Official Luthiers Forum!

can it be done and sound well?

I'm sure it would work but I would think it would be a really heavy neck making the guitar a little less comfortable to play. Also, depending on the type of oak, the pores would be a real pain to fill.

well, my brother just cut down a HUGE oak tree, so i was just thinking about the possibilities of getting some guitars out of it...

some guys have boasted of success with oak backs and sides.... Jody

Eric,

Oak is very low on my list of woods to ever try to carve again. Not saying it can't be done, but what a pain. Use the oak for back and sides, use cherry or walnut for the neck.

Steve

Give me a month or so and I will tell you how I like a QS Red Oak neck on a QS Red oak Back and sides guitar....

What I have been told so far is to expect the same thing you would expect out of any hard, dense neck material -- Helps with sustain, possibly trebles a little brighter... but I can't tell you first hand yet.

It is much farther along than this pic... but you get the idea...


It is going on this:


Anyway, working wise, it is definitely harder than Mahogany, Cherry, or Walnut...

The caution is that it is extremely ring porous.... the Hard parts in Oak are extremely hard while the Soft parts are extremely soft.... so it requires quite a bit more care while sanding so you don't put flat spots on the neck.

Tell me how yours comes out.

Thanks

John

white oak is what used in the past . Martin used it on a few runs early in the 20th century . Do you know what type of oak you have?

_________________
John Hall
blues creek guitars
Authorized CF Martin Repair
Co President of ASIA
You Don't know what you don't know until you know it

I'd use it to build a really nice guitar case - some really nice examples in previous listings. If you're in a region with humidity swings, one of these cases looks to me to be a good means of keeping the guitars stable, while leaving them accessible to play.

I've built a guitar out of an untested wood, (silver maple) which was fun, but in the end it takes a long time for me to build a guitar. These days I'm building with woods that I know will make a great guitar if I can live up to the potential. Just too much effort to roll the dice on something that people probably haven't used for guitars for 150 years for a reason.

My two cents.

Eric, Here are some pics of an oak guitar that I built a while back. It is reclaimed from a barnwood beam circa 1850. I think you'll be able to see some nail holes on the back that I was unable to get around (they just add character). There was just too much insect damage to the beams, I even ended up with a 4 piece back. Anyway the neck (also oak) is plenty stiff and has remained stable. Carving the neck is not a easy as mahogany or cherry, due mainly to the courseness of the grain, but doable. Filling the pores require patience but also doable. As far as weight, the OM oak weighed 4lbs. 8oz. compared to just under 4lbs for a mahogany OM...And it sounds great.

Chuck

_________________
_________________

Chuck,

That is a pretty guitar.

What I learned about the historical "Premium" musical instrument woods is that they were also the same "Premium" furniture woods of the day... The "Cheap" furniture and instrument woods were Local Non-porous woods that you could get directly from the sawyer... (Non-porous so you don't have to spend time and money filling all those dang holes..)

That's how Cypress became the Flamenco guitar back in the day... it was Cheap and available locally. Same thing for Pine and Maple European musical instruments... Same thing for maple, chestnut, and sycamore Early American instruments... I bet Brazilian instruments were naturally made of local native Brazilian woods like BRW and Pernambuco...

This is also my suspicion for how Rosewoods became the "Premium" guitar woods back in the day... Brazilian Rosewood was one of the most expensive woods... used in high society furniture... If you had a BRW Dining room table and paneling... why not splurge and get a BRW Guitar as well?

It's not that Oak or whatever else doesn't make a "Good" guitar.... (That's primarily in the hands of the Luthier...) It's that Oak doesn't make a "Premium" guitar... It's too "Common" ... and Gosh... people on the streets could just go build Oak guitars Willy Nilly..... and we certainly don't want that sort of thing happening do we?

Thanks

John

oak bends like butter for sides.

seriously, when my highschool pupils are looking at new shaping processes I set up my bending iron and give em some oak to play with.

1" x 1/4" strips and they are literally tying knots in it within ten minutes.

oh yeah, it SMELLs WONDERFUL on the iron!!

I only tried a neck once and hated it. the grain splits SO easily with a spoke shave.

_________________
My soundclick xx luthier blog xx luthier soundclick

Reporting back on this...

The Red Oak Neck seems to work fine so far... It has had strings on it for 18 hours or... I haven't seen any movement or trouble.



I still have quite a bit of work to go, but so far, so good.... It sounds like a Guitar.

Thanks

John

I have some beautiful white oak resawn for backs and sides. I haven't decided on the necks yet, but intend to do at least one from the same stash as the back and sides. It is a pain of course, but I am a beginner and these will not be built for a particular player. The tap tone (again little experience) is on the bright side with sustain compared to walnut, bubinga, maple, and sycamore (the extent of my stash).

On the neck I will have fiber on both sides of the truss rod and can't imagine the weight as much of an issue, with the thin neck profile I have used.

Danny R. Little

Oh, btw, well quartered white oak is much more stable than its red cousin in my experience with furniture and cabinets.

Danny R. Little

I would use for necks as long as it was flat sawn and laminated.You wouldn't have to worry about movement that way.You might get some nice ray flake on the neck doing it that way also.