Official Luthiers Forum!

I'm planning one, and I wonder what I can do to make up for the tiny body.

I was thinking I should use a cedar top for warmth and lattice style bracing for volume. Does that sound reasonable? I can't find any plans for small ones so I was thinking of buying a full size plan and rescaling/shifting to try to do the best I can. It will be my first classical, and will be number four (still got number three to do) but I hoped someone may have some thoughts about it and could offer some advice so that I can get a bit of an idea of what I'll do before I run it through in my head a million times in the coming months!

I know it's a lot of work for a guitar for a little person who will grow lots in the coming years but she's going to have a half size guitar for two or three years so I'd love her to learn on one of mine. I'll make her another one when she's bigger!

Cheers in advance! : )

I did search but I didn't find anything much more precise than "build it lighter". Apologies if I'm overlooking an obvious resource.

Check out Roy Courtnall's book "Making Master Guitars" he has plans for a very small Torres (610mm scale) known as the SE 117.
These sound wonderful when properly made and would be a good size for a youngster.
Here is a nearly identical one (SE 151 A) which I built:

Fantastic! Thank you so much, David! That's a really great recommendation and a beautiful guitar. I'm nearly sold! I've wanted to build something based on a Torres.

Do you think I could get away with scaling it down to closer to 550-570mm scale length?

It obviously won't be a replica any more but I figure it would be better to scale that down than a full size plan. I don't want to put her off by it being too big for her. Most beginners seem to be put off by having a guitar they don't like or that doesn't play well, don't they?

I'm happy if she gets up to three good years out of it before I need to make her a bigger one. Heck, I'm happy playing on a Baby Taylor scale length so she may even get a bit more than that... After that, unless she can't separate from it (which I'd love), maybe we can ask her if she wants to give it to her younger cousin maybe for her to learn on (which I'd also love). Circle of life and all that lol.

Also, what do you think of the cedar top or (maybe even lattice bracing rather than Torres bracing): do you think that will make up for the smaller body? I read that lattice guitars are normally louder. Not that I'm questioning your recommendation in any way, I'll most likely base it on that plan! Just trying to think like a guitar-maker

EDIT: If I made the SE117 at 9/10 size, the measurements would be (in mm):



Would I scale the bracing and plate dimensions down in a similar way or should I be more scientific about it? That is the question!

The body on these guitars is quite small as it is so I think the shorter scale would work fine without changing the body plantilla or dimensions.
a 610 mm to 570 mm scale change only means a 20 mm shift in bridge placement which isn't much. I'm also assuming you would want to make a head with classical machines instead of the traditional friction pegs.
These guitars have a simple 5 strut fan arrangement and I don't see any point in fooling around with a proven design here. Besides which this guitar could be both an instrument for your daughter to play and an entree for you into the traditional classical design which is an excellent jumping off point.
I would recommend spruce (Englemann, or even Red) for the top and any good dense wood for the back and sides (E.I. rosewood, Maple etc.)
Of course the originals (and my replica) are European Spruce and Spanish Cypress.

"Light" in this case probably means "less stiff". Which is indeed very confusing, because weight is also an important factor in acoustic instruments.

That said, weight is not much of a concern in small guitars. They're naturally lighter by the smaller soundboard area, and can be lower stiffness without caving in, which usually has the side effect of lowering weight even more. So lattice bracing is by no means necessary, since its main advantage is being ridiculously stiff for its weight. Much better chance of success with fan bracing, IMO.

I've built two small Torres guitars, one redwood/rosewood with no fan braces:
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10130&t=34382
And one spruce/maple with fan braces:
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10133&t=37308

I think the spruce is actually lower stiffness even with the braces, due to having a super thin plate. But its bridge is a little heavier, so their total active soundboard area weight is probably pretty similar (unfortunately I forgot to write down most of the component weights...). The redwood one sounds better. The rosewood back is probably part of it though.

But you shouldn't attempt the braceless style unless you're also doing that style of bridge (string-height-at-bridge 5/16" above the soundboard, and no saddle).

Those two are 25" (635mm) scale length. I'm not sure about going all the way to 550-570mm for standard tuning. If you have a full size 650mm or so classical, try tuning down to D and capoing the second fret. That should be about 580mm E tuning. I have some carbon strings on one of mine that are really tight, even when tuned to D. So those might work for it.

SE117 is already pretty tiny, so I don't think it would be wise or necessary to make it any smaller. You could give it a slight Manzer wedge angle to the back so it feels a bit shallower. But don't overdo it or it gets uncomfortable from the tilt. It also encourages looking at the fretboard

550 - 570 mm's is Terz scale length.

viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=32976&p=434354&hilit=19+th+century+terz#p434354

They are very small Guitars but they can sound very nice. I don't really see the point of doing a Lattice. Lattice Guitars aren't really noted for their warmth. With a very thin light weight top they respond quickly and move a lot of air. The pay back is that they can sometimes sound a little brash and hard edged. Small Guitars don't do enormous amounts of bass, it's more 'controlled'. Put the two together and it might end up a canon but one that pushes out a lot of hard edged treble. Of course I can't say that it won't work because I've never actually tried it, so large dose of salts.

I agree that the body is scaled well just as it is.
Judging from the original of the Torres SE 151A (which I had in my shop for several months) the plate thicknesses should be on the order of 2 mm.
I think I made mine closer to 1.8 mm or so (top and back) but it really depends on how hard/dense your wood choices are.
My example sounds very good has plenty of volume and more than stands up to excellent players so I think this design would leave little to be desired especially in the hands of a beginning player.
Good point on the scale length above.....I'd make it as close to the 610mm mark as you can as the guitar will be better for it (plus your daughter will be able to use it longer and indeed it will be something she can always enjoy.

Here's a pic of the original SE 117 which Courtnall patterned in his book (I believe the plans are also available separately from him as well as another version is included in the Jose Romanillos book on Torres):

Dennis, David, Michael, Thanks for the advice! I'd be a fool to ignore it! I was just trying to "think like a luthier" lol, should've known it was too early for that to be possible! (In particular, Michael, your prediction regarding lattice bracing makes much more sense than mine!)

I'll use European or Engelmann Spruce and Maple, and keep it as close to the Torres plan as possible. I may even try some deflection testing for the first time to relate the stiffness to plate thickness, taking David's 1.8mm into consideration. I'll also definitely be reading Dennis' build threads over and over.

Plus, I didn't make it clear, but this will be for m'best mate's daughter, Rosie (so I shall be inlaying a Rose on the headstock).

And, I'll use standard tuners rather than friction pegs. She's going to help design the rose and the rosette, and, being a little girl, she's likely to want the maple and spruce stained to a girly colour (as tastefully as I can manage). Am I going to lose the little cred I have here building this guitar? As long as she likes it, I'm happy! (Of course, for my own satisfaction, I want it to shock her guitar teacher with its quality! )

Great point! I forget sometimes to walk before I trip over.

Maybe a rose pink sunburst?

_________________
The name catgut is confusing. There are two explanations for the mix up.

Catgut is an abbreviation of the word cattle gut. Gut strings are made from sheep or goat intestines, in the past even from horse, mule or donkey intestines.

Otherwise it could be from the word kitgut or kitstring. Kit meant fiddle, not kitten.

That thought did cross my mind, Colin. I'm going to mock up lots of designs for her to choose from! If she chooses the sunburst, I'll try to hide my face, and this will be my first sunburst!

I've done some further reading about sizing children's guitars (http://www.suzukidad.com/guitar-gear-for-suzuki-students/childrens-guitars/), and I think even a 550mm scale will be too big. I'm going to aim for 480mm, so it's going to me more akin to a Guitalele. For my own sanity I want it to sound as good as possible, so any suggestions are welcome!

This is a rough page I put together of the 480mm scale size relative to a growing child of average height.
.
I just modified the Torres design but with such a reduction in size, I don't know how applicable the bracing is any more.

(I know, I didn't make remotely clear how young she is! Didn't realise it had to be so much smaller due to a bad article on the subject.)

I've built three of these guitars so far and it is a charming and it remains a viable guitar for a long time. The 603 mm scale is actually pretty short.

If the child is young enough that a 480 scale is correct, they the will outgrow this quite quickly. I'd also offer that for someone that young I wouldn't invest a lot in terms of material or effort in making a "fine" guitar. Once they are a little bigger and a little older, absolutely!

_________________
Expectation is the source of all misery; comparison the thief of joy.
http://redrivercanoe.ca/

Oh well Doug I have to disagree. Quite strongly. There's a lot of charm about very small Guitars and they sound perfectly nice and absolutely no reason why one shouldn't be carried into adulthood. Might not make it into the music academies . . . but so what.
Anyway, I think these two are older than 4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap-Gvqaq80I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haRp1ADwojk

Thanks Doug, but I'm with Michael on this. Based on my research so far, she should get two years out of it before it is relegated to being her "travel guitar", by which time, I'll have made her a bigger one which really will be able to last as long as she wants it. I can play a 570mm scale length with no issue so I'm sure a six or seven year old could play a 480 even if it should be closer to 550 by that age.

I do understand completely where you are coming from though. I was expecting that to be the general consensus. And the 604mm Torres is something I'd love to build exactly as it is in the plan.

I was going to make her a nice ukulele (hers is one of those godawful toys), but we decided that she's so close to needing a little guitar, that that really would be a bit of a waste of time.... Now it turns out that the size I'm making isn't dissimilar to a baritone uke with six strings. If it turns out to be the one that kicks off an interest in music, I'l be stoked, and, equally, if it gathers dust in the corner and she learns only two chords on it, I won't be surprised or upset. I learned a few chords as a kid and it made it much easier for me to actually start playing on my own when I was older. I'll get as much joy seeing her using it as I would anyone else. More, probably. (About the materials; I've already priced it up and it's very reasonable. I'm obviously going to make it as well as I can. Only made 2 so far.)

Planning one are we now,hmmm....that would be pre meditated. Which you obviously realize by wondering on how to make up for it.
Well unfortunately the church no longer sells indulgences...however some coins in the poor box or a buskers hat while humming a few bars of Halleluiah by Cohen might just do the trick.

Other than that , me see no overlooking on your part, so you may as well take back yer apologies and save them for when you really needs them.

Of course you must realize you ain't just builden a guitar...Nope!...you be building a family heirloom. Just be keepin that in mind and in your heart while building the sucker
for her.


blessings
?adma

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

Thanks, Padma, you're absolutely right. I will!

And, regarding apologies; well, I'm the kind of Englishman that dishes out mini-apologies thirty times a day at least.
I think I misunderstood the concept from an early age.

A coin a bar? I hope we're talking ha'penny coins! Any more and I might start busking myself!

Have you built any guitars this small? Would an archtop work well at that size? Not that I'll be building an archtop just yet, but yours are very inspiring!

Narrowest Me has built is 300, and me don't build no flat tops. Well, very very seldom.

Thank you.

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

Measurements to go with the drawing above...



275mm lower bout
360mm body length
62-72mm deep (possibly a wedge with an armrest and a soundport)
480mm scale
43mm nut width
55mm string width at bridge

Now the ones I'm yet to work out.... (and obviously, I'm only looking for recommendations, I may try deflection testing on this one.)

1.8mm top(?)
1.8mm back and sides(?)
5mm fan bracing(?)

I'm slightly tempted by this Kasha braced baritone uke plan, http://www.hanalimastore.com/servlet/the-113/Plans--dsh--Baritone-Kasha/Detail, but interested to hear what others think.

I think that my comments may have been misread. I totally love the SE117 Torres type of guitar and I believe that they are fine for the young player and will remain so into adulthood.

What I was getting at is that if the child is too small for a 603mm scale guitar then they may be too young to treat a fine guitar really well. Not to say that it should not be built well, just that it should be built with such a young child in mind. I have three kids under my belt so I am not putting kids down! And yes, I believe that that they will treat their belongings as well as you teach them.

_________________
Expectation is the source of all misery; comparison the thief of joy.
http://redrivercanoe.ca/

Nah, I know what you meant. Tis all good! I know it isn't advisable and I was expecting a chorus of people saying what you are saying. You have infinitely more experience with kids than I so I'm probably being foolhardy but I was going to make her a ukulele anyway because I wanted to make two at once to get some experience and I thought she might like one. She loved the idea of a guitar, and I figure it will take me nearly as much effort to make the uke, so I'm more that happy to do it! All the guitars I make in the near future will be for friends and family.

She may break it, but I'll make sure to tell her parents not to worry on my account in the slightest if she does. If I can fix it, it will be good experience. She's been very careful with my guitar, but of course accidents happen.

I've got a lot of what I need anyway, so money doesn't really enter into it. Just m'time. If building it with a child in mind means over building it to the point that the Yamaha guitelele sounds better than it, then I don't want to do it! I'll buy one of them and slap a Royle label on it. She'll never know?!

Sounds like you're in the right head space for it! Build on.

_________________
Expectation is the source of all misery; comparison the thief of joy.
http://redrivercanoe.ca/

Kasha style bracing They really know how to over think this stuff. It's a tiny Guitar. A thin flat piece of wood with strings attached. You might need one twig running down the centre of the soundboard, maybe another two twigs either side of those. Actually you probably don't need any twigs at all.

I said I was only slightly tempted!

I was thinking about three sticks, but do you think it would be advisable to have none at all? Maybe a double top? Or am I over-thinking again? The thing I really need to wok out is how thick the spruce/maple should be. The last thing I want to do is overbuild it! As long as it doesn't cave in for two years, I'm home and dry. Only kidding, but it'll be totally worth all the effort if I can get a nice sound out of this little thing!

Without plans or guidance, I'll be stumbling in the dark really so any drop of information is appreciated.

Given the circumstances of this instrument, do any of the advanced building & thinking for yourself, it will be worthwhile only for you. The girl won't notice and won't care. I'd suggest 2mm plate thickness all around for this one. Thin enough to sound good, yet thick enough to be reasonably durable. The bridge will be a significant brace on this small soundboard, so keep that in mind while planning out your bracing scheme.

It will sound much better than anything else that she'll have available, so don't worry too much on that front just yet.

What she WILL care about will be whether or not it hurts her fingers to play! So, set the action properly. I remember my first guitar, it was truly awful with strings a mile high. I hated practicing and it put me off of guitar for years. Also, she'll care about how pretty it is, so think about what this young girl finds appealing.

If she sticks with it, build her a proper SE117 and make that one killer!

_________________
Expectation is the source of all misery; comparison the thief of joy.
http://redrivercanoe.ca/

This one I made from scraps and has 3 sticksies:



It looks a little odd because the fretboard is actually full width, for an adult hand. I can't remember the soundboard thickness but I still have the instrument somewhere.
A couple of year ago a few of us had the chance to directly compare this to a Guitalele. Mine was a touch louder and sounded more Guitar like, the guitalele had more of that plunky Ukulele type sound. Not a lot in it though but then you shouldn't expect huge differences despite the low cost of the Guitalele. Diminishing returns quickly set in, whether it be £3 million Violins or any other musical instrument.