Official Luthiers Forum!

Well I don't know if it's really red spruce or black spruce or white spruce. All I know is that it's been sold to me as red spruce and it doesn't matter where it has come from, Colonial, Old Standard, RCTonewoods, Allied, or LMI, it's all made great sounding steel string guitars, better sounding steel string guitars than I have made with what has been sold to me as sitka, european, or lutz, though those are nice guitars. Seems like the OP had a similar experience with the guitar he made out of what he thought was less than stellar red spruce. What I like about red spruce is its ability to sound good with many different styles of music from fingerstyle to jazz to bluegrass. And the dynamic range is better. Now those are generalization but they've been more true for me consistently than what I've found with other spruces and a lot more consistent than generalizations about blondes or redheads. It doesn't always tap that great and it's harder for me to voice the top accurately but the "red spruce" guitars still seem to come out better. So as long as the tonewood dealers keep selling it I'll keep buying it. I haven't been disappointed yet.

_________________
Ken Franklin
clumsy yet persistent
https://www.kenfranklinukulele.com

Ya, Flippo, and me just rattlin their cages cuz its the first batch of black beer this summer, its a Saturday, and well ya know ya gotta sample the first batch till ye do the face plant in the sawdust.

Yo Franklin, if that red spruce gets your pig clean then use it.

Personally ...me like western red cedar, and although me log me own, me has never had two tops quite the same. Nor have me had two batches of beer quite the same. In fact me never had two of anything quite the same...however there were these twin redheads in Amsterdam...but me don't wanna be boring you with me old man exploits.

Blessings
Padma

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

Just to be provocative (in a nice way) - IMHO (niave for sure), I believe there is a lot of truth in what Padma says (twin redheads in Amsterdam made me cuckle )- Martin used Adi, as it was there, plentiful and local, Old growth Rio most likely originally because it was stiff and looked good.... is the mystique around the pre-war thing really anything to do with the woods used (apart form the inherent beauty of the QS Rio) or more with the quality of craftsmanship and 70 years + of aging beautifully?

I also wonder if the whole concept of 'Mastergrade' is perhaps misleading of whatever species: stiff high grain count, even colour, well QS - used predominantly now and certainly historically by those who actually knew what they were doing - so has some of the quality/experience of the builder (who could probably make a decent guitar out of more varied and 'lesser grades' - been 'transferred' to the wood?

I on the otherhand would probably not see a great deal of difference between species or quality whatever I used as still way too early in the 'journey', but for some reason, the idea of using better quality (read higher priced) tops, helps focus and attention - its probably just my shameful attitude, that if using cheap materials, there is a tendency to rush and not take as much care... but thats my problem and a whole other debate

It shows that there is a lot more to great tonewoods than taptone. I essentially agree with most of what you wrote Ken, especially the different nature of overtones that red spruce seems to produce. I can't say I like it better than picea abies, it is just different. I even like Englemann…
In the kingdom of the blind the one-eyed man is king. Or is it the opposite?
Come on guys, let's be serious…
Not everything is the same and not everything is different.
In spite of outliers one can generalise about species. The variations, IME at least, are not that great and density is only part of the story.

Mark's chart confirms what every builder -who has actually built guitars- knows. I get my red spruce locally here in Maine, from Rob Dmitrieff and David Hill. Not only do I believe them, but red spruce has a specific "sweeter" smell different than other spruces. Besides density there is the fact that red spruce has more surface hardness than other spruces, that alone must have an effect. Lastly, here at least, I do not think you could find a black spruce big enough for guitar tops.

Sorry to sound pedantic, but when building at the highest level and actually reaching a specific tone, every tiny difference counts. It doesn't mean, as many erroneously think, that if you select this or that top and that wonderful B&S set, you're going to get the guitar of your dreams. Like haute cuisine, the ingredients are only part of the story and are meaningless without the chef…

When I worked at Pantheon I was able to evaluate 1000's of guitars sets, and actually follow them being made into guitars. It was a great education. Besides the fact that yes, we all were able to differentiate between spruces by the way the guitars sounded. We knew the models very well of course, and were rarely wrong. As a matter of fact, Dana's essay on the subject is still the best:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050308152013/http://www.bourgeoisguitars.com/tapping_tonewoods.htm

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

Thanks Ken, Laurent, (others) that offered relevant info. I really appreciate it..

Regards, Peter

'Adirondack spruce' is a common name for red spruce. Red spruce is the only native spruce in WV, VA, TN, or NC.
If you are interested in being more correct, call it red spruce rather than some other name. Red spruce is the name of the tree.
Engelmann spruce is the name of the tree.
Sitka spruce is the name of the tree.

_________________
John

Yo, Laurent,

thanks for that link... nice read.

Me gonna quote one line from it...


Tapping Tonewoods, by Dana Bourgeois
How the Selection of Species Helps Define the Sound of Your Guitar
Acoustic Guitar Magazine, March/April 1994)



"Relatively subjective point of view" to me thinking translates as "talk about this tone wood vs that tone wood is all a babbling crap shoot."


You like the wood... use it!


blessings
Padma

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

Paddy - did you read this part?...

"Red spruce is relatively heavy, has a high velocity of sound, and has the highest stiffness across and along the grain of all the topwoods. Like Sitka, it has strong fundamentals, but it also exhibits a more complex overtone content. Tops made out of red spruce have the highest volume ceiling of any species, yet they also have a rich fullness of tone that retains clarity at all dynamic levels."

If you're building a dreadnought and you want it to have plenty of headroom, but also offer rich overtone content, while in might be possible to find an Engelmann top that would work, "generally" speaking you would improve your chances of success if you looked though your red spruce stack instead, right?

There's no point in arguing...

Ya me read it. So what!





Non the less...in every conversation, in the very next breath out come the generalized B.S.* statements...you know ...the wood dealers tales ...about "well dis luthier said. blah blah..."

and the myths and B.S.* never ends.

Dudes ..." its the builder ~ not the wood"

Truth is me getting really tired of dealing with the programed belief system ruining around in our craft, and no thats not a spelling mistake.


Oh well.

As me said in me first post in this thread "the truth is me Frigen tired of this Babbling about this spruce quality verses that spruce quality." Its all subjective. Period.

So thats it...I, me, Duh Padma here by do solemnly swear and promise to never ever post to any more of these B.S.* threads about this that or the other spruce.

blessings
Padma



B.S.* : Belief systems.

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

How's that black beer, Paddy?

I so confused???!!!!!!

_________________
MK5acoustics.com

Me too. Looks like in-spite of all the professional opinions we find here, we're still left to learn through our own trials. Not the first time I've found this to be true.

_________________
Hutch

Get the heck off the couch and go build a guitar!!!!

life´s not fair. i thought i could buy and/or post my way to the top. well...

_________________
member of the guild of professional dilettantes

"Mastergrade" has a whole lot more to do with cosmetics than anything else. The market for very expensive handcrafted guitars tends to demand cosmetic perfection from the wood, and those tops come by once in a blue moon, nature being what it is. Quartersawn tops with no or very little runout are expected, and can be found as mastergrade, or as seconds which can be had for $30 a top, or less.

I agree with all the comments here that each sample of topwood is unique, and although there are some "trends" in species (e.g. the range of density in Adirondack tends to be higher than Englemann, for example) you really need to measure the properties of an individual top to be sure. Some do this by feel, others with calipers and a scale, but at the end of the day all are looking for specific properties that are appealing to the builder in what they are trying to acheive. Experienced builders of classical guitars would likely select a different top than a builder who's looking to make a "banjo-killer" bluegrass dreadnought.

Finally, I've heard of experienced builders being shocked at how good a guitar sounded when it was built with a top that had been judged to be too "floppy".

Anyway, I'm keeping records on density of tops that I use, and deflection testing results, so that I can make an effort on dialing in a process that makes guitars that sound good to me. And I'm going to build with all of the usual suspects in terms of species.

Tastes vary. I prefer this article: http://www.amjbot.org/content/93/10/1439.full. It has a clear, ringing tap tone, and stronger fundamentals.

you are a fast reader filippo.... it will take me maybe a decade to go through it... thanks for the link, Eric.


cheers,
Miguel.

_________________
member of the guild of professional dilettantes

I do not build spec. guitars.
Each one is made for a specific client.
All have different roses & trim.
Neck width,scale length etc..
In doing this I've found that any decent top wood can be used .
Evaluate each top as you get them.
I.E. -best for a classical-lite weight -etc..
Buy good tops from good dealers & let them age for a few years before you use them.
If you only plan on making 2 guitars a year buy enough for 10 years.
You'll see a difference in the stiffneess & taptone as the tops age.
Mike

_________________
Mike Collins

Howdy Mark, good to see you here. Pay no attention to the Padma behind the curtain, he is just off (maybe on? ) his meds today.

Alan D.

i laughed really hard at that. if i learn nothing about any of the spruces, that was funny. this is actually a decent thread though. thanks, guys.

_________________
sweat the small stuff.

Thing is... from a playing perspective... for over 30 years and having had the luxury of doing side by side comparisons between exceptional instruments from Sheppard, Tippin, Sexauer, Charis, Petros, and from the UK Sobell + various Martins (vintage and new), Collings....etc, each has their obvious unique tonality, charm and beauty and given that these builders are all using a variety of B+S woods as well as tops be it German, Swiss, Carpathian, Alpine, Italian (The Euro spruce), or Sitka, Lutz , Adi, Redwood or cedar - I am not sure I would want to get bogged down in the nuances between 'species' when there are so many variables effecting these instruments unique tone - not least the skill of the builder (as Padma points out)

I guess for me, I have never had a 'tone in my head' that I either believe is the holy grail nor that I think is a 'preference' - its why I will never own enough guitars (and what I try and expalin to Mrs C ) - they are all unique and all wonderful and its because of this variety there is a desire to own...just one more... please...

I guess I explain it to my wife (an art historian ) such .... if you think of fine builders as the artists, and each picture as instrument.... the movement or style (impressionism/cubism/modernism,vortism etc)represents the build type... some are painted in oils, some water colour, some acrylic, some on card, canvas or even wood.... (materials) ..... well some players love the artist and anything they paint, others the movement, some just oils and some just a certain picture... but most love the variety and just when you think you have a favourite, you see (play) something new and it completely changes your perception of the artist, the movement or the media - and thats the beauty of art..and of fine instruments and why this often preoccupation by some players (customers) with selction of materials is often at odds with what really matters... the uniqueness of the instrument....I guess saying this material over that material will yield this over that result seems like telling PIcasso to paint in watercolour because thats whta you like... when as far as I'm concerned a Picaaso in any material is wondrrful...and I want that Braque as well...oh an a Van Gogh and a Chagal, ... and not just one by each of them!

...sorry went off topic a little there... but I guess I have to agree in some respects with Padma... Yes in generaly there are going to be similarities between top woods of the same species, grown under the same conditions, same mineral in soil, altitude, amount of sun and rain, age, etc... (as well as the genetic uniqueness of the species)... but when you consider the difference a builder makes, in thicknessing, bracing, body size and shape, neck join, bridge, scale length nut, bone saddle, fingerboard, B+S woods and all those factors, I think generalisation become meaningless - a great guitar by a great builder will be far far more than the species of top to generalise about the tone of the whole tree, let alone species...surely that is as factual as any denisty measurement, deflection test or grain lines per inch? Tis in my 'playing' mind anyway.

I like your analogy Frank, and I think it reconciles a lot of things we've been saying here. It's only natural that painters will have strong opinions about paint, and prefer to use the best paint available. Maybe some of them even become obsessed with quantifying the properties of pigments and vehicles. But only a curator would look at a beautiful painting, and think "That's really good paint!"

Yeah, but which is better?



Heh heh, sorry, feeling like a bit of an instigator today......