Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Solera questions
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=23775		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Sat Sep 12, 2009 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
Filippo,

1. I think you have a decision to make. Hauser did not shim his lower bout.. Using the raised lower bout in the Solera will change the geometry of the guitar, so, you'll have to take that into account. I think one of the reasons for using the raised piece is to add a bit of tension to the top, which increases the response of the guitar. How much, I don't know. There are plenty of great sounding Hauser guitars out there.

2. Shimming the top does change the sides. Romanillos' answer is to cut the top to size, and wrap the sides around the top. This lets the sides rest on the flat part of the solera, and they can be left flat. They are then trimmed down to the top after removal from the solera. Bogdanovich has a different approach. He fits the sides to the top, He also uses laminated sides and laminated, solid linings.

3. I don't think I can tell you what you want to do. It depends on what sounds good to you, and what you are trying to accomplish. I like the adjustable blocks, and I use the solera for lots of other stuff as I complete the guitar. The blocks are good holders when you are working on the top, after assembly. Keeps the guitar from sliding around. I feel like they give me more flexibility. I can't recall if Bogdanovich has a separate work board in addition to the one the mold sits on. Though, I guess you could take the mold off, and use blocks when you aren't using the mold.

I really liked David's CD. It gave me confidence, somehow, to go ahead and get started. I think it was his little deal where he screwed up the scarf joint, then fixed it. I thought it was a nice touch, and I got over worrying about making a mistake. Good thing. [headinwall] :D
Author:  Stephen Boone [ Sat Sep 12, 2009 11:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
Hey Filippo, I have tried the Bogdanovich method and I found it very difficult to glue the top to the sides. I had to do a lot of shimming....I have been using a 25' radius dish to dome my tops but I feel it makes the dome too high making my effective bridge hight to high and messing up my set up/action. Just today I made a solera flat around the sides but with a dome that I carved out for the lower half of the sound board. I made the max depth about two mm and made the dome as even as I could. I take the glued up and domed top and glue it to the neck/sides sub assembly on a different board with cork around the perimiter letting the dome sit as it wants. I do not recommend the Bogdanovich solera though I like most everything else about his ways.

I guess I use a strange combination of methods....
Author:  Claire [ Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
Hi Flippo,
The Bogdanovich method with the mould relies on the fact that the sides are laminated. The laminating makes the sides super stiff with almost no spring back when you release the sides from their laminating caul. This makes assembly pretty easy.
I thought the way he trimmed his sides looked a bit cumbersome so i did it a bit differently. To determine how to trim the sides I decided to place the soundboard on the solera, which is raised in the lower bout area, line the sides up, and run a pencil line around the lower bout, which gave me an exact line to trim the sides to. Sounds easy, but it was still kind of complicated to get just so.
When I laminated the sides I messed them up because the glue set up faster than i had anticipted. I should say i messed up one side from a pair. duh The other side i got right, which I then used as a clamping caul for the new set of sides that i now had to make. Expensive caul.
I can't see myself making another one like that. Too complicated, too messy, too expensive, etc. And i actually prefer the sound of a more traditional guitar.
I think the Romanillos method would probably produce a more traditional sound. I think its a matter of personal preference.
I think the Romanillod methos could be a bit of a pearl if you get it right in terms of stiffening the soundboard.
Which ever way you go, good luck.Try them all....lol

Best wishes,
Claire
Author:  douglas ingram [ Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
From what I've been able to deduce:

Keeping the top of the sides in plane and inducing a dome requires that this dome have some termination as it approaches the fingerboard.

Dropping the tail of the sides allows the dome to be tilted such that it runs straight from the fingerboard, the apex of the dome is in line, and then it continues on to the tail.

All of this changes the relative height of the bridge relative to the fingerboard, and, thus, the neck angle.

Check your drawing in profile against your building procedure and all will be fine.
Author:  David LaPlante [ Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
Until your are more familiar with the subtleties of the various constructions, I would stick to the "flat" solera. This means that the edge of the sides will be in a single plane around the periphery of the top.
Brune describes an absence of arch or doming in the original Hauser '37, but adding a slight scoop in the area behind the soundhole and around the bridge will help to avoid being too flat which may appear concave (which you don't want).
One thing I used to do when I built in this mode was to work on a flat solera and insert a 2mm thick piece of matte board under the top alone and then clamp the nut end to the solera. This is a simple way to give your neck the right amount of "lift" once the guitar is together.
The Romanillos method is elegant and one which I too have adopted but until you've built a number of instruments, I'm not sure you'll be able take advantage of what it offers.
Truly great guitars have been built in the "flat" mode and I think it will simplify things for you at this point.
Author:  schrammguitars [ Sun Sep 13, 2009 1:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
Out of the 30+ Hauser Sr, Jr, and III guitars that I have examined all of them had a concave dip of about 0.003" at the lower transverse bar. For a true Hauser style guitar it is desirable to have a slight cave in, although it is not caving in due to the string tension but because the transverse bar is relieved.

Dammann guitars are also designed to cave in about 1-2mm between the soundhole and the bridge. Matthias told me that was done on purpose.
Author:  David LaPlante [ Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
Hi David,
.003" is so little that just drying out could account for it.
Do you have info from the Hauser camp that this is actually what they do ...??......they have been (are) cagy about that little "secret" regarding the black veneer under the fret board extension <grin>

best
Author:  jlneng [ Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Solera questions
I used the solera per Courtnall's book (Santos Hernandez)with a 2.5mm bowl shaped depression for the lower bout and took a router and milled a 3mm deep by 70mm wide shelf in the neck section from the 12th fret to the nut. That way I did not have to worry about having a symetric ramp on the solera. The string height was spot on for a flamenco. I made adjustable blocks and no mold. It was very simple. I scribed a centerline in the solera from end to end, and a line for the 12th fret, which always were used as my reference points. I also scribed the outline of the sides using the acryllic plantilla I made from the plan. I also glued 2 small blocks (52.5mm apart) on the nut end of the solera to guarantee that the neck would be perfectly centered at all times. I was happy with the result as far as intonation and playability. The only departure from the plan was my lattice fan bracing which I copied from a new Ruck Flamenco. Pretty much popsicle stick shaped with tapered ends. Hope this helps! I am not changing anything on the next one exceppt to do a better job finishing, and using nitro in lieu of KTM9
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/