Official Luthiers Forum!

I've got a Bozeman adi topped J-45 Legend that's very lightly braced, weighs very little, hide glue, vintage specs etc and it's LOUD and resonant. As J-45's go, it doesn't get any better and I get the impression that structurally, it's built right on the egde. I think Gibson went all out trying to recreate a 1942 guitar and got it right.

I also have a recent Bozeman SJ-200 (a very good example I believe) and while it's got qualities the J-45 doesn't, it's heavier, looks like much bigger braces and it's not quite as loud and resonant.

If I wanted to build an SJ-200 that 'doesn't get any better', would it have to be built vintage style like the J-45? i.e. right on the edge? Is it the adi/hog combination that makes the 45 such a loud resonant guitar? Is it the hide glue? The thin braces? Will a sitka/maple SJ-200 ever be as loud as a loud J-45? Or won't the sitka/maple combination allow this? Were the SJ-200's ever as lightly braced as the J-45's back in the 40's and 50's? Are the Bozeman 200's too heavily braced?

Thanks in advance.

Make a rosewood sj. When doing research for a customer I found out they made rosewood j200's . Now I have never played both those guitars side by side for comparison but I'm guessing the maple jumbo just sounds thinner and lots of treble. Rosewood would round out that bass and give you a more full rich sound.

IMHO "on the edge" isn't necessarily good. Too light and you loose clarity. The tone can get kinda muddy....not to mention structual issues. Light in the right places, and heavy in the right places is what's needed.
The way I see it, too light, and nothing but the bridge moves. Too heavy and nothing moves. Somewhere in the middle is where "magic" happens.

_________________
I didn't mean to say it, but I meant what I said.
http://www.brackettinstruments.com/

I'm one who believes that the best guitars are built on "the edge". The challenge is that "the edge" is a moving target.

_________________
Jimmy Caldwell
http://www.caldwellguitars.com

To close to the edge & they fall on the floor.
Mike

_________________
Mike Collins

P@ul, I hear you with the RW but I find it gets too bassy for me. It's the maple tone I'm after, just louder.

Since the J-45 looks like it's about to implode, I was thinking lighter braces. But muddy or too bassy is definately not good. If I knew what to do I'd build one from scratch or re-top one with adi and make the internal changes.

But, how do I find where to make it lighter or heavier, where it counts and find the edge?

Reading Somogyi's "The Responsive Guitar" would be a very big help...!
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

The answer can only sound like a Zen koan. Think about string tension, where the strings anchor and how they exert pressure and you'll know where the guitar needs to be sturdy, and where it can be light. Obviously the *real* vintage J's were not built so close to the edge, at least not the ones that have survived. A good point of departure would be to copy *exactly* the dimensions and materials involved in the guitar you want to replicate. Either find accurate plans, or preferably measure accurately the exact model. It's difficult with Gibsons because they're so inconsistent. The variations in wood sets will not be enough to offset you in a significant way, provided you get high quality materials (which the vintage Gibsons did not necessarily have BTW). The rest is a matter of repairing and building enough guitars, studying the structural issues involved and gain enough experience and insight to 1/get better, 2/get exactly what you shoot for 3/compensate wilfully for the natural variations occurring in materials.

_________________
Laurent Brondel
West Paris, Maine - USA
http://www.laurentbrondel.com/

Wise words.

Great advise Laurent !

jf-easy sir !

_________________
Mike Collins

This is what I was thinking. There are no shortcuts. You can get close copying a successful example, and can accelerate the process with instruction from a good teacher, but in the end, you simply have to build a bunch of guitars to figure out for yourself. It's by gathering data or gathering intuition through experience, but most likely by way of a combination of these that you will progress.

_________________
"Building guitars looks hard, but it's actually much harder than it looks." Tom Buck

Use of the term "best" just opens the proverbial can o' nightcrawlers. But, that aside, for example, there's a healthy contingent of 12 string players who would put Bozo (just to head off any obvious clown references, it's pronounced Bozho) Podunavac's 12's in the best category. Incredible projection and tone--yet they're very heavily built. The amount of bd ft. of bracing he puts in his tops would brace two 'normally' built--and perhap 2-1/2 "on the edge" built instruments. Most Martin 12's are comparably in the latter category, and every one I've played sounded like a handful of nickels being thrown against a 'vintage' box spring.

Now, if you're talking say 'vintage' Gibson sound then you may have to build on the verge of implosion. For me a lot of so-called vintage Gibson's don't sound very 'good' (another subjective word).

At any rate, mine is just one of many opinions. I think the best advice is that your answer (as others have stated) will be borne out over the course of years of building, not with just a single project. Good luck. It should be fun.

_________________
michael propsom
www.propsomguitars.com

A j45 and a j200 will never sound the same. A maple and a mahogany and a rosewood will never sound the same. They can all be good guitars, but they won't sound the same.

The book looks like the start and then I guess, it's no way back. This could take some time.

Hupaand, of course. I'm not trying to make a 200 that sounds like a good 45 (I already have one). I'm trying to make a 200 that's as loud as my benchmark 45.

There are so many misconception about "on the edge". To your answer , no I often joke the the best sounding guitar will hold together for one song then implode but that is not true. I have been building seriously for over 10 years and I have over 104 guitars done. I , like many new people believed the secret was a flexible top . That isn't what it is about.
There is a balance that is needed and every guitar is different. The mating of the top and braces is a big key. I have see some very thin and light guitars that sounded horrid. As was pointed out the harmonics , Bass , Treble all need to blend. If you build too light you will not have a balanced guitar. Voicing a top and you can go from great to dead in such a small amount so you can fix it till it's broke.
My best advice is to keep a building log and learn what you are doing to your guitars and what the changes influence. You will get many opinions on this subject and few will really know what is going on. I agree with what Laurent stated. The only issue is there are few really good prints out there. I was lucky that I got great documentation from Frank Ford , Martin , and a few retirees from Gibson . Experience is a hard teacher but sometimes it is the best one. Good luck and find good sources for your information.
Too often information that is past on is based on opinion , hearsay or just false. Learn your source , just because it was on the "internet" does not make it true .

_________________
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

IMO the "building light" approach is one school of thought (and the one I belong to) and it IS successful, and structurally sound, but that doesn't mean that you can just willy nilly lighten everything up without rationale. When done right these guitars DO sound better to my ears, but it is possible to push it too far and kill the liveliness.

Clearly there are other methodologies to produce good sounding guitars, so to some extent these discussions fragment pretty quick into camps depending on the builders methodology.

If you are serious about building light the best resource are the Somogyi books. I have had (what I think) is dramatic success with his method and I highly encourage others to look explore it. It took a few guitars to "get it" but once you dial it in I think it is a great system.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

Hauser senior supposedly built at least some of his guitars with an unusually thick top.

That's why I build mine in the center of the work table.

_________________
Hank Mauel

Do you roll that away for dinner parties in the evenings?

I try to keep mine flat as much as possible, to alleviate that problem!

_________________
Waddy

Photobucket Build Album Library

Sound Clips of most of my guitars

great advice on this one.
i'm doing a completely different bracing, and top config.
kinda close to da edge.
in a coupla weeks i'll find out how it sounds.
yikes!
this subject is the hardest part of building, imo.
acoustic git # 6 for me.
experience, and taking notes is the key, i think.

Priceless, Filippo. For all else, there's MasterCard.

Seriously, and I mean this as a sincere compliment...from the photos of your shop you have posted now and previously, you gotta be anal! This shop makes Hesh look like a a piker.
Do you ever have a wood shaving left on the floor by accident, and if so, do you go into convulsions racing to clean it up?
You can bet I'm NEVER going to post a photo of my shop!

_________________
Hank Mauel

Well, Fillipo, you can come over any time and clean mine!

Come on Hank, if you'll post a picture of your shop I'll post one of mine.........if I can find my camera.....it's in my shop somewhere

_________________
I didn't mean to say it, but I meant what I said.
http://www.brackettinstruments.com/

Dares go first!

_________________
Hank Mauel