Official Luthiers Forum!

I just think about it and that's my question for the pro's
what you thing with back wood with another side wood???? (for accoustic) is that unusual or it can be done???
what you ever built it???
thank's

I'm not a pro... but it sure can be done... Nothing to stop you except for the looks.... Even then - you can frequently find woods that are similar looking enough to make it not so obvious....

In many ways, it actually makes more sense - though it's not at all common.... You could pick a very easy to bend side wood... and then pick some "Optimal" wood for the back that would otherwise be very splitty or very hard to bend for sides....

The main difficulty for a "Pro" is selling it... You gotta explain why you would choose different sorts of wood.... and it's not "Normal" so people just won't get it...

Thanks

Very bad idea. It will kill the sound.

Joking.

Go for it!

_________________
Francis Richer, Montréal
Les Guitares F&M Guitars

Definitely not traditional, but nothing actually wrong with it. If you like the look, go for it. My prototyping guitar has African mahogany sides and a bubinga back.

I've never heard stories of Brazilian rosewood sides making any huge difference to tone. In fact, I've heard more stories about laminated sides sounding better. And then, the inner laminate is often a different species than the outer, especially if the outer is expensive. Not that the species matter at that point, since the laminate doesn't vibrate much... which is the whole point (well, that and easier bending... and split resistance... and stability)

I generally prefer the look of matched back/sides, but it does seem like a waste of rare wood in terms of sound.

I ask because I want to learn to be a pro and I want to learn from the basic,
and I agree if the difference is related to the quality of the sound produced is and I will build according to standard recommended unless there are parts that can be in the new design...

That is what I did for one of my first decent flat top guitars. The sides were ash, while the back was black locust. I stained the wood to match. The guitar sounded just fine. I was young with little money, so it also didn't hurt that it was wood that I had available for free.
Other easy to bend domestic woods are beech, oak, and sassafras.

_________________
John

I am building a "proof of concept" guitar now using ovangol sides and maple backs. The sides were practice sides from LMI, and the maple is big box stuff. I plan to stain both to match as best as possible. I hated to not use the sides once I was successful bending them, so I figured just use what I have on hand to complete the build.

Interesting....

I guess I was thinking somewhere along the lines of a Granadillo or Jatoba or Maca or Pau Ferro back (Very hard and pingy) and some sort of Mahogany sides.... The color and grain are very similar - but the mahogany is worlds easier to bend and work.... I suppose you could even pick a lighter color wood for the sides with a similar grain pattern, then just stain it for a reasonably close match to the back....

Perhaps in Indonesia - Luann may be available fairly cheap - and you could use that for sides... but you could match it with a back that is a very hard, dense wood (Some flavor of rosewood or local "ironwood") with a similar brownish color....

Thanks