| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=25398 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | David Malicky [ Sat Jan 09, 2010 11:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
I’m working on a design that’s intended to be more comfortable to hold and fingerpick than a dread, has more bass than an OOO, and gives up as little punch to the dread as possible. I know these goals are in tension; I’m trying to find an optimum. My current design is similar to the OLF-SJ: 15.65" x 10.0" x 11.2", 20.25" long, 25.0" scale, 13 frets to body. To make it more comfortable to hold while seated than a 16" dread, I tried these things with the profile: 1. Used the lower bout width from a Martin D, but slightly longer length for soundboard area. The tail could be pushed down a bit more, yet. 2. Matched the waist radius (3") to that of the thigh (approx dia = 6”), so the fit is both stable and comfortable. 3. Reduced the "AC" dimension--see pic below-- this is meant to track the fit between the thigh and the upper arm wrapping around the lower bout. But kept the waist reasonably large for punch (but maybe 10" is too small?). Location "C" is the center of the "thigh" fitted to the waist. Location "A" is the furthest part of the lower bout from "C" (worst case, and about where arms tend to go). Minimizing AC seems to be best accomplished by rounding the lower bout near "A" like a Jumbo/SJ, rather than the dread’s square bottom. A Martin D has an "AC" of around 19.0" (but hard to define w/ the sloppy waist). 4. Kept the profile at "B" fairly flat and straight (instead of going convex), so the sides don’t dig into the thigh if touching there (my experience when "B" is convex… anyone else?). So, it looks like a "D-SJ". I realize these are fairly subtle changes, but hoping they might add up to a good optimum. And of course I’m trying to keep the shape aesthetic (to me, at least... those comments welcome, too). I’d value any input on this line of thinking--if it makes sense, if you have any experience with these approaches, and/or if you’ve found better paths to these goals. I'll start another post on bracing. Thanks, David |
|
| Author: | woody b [ Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
I'll have to make some measurements on this one. I suspect the waist is a little smaller, with a tighter radius. If I remember correctly the lower bout is 15 5/8". |
|
| Author: | mhammond [ Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
I think its nice to see someone really thinking this through. Keep going and keep posting! Thanks, Mikey |
|
| Author: | Fred Tellier [ Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
I did a similar quest for comfort without loosing the bass and went to a Martin Jumbo sized body. It retained the sound I wanted but was still too hard on my sore shoulder. I got the chance to play a Manzer wedge and liked the feel so I decided wedge was the answer. I got to meet Linda and asked a few questions and she said that as far as she could tell the wedge did not affect the sound as compared to a full depth guitar. I decided to go that way and took the Jumbo outline and wedged it by about 5 degrees, 7/8" removed from the bass side at the lower bout. It sounds excellent, has has a great bass punch but is also very balanced, much more so than a D size guitar. The new owner bought it after playing a couple tunes on it because of the large guitar bass, small guitar balance and comfort that it had. He normally plays smaller body Taylor guitars and wanted more bass. I got to play it again last Friday after it being gone a couple months and it is opening up real nice. For myself I found it still a pain in the shoulder to play and am now building a OM sized wedge which is about 1/2 " thinner on the bass and 1/2" thicker on the treble than a normal OM sized guitar. The original Jumbo idea was better than the D for comfort with the tighter waist, but the wedge really made a difference. Fred |
|
| Author: | bob J [ Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
How about the D18? |
|
| Author: | bob J [ Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
How about the D18? |
|
| Author: | Flori F. [ Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
I apologize if I'm being naive or sounding like an arse, but I haven't had any trouble getting strong bass out of smaller body guitars. I think each body shape tends to produce a different sounding instrument. However, I don't think it's a question of "if I make a smaller guitar, I'm going to have trouble getting bass out of it." I feel you can get plenty of bass out of OM's, OO's, and O's. To me, it's more important that the guitar have a balanced tone between bass, mid range, and trebles. I do find tweaking the balance and shaping the instrument's tone a challenge. But for me that's why building is fun. So I wonder...do you just want strong bass? Or is there something more inherent to the dreadnought tone that you're trying to achieve with the new design? Cause looking at your requirements... 1. more comfortable to hold and fingerpick than a dread, Isn't that just about everything other than a watermelon? 2. has more bass than an OOO I think you can build a bass heavy OOO. So is it dread tone or bass? 3. gives up as little punch to the dread as possible I think "punch" tends to be more a consequence of bracing style than body shape, though the two do interact. But I'm sure others disagree. Anyway, those are just my thoughts. Not trying to be a pain. - Flori |
|
| Author: | David Malicky [ Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
Thanks for the replies, all. Yes, I can see how the wedge would really help. The D18 does have the smaller lower bout, but the waist and squared-off bottom would seem to be not so good for comfort. I'm definitely no expert on smaller bodies, but from what I've read and to my ears, a deep satisfying bass usually needs a big body. But I know tone is very subjective. I've heard there are some very skilled builders that can achieve good balance and rich bass in small bodies, but I'm not in that company at this point. I'm not looking for a dread tone, exactly (to the extent dreads are muddy and unbalanced); I would like: satisfying deep bass, strong punch, reasonably well-balanced, moderate overtones, rich but clear strummed sound, pretty/pleasing picked sound (wouldn't we all?!) -- to the extent those adjectives mean anything. My limited experience suggests that punch is helped by scalloping, esp under the X-joint, but goes away as the waist tightens. Thanks again for all the input! |
|
| Author: | Flori F. [ Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Body shape for comfort, bass, and punch? |
David, Maybe you can ask Andy Zimmerman his opinion. He's down in San Diego as well. Here's a link to his profile: memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=10274 - Flori |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|