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

Experimental guitar
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=27807		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Aerith [ Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Experimental guitar
Hi there,

I'm just finishing the guitar making course at Anniesland College. I made an experimental steel string guitar, picking up ideas found here and there that I found worth trying, adding my own little touch. The result seem to have a bit of success :D

My main objective was to think out of the box, and use the little time I had in school to learn/figure out with the teachers/classmates how to make such an instrument. I really didn't see the point to make exactly the same thing as during the first year, and I believe we have enought material in these days to learn how to make a "regular" instruments by ourself.

The main features include a 12th fret neck joint, a floating fingerboard, a fan bracing, a semi -AKA- Benjamin cutaway, a soundhole placed on the side (rib), and a combination of spruce and cedar for the top (yes I dared crossing the border of the big "NO!") The back and sides are made out of walnut.

The sound is very particular. Most poeple find it very jazzy, but it seems to work quite well for blues as well. I really didn't know what to expect as a final result: The bass is just amazing! A few poeple actually jumped by surprise when trying it (including Steve Hicks who came over to play every students' instruments for a show) but I find that the treble needs a bit of improvement, It needs a nicer note.

As the soundhole is on the side -directed at the player- it's more of a personal instrument, more enjoyable for the player than the audiance. And it really does sound completely different to the player. On the overall, everyone seems to love it (including my teachers and classmates)

For my next project I'm planning to make an improved version, fixing the few "technical" problems I encountered during the making of that first one, but this time using only spruce for the top, and without the floating fingerboard, in the hope that this will improve the sustain of the sound. I'll try again the mix Cedar/Spruce once I'll have have improved this model enought.

It's currently being exposed for a show, I'll post some more pictures from the back and sides later if you like.

Cheers!
Author:  Foster [ Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
I like it that you experimented.
Have you discovered what the problem is with the trebels?
You said it needs a nicer note.
What do you mean by nicer? Louder? Brighter? Clearer?

With the sound hole on the side you said it was more personal. I guess you meant it did not project toward the audience. Do you intend to put a sound hole where it should be on the next one with a somewhat smaller hole on the side?

I would like to see more of your guitar.
Author:  alan stassforth [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
i like it aerith. can't really tell, but it might be a little too fat, hence the heavy bass/weak treble. i would keep the floating fretboard, thin it up a bit, put a soundhole in the regular place, and a "players port" on the side on your next one.
also, the tone will change with it being played in. i'm curious how the dynamics are on it. when you play hard or soft, is it responsive? i bet it is.
oh, try putting heavier top strings on it?
Author:  alan stassforth [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
i like it aerith. can't really tell, but it might be a little too fat, hence the heavy bass/weak treble. i would keep the floating fretboard, thin it up a bit, put a soundhole in the regular place, and a "players port" on the side on your next one.
also, the tone will change with it being played in. i'm curious how the dynamics are on it. when you play hard or soft, is it responsive? i bet it is.
Author:  martinedwards [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
I like it a LOT

Someone posted a group pic of all the guitars on the display on another forum and I picked yours out as a goodie!!

forget the nay sayers who want you toy cut a hole in the front of it!!!

I've made a few with the soundhole on the side and they are LOUDER out front than it they had a big old hole ruining the looks!!

both the side ported guitars I made had fanned frets too......

Image

Image

and this bouzouki might be a step too far for some folks!!

Image

Image

MY theory is this.......

compare the guitar to a loudspeaker. the top is the speaker cone, the back & sides the cabinet.

in the speaker, the electromagnet drives the cone, the cone shifts air, sound happens. if the cabinet is ported then air can move freely and there is more volume.

in the guitar the bridge is the magnet, the top is the cone. so long as there is freedom for the air to move, it doesn't matter where the vent(s) are.

cutting a dirty great hole in the speaker cone doesn't seem like a good idea does it?

Batson guitars do it to and it WORKS!!!
Author:  CWLiu [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
What a coincident! I just finished mine five days ago. I replaced the top of my classical guitar and routed a soundhole at the side.
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=27762
Author:  Aerith [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
Hi there,

I'm really glad to see I'm not alone going in this kind of direction because I litterally had to FIGHT with everyone in my school to defend this project. (and I seemed too be right as it won the gold medal of the Craftex exposition in Glasgow)

Concerning the trebles, they are actually quite clear, on the overall every notes are really clear, with very nice overtones coming at you as a player. To the audiance the overtones are pretty much not audible though, and it sounds quite "dry" and "muted"

It is very loud and responsive both when playing "hard" or "soft" (although the bass tend to be too dominant when played softly)- As I said the bass is really impressive, it literrally explodes in your face, and it has a relatively good sustain compare to the treble which is more on the "sweet and dry" side. I'd like to get a more "crystalin" treble tone to it and a lot more sustain. On the overall, it still is a very interresting jazzy sound. Many people compared it with a "kind of Macaferie" and I'm very happy with it, but for the next one I'd like too keep exactly the same bass (I just love it) but with more sustain on the overall, and a more "crystalin" treble - if it's possible of course, just need to figure out the way to do so.

I haven't quite decided about the place to the soundhole for the next one. I was thinking maybe on the very top left of the guitar, half-cut into the soundboard/ half-cut into the rib. But I'll have to figure out a way to make it solid and looking good. Or still in the rib , but with a small soundport on the top (the opposite of what is usually seen). Otherwise I was also thinking maybe on the very top left of the soundboard, And one on the side (rib) but with the possibility to close the side one, and see what happens depending on the size of the side soundport. But I'd tend to go for the first option.

I haven't had the chance to try heavier strings yet. But it will be done soon.

The Spruce/Cedar reacting differently might be a good explaination for the treble needing more time to come out. It indeed need more time I suppose as it is still a very "young" instrument. I'm guessing the shape might also influence it, but I actually like the bassy sound of it, so I'll keep it for now.

Thank you to all of you for your pictures and for sharing your experience. Very nice guitar Martin Edwards, I really like it. Could you give me more details about its sound?
Author:  alan stassforth [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
hey, this has got me very curious, because i play lap steel, weiss style, and when i play with folks, they can't hear me, because the sound is going up. great for my ears, but they can't hear it. so my question is, how does it sound to the audience with no sound hole in the top? aerith, you said they can hear the bass but no treb? is it as loud as a regular git to them? i was thinking about someday building a weissenborn style with no hole in the top, but one on the side facing the audience. i like the look of no soundhole, no rosette [:Y:] , and, i would think the top would have different characteristics as far as strength went, lighter bracing perhaps?
Author:  AlexanderLou3 [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
Hard to see in the pic but that cutaway doubles as the soundhole too right? Like these two gorgeous guitars that were posted recently?
viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=27680

Very cool. Something I'd love to do but I do like the tradition, look and artistic part of designing and building a rosette
Author:  Aerith [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
Like I said, to the audience it doesn't sound the same. They can't hear the overtones, and it sounds kind of muted and dry (no sustain for them) They can still hear the treble with the bass, actually I'd say it sounds like there would be a better balance between bass and treble to them, comparing with the player's side for whom the bass are more dominant. I guess it would need a pickup to be played for an audience as it naturally sound more quiet.

I think you idea is interresting, but wouldn't it be a lot less enjoyable for yourself? you may actually end up not hearing what you're playing, how about smaller soundholes on both top and side? (to you and to the audience)

The absence of soundhole is the reason I tried a fan bracing as I'd been told that the use of X-bracing was only due to the weakened area of the soundhole. I don't have enought experience yet to really say if it's a lot lighter, it might actually be the same, maybe even heavier. We pretty much had no idea of what I was doing with my teachers. I based the bracing on Bouchet's and henced it in proportion to the difference of string tension between classical and steel string. I now believe the calculations weren't quite right (I wasn't aware of the cube rule of the deflexion, I'm not quite sure how to call that). Also some poeple seem to think that an X-bracing would give the best balance in the top movements, as the fan bracing would not really allow a particular type of mouvement (I think it's the long dipole?) Anyway I'm still a beginner and all that seems a bit complex for my current experience and comprehention.

I have to say I do LOVE that last guitar you sent, very interesting.
Author:  AlexanderLou3 [ Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
Glad you like those guitars in the link I posted. I dig that design too.
I believe the X bracing is in fact for a more piston like movement of the soundboard, and not just to accommodate the soundhole.
Did you say your cutaway is indeed open like the guitars in that thread I posted two post up? Hard to tell from the photos. We'd love more btw!
Author:  Alan Carruth [ Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
Aerith wrote:
"Concerning the trebles, they are actually quite clear, on the overall every notes are really clear, with very nice overtones coming at you as a player. To the audiance the overtones are pretty much not audible though, and it sounds quite "dry" and "muted""

When I did my 'port' experiments, I found that the main function of a side port in a guitar that had a 'normal' soundhole was to put out some sound in the high frequency range that the player could hear directly. Guitars become more and more directional as you go up in frequency, and the highs are usually coming off the top and out of the soundhole, in the direction of the audience. In a normally reverberant room the player can hear reflections of those frequencies from the walls, but in some circumstances you don't get that, and lose the highs. That's when the port helps the most.

In your case, you have highs coming off the top and out of a side soundhole that's 4" or so in diameter. That hole should be pretty effective at producing sound above about 1000 Hz, and is probably quite directional above 3-4 kHz, so the audience may not be getting much of that. The top produces sound in that range, but it's vibrating in smaller areas that tend to cancel each other out . The radiation from the side soundhole probably also cancels some of the sound off the top.

Fan bracing and X bracing work a bit differently. X-bracing is a bit stiffer for the weight, I'm pretty sure, and it also adds a lot of stiffness across the grain of the top. This alters the timbre of the guitar a bit, and seems to help give a steel string box some 'fullness'. Neither bracing system seems, in my estimation, to favor the 'loudspeaker' motion more than the other; it's more a matter of when the 'speaker cone' starts to break up into smaller vibrating areas. Speakers are designed to avoid that as much as possible, but on a guitar it accounts for a lot of the timbre, even if it does decrease the efficiency of the 'bass reflex action'.
Author:  CWLiu [ Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
Aerith, I suggest you can apply this design to an "otherwise pretty normal" X-bracing guitar next time. Bouchet's bracing is kinda a ladder bracing plus five fans, so it can be even stiffer/more restricted than a ladder bracing top. My side-soundhole guitar doesn't have less overtones or volume in the front than my normal ones. In fact, I find where the soundholes usually were is now a good place for micing. I recorded my clip about one yard in front of the soundboard.
Author:  Aerith [ Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Experimental guitar
I'm really sorry guys, I've been really busy lately and completly forgot about this post. I'm trying to add some new pictures, but for some reason I don't get, it doesnt work.

Hopefull I get over it soon.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/