Official Luthiers Forum!

Great advice, Todd. I'm curious what you feel is problematic about the OLF SJ plans.



Ken Jones
Mountain Song Guitars

_________________
Mountain Song Guitars www.mountainsongguitars.com

For anyone doing their first few guitars I think this is the absolute best and easiest route to take. There is a vast amount of info available and if one gets too deep into the weeds of it all at once things can go astray especially if it is all mixed together.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

I'm curious how many builders take playing style into account when when building a top. Do you think that a lightly built, extremely responsive top can be over driven by a player with a heavy attack? All the guitars that I have felt I have over built I felt still sounded good when played a little more aggressively. I suppose starting out with good materials is a factor. What about string gauge? Do you factor that in when top voicing? Maybe I should just buy the book(s).

Yes, I don't think every players will play Joe Satriani light on their guitar, if the player is like that by all means go with 9-42 electric (nickel steel) strings and build the guitar VERY lightly. However if the player has a heavy hand then it makes better sense to build it heavier. Many acoustic players in fact (the strumming kind that is) tends to slam on the guitar, not to mention use the guitar like a drum, in that case a heavier build may be favored.

_________________
Cat-gut strings are made from kitten guts, stretched out to near breaking point and then hardened with grue saliva. As a result these give a feeling of Pain and anguish whenever played, and often end up playing themselves backwards as part of satanic rituals.

Typhoon Guitars
http://www.typhoon-guitars.com

Yes, definitely. John Mayes' "Advanced Voicing" is specifically geared towards this.

The lighter the touch, the less energy there is driving it, and visa versa. An ideal instrument for fingerstyle could sound incredibly muddy strummed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

After some reflection, I don't know that I ever followed a plan. I ordered a seconded top from Martin for the layout, spoke with a number of luthiers I admire, and followed John's DVD as far as the tap tone went. The first one sounded pretty good, but not quite what I was looking for; it has a very traditional sound, but I wanted something with more bleed and "wetness" between notes. So the second saw a few changes (.5" tall X v. .6", and tapered braces, kept the top around .105"). Got closer. Third was still a bit different. Started coming to my top thickness using the warble test in Kent Everett's DVD.

Now I'm looking for more bass. This one I'll be spraying next week has a thinner top, around .095. From here on out I'll be testing deflection, and I'd like to explore Trevor Gore's equation for deriving target thickness as well---see how similar the resulting thicknesses might be. I'll also be trying a lattice in the lower bout rather than traditional long tone bars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Just get the Gore/Gilet books. Just do it. Get them. If you want to build any guitars, you need them. You do. The intuitive approach will get you there eventually, the books will get you there tomorrow. Instead of having to go through years of experimentation. Call it cookbook if you will, but the recipe is sound. You can still add your own garnishes, but it will prevent you from putting peanut butter and ketchup in the same sandwich. If you are an audio engineer, and can do the math needed to design panels to tune a room, you're laughing at the head of the pack. It really is just like tuning a drum. You'll still need to learn the craftsmanship, and you will still need to learn the unteachable aspect of putting your art into it, but the books will get you right away to the point of understanding how to do what you want to do. They will give you the brains you need to create your own recipes.

You're absolutely right about that. No amount of book lernin' will give you the experience of feel and touch. But I just love the fact that the books give you measurable data and facts. It's like an artists color wheel or musical notation. I do feel it is an incredible shortcut to knowledge. You still have to go through all the business of putting yourself into it of course, and applying it to your own ends. I think it is wrong to see these books as only giving a recipe for Aussie BBQ Shrimp. Instead, they are more like a chemistry text that will tell you why adding saltpeter to your ashes will be very interesting for you.
They are just techniques, based on physics, that will allow you to come up with the recipe for your own designs, not his.

Oh, and yeah, sorry, I am a bit touchy these days. 18 years of dedicated service comes to a screeching halt on Nov. 22. Sure did learn a lot...

So here is a view point from a newbie. I have only built two guitars but I didn't depend so much on tap tone but rather stuck more so to suggested top thinknesses, went with Todd Stock's suggestion of 1/4" bracing on the OM, tried to copy brace shaping and scalloping of respected builders (using their online pics), and tried to avoid overbuilding. I did pay attention to tap tone along the way but primarily as a learning reference. I have several friends who are professional musicians including one former Nashville recording artist and both say these are very good sounding instruments...so much so that they are both in dialogue with me to build for them down the road (probably just being kind). I'm not suggesting that I'm all that great as I have so very much yet to learn. However, I feel that following the above advice has served me well and given me a good start.

_________________
Doug

Don't let fear or common sense stop you from trying to build something

Indeed. Here we come to a crashing new beginning. If they don't give a press release on Monday, I'll do it for them. It's certainly newsworthy in this community...

Meddling: Sorry to hear about your situation. Hope it turns into a positive for you. This has been a good thread and I hope Aaron (original poster) got some sense of direction and a bit of understanding of the complexity of the major part of the guitar. It's not an easy thing to put anything but a brief snapshot of what can be done. One must put in some work.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

Oops, apologies for the derail.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming...

I always learn something from these discussions. But I must also admit that I find Todd has a wonderful writing style. Always makes me feel like I'm reading a good story. So Todd, if this guitar thingy doesn't work out, you have a future as a writer. Great stuff!

_________________
Under Compensated Nut!

My feeling is that all of the 'tech' stuff, whether it's Trevor's books (get 'em!) or my own efforts, is much more useful for telling you what won't work than what will. Knowing how this stuff really works (AKA 'physics') helps you see where the snake-oil salesmen are wrong, so you can skip those approaches. It will also tell you why making a to .05" thick and leaving out the bracing will probably be less than satisfactory in the long run, even if it does seem likely to 'free things up'.

The other thing you can't get from a technical manual is a reading on what you[i/] like. Trevor has very particular ideas about what he's trying to make, and so do I. We both, of course, feel that what we make is 'the best', or we would make something else. You might not agree. If you don't have alot of experience building, you can start with somebody else's idea of what 'good' is, and try it. If you don't like what you get at least you know what [i]not to do next time.

Sometimes it's hard to apply one person's methods to a different design, or an instrument that's aimed at a different outcome. When you've gained some experience you'll be able to see why the person did it the way they did, and how you might apply their methods to what you want to do, but it can be confusing at first. The time-tested designs can be considered as the 'best' way to do certain things, but it's pretty clear that the 'best' Bluegrass Dread is a very different beast from the 'best' archtop Jazz box, or the 'best' Classical. Once you've learned about how these things work, you will be able to see all of those designs as points along a continuum in some respects. Then you can place yourself along that line at any point, and know what to make. Again, that's the beauty of the 'physics' approach: it takes these things out of the realm of isolated 'special creations' and makes them simply instances of a more general design. Physics can tell you, to some extent, what to do to make the guitar you want, and it may be even better at telling you what [i]not[i/] to do, but it can't tell you where on the continuum of 'the guitar' you want to be: that's a subjective and artistic decision.

My feeling is that all of the 'tech' stuff, whether it's Trevor's books (get 'em!) or my own efforts, is much more useful for telling you what won't work than what will. Knowing how this stuff really works (AKA 'physics') helps you see where the snake-oil salesmen are wrong, so you can skip those approaches. It will also tell you why making a to .05" thick and leaving out the bracing will probably be less than satisfactory in the long run, even if it does seem likely to 'free things up'.

The other thing you can't get from a technical manual is a reading on what youlike. Trevor has very particular ideas about what he's trying to make, and so do I. We both, of course, feel that what we make is 'the best', or we would make something else. You might not agree. If you don't have a lot of experience building, you can start with somebody else's idea of what 'good' is, and try it. If you don't like what you get at least you know what not to do next time.

Sometimes it's hard to apply one person's methods to a different design, or an instrument that's aimed at a different outcome. When you've gained some experience you'll be able to see why the person did it the way they did, and how you might apply their methods to what you want to do, but it can be confusing at first. The time-tested designs can be considered as the 'best' way to do certain things, but it's pretty clear that the 'best' Bluegrass Dread is a very different beast from the 'best' archtop Jazz box, or the 'best' Classical. Once you've learned about how these things work, you will be able to see all of those designs as points along a continuum in some respects. Then you can place yourself along that line at any point, and know what to make. Again, that's the beauty of the 'physics' approach: it takes these things out of the realm of isolated 'special creations' and makes them simply instances of a more general design. Physics can tell you, to some extent, what to do to make the guitar you want, and it may be even better at telling you what not to do, but it can't tell you where on the continuum of 'the guitar' you want to be: that's a subjective and artistic decision.

If you have Robbie's online course (which this reference is from) he talks you through what order to carve and alter braces, which ones to alter to achieve certain goals and it's really easy to follow. Watch the rest of his making of the top (which includes bracing and voicing) and you'll get a chance to do it the first time along with an expert.
Good luck!

If you do not have a mentor close by you can work with (as Todd recommends), I suggest Robbie's online course. It is almost like building a guitar with him form start to finish. Also he has always answered any questions I have had. It really helped me put the whole process together.

_________________
_____________

EddieLee

Thanks Alan. Good post as usual.

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

...what is this talk about "mentors"? not the first time i've seen it, and it weirds me out. this is called the internet: you think if we all had someone standing over our shoulder, guiding our forearms, as we polished our....spruce tops, we'd be on an online forum wondering about stuff....? just curious.
or, if we already rubbed elbows with someone in realtime who had all the answers, we'd be too bashful to strike up a rapport with them, so we'd defer to a forum....? oy vey

I totally forgot about this. You can purchase the chapters ala carte for a very reasonable price.

Robbie's courses are incredible. I watch some lessons every time I get to that step again, because I build slowly. Yes, it is just one person's way of doing things, but he's an amazing teacher and the videos show everything he's doing. Buy the whole course....don't bother with ala carte, because you also get the work flow in a logical way. Some things, the timing doesn't matter, but in a lot of building steps, it really does matter (ask me how I know this).
But you still need the forum, because it gives you different perspectives and usually many opinions, which you can then tailor to your style, skills and tools.

Wow! There has been a lot of activity on this thread since I was last here. Had a busy weekend.

Robbie's course sounds intriguing to me. I think I'll check it out. Like I said, I AM building one as we speak. I finally got an acceptable rosette inlaid into the top and the soundhole cut out. I figure I can work on purfling and other things as I'm preparing to get on to bracing.

AND... As serendipity would have it, an HD-28 just came into the shop in need of some finish touch-ups. What if I just took some pics and measurements of that?

_________________
"I'm not going to say that perfection has never been achieved. However, if it has, it probably went unnoticed due to it's lack of character."