Official Luthiers Forum!

I really enjoyed the response to my last thread, about who would like to "go pro" or not, with their making, so I thought of another -

Some weeks go by when I get more emails from people wanting to make guitars than buy one! But with apprenticeships thin on the ground, books, dvd's and forums seem to be the way to go.

What advice would you give to someone just starting out?

How did you do it?

nigel
http://www.nkforsterguitars.blogspot.com

_________________
nigel

http://www.theluthierblog.com

Avoid the Classifieds .... once the zoot bug bites .... it can get expensive !

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

I'm only on guitar 3 but have more wood than I know what to do with! I can't keep money in the bank.

I think it’s important to be able to build your instrument from beginning to end on paper or in your head before you start cutting wood. This is true whether you are a beginner or a seasoned veteran. The details in the paper/mental build include every step in terms of structure/design, technical approach (such as jigs/tools), and sequence. After all, an instrument is a whole and not a collection of parts or steps. If I can’t do this, it’s simply an encouragement that I need to do more research or critical thinking. Sequence is especially important because you want to do things in the easiest possible way and not paint yourself into a corner. Instead, it’s best to leave as many options open until you have to pull the trigger so that the technical barriers to optimizing structure and sound do not become the biggest factors. For beginners, the paper/mental build will naturally focus on structure and execution, whereas for the more experienced, it will focus on ways to optimize sound. In my own career, it was interesting to watch that transition take place.

That's definitely true. While I was building my first, I seemed to be spending all my waking hours figuring out how to do various processes. One thing I found really useful was, when reading this forum, I would often come across a useful bit of information or somebody explaining a process. Whenever that happened, I would copy the post into notepad and you eventually build up a little reference library that you can refer to without having to search for it.

_________________
"I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that I may learn how to do it."
Pablo Picasso

https://www.facebook.com/FenskeGuitars

Keep in mind that the first one will be far from perfect. Relax. When you mess something up, remember that it happens to everyone and it's part of the process. Getting something wrong is on the path to getting it right. Don't be afraid to chuck a top or a back to do over. Mistakes will never seem as horrific as they are the moment you realize you've made them.

Pat

_________________
formerly known around here as burbank
_________________

http://www.patfosterguitars.com

Get some reference books and videos. Build a couple of kits to see if reality matches your dream. If the fire is still burning go and take a good building course.

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

I dunno.
Never could figure things out on paper. Much better at having things in my hand like a Lego kit. How do I get this thing to do that?

I think this advice is absolutely spot on. You need to be this familiar with the process to build smoothly and timely from start to finish, and to anticipate and deal with issues that may arise as you go along.




Doesn't REALLY have to be on paper, but you should be able to walk through the steps from start to finish in your head without going "Oh crap,I forgot to do THIS first!".

The other advice I would offer is, it's a good idea to be able to stand behind your work, this means ALSO being proficient in the repair aspects of luthiery, in case you need to remove a bridge, reset a neck, repair a binding that pops off (more a problem with plastic than wood), reglue braces, repair cracks, refin, etc., in case they come back for warranty work.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

there are a few facts
A it costs to learn how to build
You pay a teacher or pay with your mistakes
B There are more ways to do this than one may think. Avoid the my way is the only way advice.

It is easier to make a good sounding guitar than a good looking one. Don't expect your first guitar to be your best. I think once you start to question your results and learn the cause and effects of the process , you will be on your way.

Keep a building log and learn from others , even if it is not to do it that way.

_________________
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

Don't do something experimental on your first one. Unless you're working with somebody experienced. It's hard enough already!

_________________
Pat

It's ok to make assumptions....but question them and test them.

As often as possible...test an assumption apart from an actual guitar...on a test article.

In everything you do make notes so you don't cover old ground. Make a written plan...follow it then write a critique of the result...write out a revision...follow it then write a cri.....

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

A newbie on builds 3 and 4...

I was VERY lucky... I knew I wanted to build ONE guitar, simply to understand more about their construction - the intention was only to ever build ONE instrument and since I wanted to do it as best as possible, I found out about a local pro builder and asked if he would do a class a week for a couple of hours. We agreed a fee and I went to work, first session, just on discussion on type of instrument I had in mind and woods, properties etc. I had found a lovely set of macassar ebony at a good price back in 2007, maybe only twice that of an average indian set...and with apologies to those long toothed pros who advocate using cheaper woods when starting out, as I was building only one, and had several nice guitars in Indian and Sitka, why build another with the same woods? I had a great German spruce top and a stunning B+S... (which were a fraction of the eventual cost) and 2 and half years later a great guitar. The cost, well in $ terms could have bought one from a highly respected pro, but the learnings and advice gained were priceless - would always advocate getting to know a pro, and pay for 'lessons' - you just learn so much, from sharpening tools ... to well loads, especially when I was expected to do all by hand... made a good friend and I still go back and visit and talk wood and guitars and ask for advice etc...

When I moved to Scotland a few years ago, I finally had space for a workshop in the cellar/basement - so set one up. I also once again got in contact with a local pro, knowing that even if only a hobby builder, it would be great to get advice and support to help improve the quality of what I was building - again its paid for - although in this case more swapping wood for time etc. Again invaluable.

BUT its very clear that every builder is different, they do things different ways and each works well for them - So I would say that whilst its great to learn the technical skills and understand the process, remember that when it comes down to it, there are as many approaches as there are builders and many opinions on how something should be done.... yes the result of the experience(s) of the builder, but would add that they do have different experiences! As we see when folk make a request for help on here, who often get many different solutions - all equally valid and effective, but often quite different. It can be confusing for a newb - whose advice is best? What makes one opinion worth listening too more than another if you have never played one of their instruments? Post count?

Personally, seems that getting to grips with the basics - the woodworking skills is step one, but when it comes to using them to make a tonally sophisticated, interesting and quality instrument... there are many beliefs, approaches some scientific, some trial and error, some experimental, some traditional, some so clever, some logical, some illogical yet work etc etc... and all depends on who you ask, so I guess it sort of means just go for it, build what YOU want to with the materials you want to. Document what you do/have done and learn by every experience.... and get feedback from... players - ultimately as pretty, stunningly beautiful and 'work of art' like these things can be, they ARE musical instruments and if decent players like them and enjoy them, does it matter what other builders think? Respect from peers must be great, but respect from musicians is surely the ultimate aim?

Must admit, despite being a scientist by degree and profession, am not entirely convinced by some of the things some builders do with iron filings and various other 'tests' etc. I can understand the inquisitive spirit of trying to figure out what makes piece of wood respond in such a way, but can anyone on here hand on heart say that their instruments sound better since they started using these tests? ...or is it simply they sound better because you have built MORE instruments? Its a bit of a chicken and egg question really, like do the GOOD old golden era Martins sound good because of the build and materials used, or simply because the GOOD ones have aged well in ideal conditions, been looked after as they sounded great from the start? or is the 'hype' a myth perpetuated by clever marketeers? (I have played several pre war Martins and like most, some are exceptional, some very very good and some simply good to hang on the wall)...

Mystery, mystique etc is part of the culture and as with many old wives tales there is usually a solid rational behind many of the 'established' principles, but beacuse so many pros do have their OWN ways, there does come a point when you have to just do your own thing. If musicians and players like it, you cant be doing too much wrong, even if it is 'heresy' in some builders minds

"Some weeks go by when I get more emails from people wanting to make guitars than buy one! But with apprenticeships thin on the ground, books, dvd's and forums seem to be the way to go.What advice would you give to someone just starting out?"


Be honest with them, and tell them it is a road to an addiction that will impoverish them and consume their waking hours. Better that they spend their money on crack cocaine or heroin or become a musician.
And by all means sell them a guitar!

but can anyone on here hand on heart say that their instruments sound better since they started using these tests?
Yes.
Definitely....
Unquestionably...
Irrefutably....
Etc.

Time to explain

My point was that many experienced players will talk of the mythical status of certain eras, certain makers and certain guitars... Built by mythical beings in time when BRW was plain and straight cheap and boring and electricity had barely been invented. No jumping iron filings, no patterns, just an experienced hand and ear, together with years of honed craft etc.... As a newbie, for me it's about how they got there, there, the journey, and the old seasoned pros can provide you with great advice, the benefit of their experience, all of which is invaluable, but its the journey you take yourself, discovery and all that is the fun part IMHO - so getting that advice from as many as possible rather than just a single source is as brilliant as it is confusing

There is a danger, and this may sound provocative, it's not meant to, but it does that newbies listen to too much advice from builders and not enough from players - in part because we perhaps don't get our instruments into enough hands - and the seasoned pros have the advantage of having a history of such feedback- but when you see some makers charging $4000+ up charge for stump wood BRW you can't but help asking questions. And often newbies seem too in awe to ask the right ones.


Mystique is great and all that, but straight, honest BS free advice is what we need, and I have been fortunate to get some which will hopefully one day lead to a decent instrument, but can't help feel that in the effort to differentiate, some makers are taking the 'mystique' to the extreme when the fundamentals are that an experienced ear, coupled with an experienced and talented technical skill is something to which there are no short cuts.

The wisest words I have seen on here are that you learn more from your mistakes than anything else. I just feel that sometimes we are maybe encouraged to make too few, to copy principles that remain unproven in an effort to speed up the journey time - so I go back to that earlier statement, how to you know that improvements in your instruments are down to application of certain tests, and not just down to the simple fact that you have developed as a builder, improved your ear and skills?

If you can't afford to study with a luthier, I really recommend Robbie Obrien's on-line courses. Definitely the best money I've ever spent. Basically he is building a guitar nearly in real time with explanations for why it is done that way, and giving alternate processes for many steps. I got the classical course for my first, and it took the mystery away, plus the guitar looks, plays and sounds great due to Robbie, and David Schramm's online course that I started with before I got Robbies. Now working on my second, and feel like I really learned from the first.
Mike

What's to explain?
My guitars definitely sound consistently better since learning these tests than before. It's aggravating that I was about 50 guitars in before learning them. Even if you take a step by step course, get the Gore/Gilet books to get the physics principles in hand.
Worked wonders for me, but then none so righteous as the converted, eh?

Hard for me to answer this without someone saying "Well, of course he'd say that..."

But I don't need to say that. I have LOTs of emails from readers that say it for me. Words similar to:




There's lots of ways of making good guitars, but a couple of bits of advice I'd offer are:

1) Be sure to differentiate between real science and pseudo science. If you are interested in that approach and aren't able to make the distinction yourself, find someone suitably qualified to help you

2) When listening to stories, theories, explanations etc. of ways to get the perfect sound, if it doesn't make sense to you, it's probably nonsense.

3) Keep an open mind, but don't let your brains fall out.

4) There's the journey and there's the destination. Different people focus on different things, but a good route map can sure help get you to the destination. And you don't have to walk if you can catch a cab.

_________________
Trevor Gore, Luthier. Australian hand made acoustic guitars, classical guitars; custom guitar design and build; guitar design instruction.

http://www.goreguitars.com.au

Keep up with the learning even after you have built a hundred instruments. I have seen some that are stuck in their ways even if they aren't the best. It's to easy to get comfortable with what you do. You may think that you are finally there but there is still plenty to learn. New techniques and ideas being discovered everyday that make guitar building more and more advanced....Mike

_________________
Guitars, guitars and more guitars.

As a relative newbie (currently finishing my 8th acoustic) there are three pieces of advice I would give others starting out, based on my own learnings thus far:

#1 This quote from Gary rings very true for me. The amount of time I have wasted figuring out how to do something the hard way because I went ahead and finished process A before doing process B, despite the fact that it would have been much, much simpler to complete A after B.....


#2 You think your tools are sharp. They're not. All that grief you're giving yourself because of your bad technique is probably due to the fact that you still have a lot to learn about sharpening Once you have learned to sharpen them properly... you haven't. Go back and read some more books, watch some more video's etc. Once they are (finally) truly sharp you'll know what I mean.

#3 All those pretty details you want to put on your first few builds... they just attract attention and say "look at me, look at me!" and by then you wished people weren't looking quite so closely. Nothing attracts attention to your mistakes or sloppy workmanship better than poorly executed fine details. Keep your first few simple and execute them to the best of your ability. Those tiny mistakes on all those pretty details will drive you nuts for years to come

Cheers,

Shane

Don't get me wrong, not saying its of no value, just posing the question on what is to me an interesting subject. As a new builder, but someone who understands the basic principles, I am keen to understand.

The dilemma is that it seems to depend on who you ask- those who have embraced the science will obviously preach its virtues and value where they find it has helped, but others and I am talking seasoned pros with full international order books and reputation, still advocate the ear, tap, selection and of course considerable skill in crafting these together... The experience that comes with 200+ instruments.

Newbies can be bombarded with contradicting views depending on who you ask - and I guess what I am saying is that there is a paradox here - the obvious benefit from gaining advice and insight from multiple sources and experienced builders is clear, yet by doing so you often get quite different opinions and this can be confusing....

The benefits of access to that experience through sources such as this site, is great and it's wonderful to see so many willing to share their knowledge and solutions, ideas etc with humble newbies, but I guess we must try and do our own thing, make our own mistakes and be prepared to challenge convention where appropriate with respect but without fear.

Fair enough, and suit yourself.
However, these books contain concise condensed data from builders with a great deal of instruments under their belts themselves. Not saying you shouldn't listen to intuitive builders as well, but there's nothing wrong with being able to frame your information within quantifiable, measurable, translatable, repeatable systems that can be precisely and accurately explained. They won't harm you anyway...

I hear ya! and thanks for taking the time to respond, appreciated.

The pace at which many amateurs build due to work, family etc, will obviously dictate how quickly we can learn from experience, and for me that's probably about 2-3 a year max, so its going to be s l o w... and there are multiple areas of focus, from understanding the design, materials, developing woodworking skills etc ... before you even consider improvements in tone in compbination with all the above!

Recording what I do is standard, including some measurements etc, but for me part of the fun is developing a feel for the wood, comparing, bending etc, (which in effect is doing the same thing on a less accurate and detailed scale) - and with enough to learn with respect to technical skills, not sure I am ready for the iron filings and deflection or frequency stuff just yet.

... and on my wall hangs a small parlour instrument built probably in Austria or Southern Germany at around 1830-1840. Sadly the label is missing. European spruce and a single piece of flamed maple with a wonderful aged patina. The top has a couple of ancient repaired cleated cracks and ebony veneer has worn away on the neck in a few places. the bracing is at best 'rustic' and I doubt the original builder spend too much time smoothing them either.. But when strung up with nylon strings the tone this little beauty produces is still quite amazing...

I think what I am getting at is that even as a newbie I can point to many areas where such an instrument could be 'improved' simply in the 'construction', I could not, however, replicate its tone that 180 years have added.. nor the charm that comes with it. Nor should I attempt to - but assessing this instrument critically from a build and scientific perspective would categorise it as a piece of junk. Assessing it as a musical instrument, despite its cracks and aged worn appearence, is a whole different thing. Maybe, my question should be slightly differently worded - how do we ensure that we dont engineer out the uniqueness, the individual charm in what should be first and foremost a musical instrument? Understanding why something behaves and sounds as it does is obviously interesting, but is there a danger that this could lead to 'clones' rather than that individual charm?

I'm hardly an 'oldie' in terms of instruments completed, but two things that stand out for me:

1. Don't expect to save any money. Maybe, maybe, if you have a fully equipped shop already, you can break even. Given enough luck. For the money I've spend on tooling and wood, I could own several high-end custom acoustics and electrics.

2. Build if you enjoy the challenge. Despite 1, I wouldn't want it any other way - it's rewarding, challenging and fun.