New Book Review *LINK*

Re: New Book Review

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Thanks, Ellis. Have you started making one yet? Is it actually from scratch, like logs?

Have you read Kinkead's book?

Pam

No on Kinkead...

Ellis Walentine, Host

>...enlighten me.

Ellis

Kinkead builds on molds...

David Barnett - SW Florida

>...rather than a solera (the way most lightly-built classicals are assembled). I prefer the advantages (and challenges) of solera building and hand bending (my 1964 Robt. Bouchet is slowly taking shape). Nice book, though.

Cumpiano and Natelson build an American steel string on a solera in their book "Guitarmaking: Tradition and Technology".

Re: Kinkead builds on molds...

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Yeah, Kinkead makes steel string guitars, makes it look fairly easy. Cumpiano I haven't had a chance to read yet; so, I wondered whether the solera was OK for steel strings or not.

Dave, are you making a Robt. Bouchet guitar? From plans? Have you been making it since 1964? Or is it a 1964 model?

Off to read Cumpiano.

Pam

Mold v. solera *LINK*

David Barnett - SW Florida

>A solera is fine for steel strings, just as a mold is fine for classicals. Solera building (Spanish method) easily accomodates different plantilla profiles (body shapes) versus constructing a new mold for each plantilla modification. On the other hand, molds are repeatable, offering production advantages, especially when dedicated jigging and tooling enters the equation. A solera, while it is easily moved about and allows for one-off variation, requires that the sides be bent spot on, but this should also hold for molds, as one should never use the mold to force the fit. And on an on.

One of the best classical guitarmakers, Daniel Friedrich, chose to mold. His teacher was Bouchet, who did not. For someone building their first or first few guitars who doesn't like or own power tools, the solera offers a natural and viable approach.

For me the idea is to slow down, use simple tools, have fun with nice wood, aim for perfection, fall short but nevertheless enjoy myself. Bouchet didn't need anthing but a few hand tools and he needed far fewer than most of us have. I like his approach.

As for plans, I'm using Roy Courtnall's full-size drawings for the five strut 1964 Bouchet detailed in his book "Making Master Guitars", which gives plans and methods of eight great luthiers from Torres to Romanillos. If one wishes to build classical guitars, this is the book to own.

Throughout the book, it's refreshing to see the simple and often inexpensive hand tools used in luthiery. User tools. Blue-handled chisels, planes and spokeshaves that might've been flea-market bargains.

Another cool thing about guitarmaking with hand tools is the scale of the work. Doesn't take much space for tools, wood, or assembly. One guy on a luthier forum built his in a bathroom. Of course, appropriate wood (I'm not starting from a log) can be surprisingly inexpensive or anything but. I sprung for an 'alternative' to scarce Brazilian rosewood. Not cheap, but not stressfully pricey, either. Rings like a bell. I'm fairly sure it'll beat what I've been playing for the last couple decades.




Roy Courtnall, book & plans

Re: Mold v. solera

ThomD

>The main difference is that while one can mix and match whatever techniques and structures one wants, the traditional steel string is built with a neck that is joined to the body with a joint, normally a dovetail, though recently other joints have gained a lot of ground. The typical classical guitar is built with an attached neck, the block within the guitar is integral with the neck. Both designs work equally well on either guitar, though the engineering is not the same.

In addition to these differences there has been an explosion of interest in making tops and backs with curvature in them. There is no doubt that luthiers consider these to have merit, but whether they make better instruments is open to question. The lutherie advantages like reducing cracked soundboards, or allowing one to integrate geometric surfaces, combined with the fact that demanding player accept them at some level, seems to indicate they are worthwhile, however these developments drive the process as much as specific guitar designs.

Next you can take the whole process to the point where a monkey could work on your assembly line which has a lot of advanatages, not least of which is part interchangeability and often it sets the groundwork for stuff like easier repairs.

When chosing your process woodworkers have the added advantage of being... woodworkers. I don't think most luthiers are woodworkers which is to say have any significant wood shaping skills. Of course some do. But most are engaged in developing jigs to save them from the need to make accurate cuts. In essence tools are jigs that allow you to make accurate cuts, but many don't start from there. If you take the woodworking advantage you can eliminate most jigs, which makes the whole process of building a few instruments a lot more direct. Guitars are very easy to make. There is a whole world of learning to control the sound, that doesn't happen with the first instrument. A guitar is an easy shape to make, and that is as much as anyone is likely to get right with their first guitar.

Re: Mold v. solera

David Barnett - SW Florida

>"The main difference is that while one can mix and match whatever techniques and structures one wants, the traditional steel string is built with a neck that is joined to the body with a joint, normally a dovetail, though recently other joints have gained a lot of ground. The typical classical guitar is built with an attached neck, the block within the guitar is integral with the neck. Both designs work equally well on either guitar, though the engineering is not the same."

Good point. I've seen an increasing number of detachable classical necks and it's more common to find neck reinforcement on classicals, usually graphite, some adjustable, some not. I'm leaning toward both tension rods and reinforcement. Some earlier classical guitarmakers used other joints than the traditional let-in slotted headblock.

As to solera v. mold, another reason to consider the solera comes from Roy Courtnall:

"The real advantage of the Spanish method is the sequence in which the instrument is assembled -- this ensures that the central axis of the guitar is accurately maintained, and the entire structure is rigidly held to the solera by means of a large bolt which is passed through the soundhole and the solera. The instrument is assembled face down, and the large, lower bout area on the solera is scooped out so that the soundboard is pressed into this concave shape. All the fan struts and harmonic bars are glued to the soundboard while it is face down on the solera, and the fan struts, which are straight and flat along their gluing surfaces, are forced, under pressure from cramps or weights, to take up the domed shape of the solera. The solera has an extension to support the neck, and this is usually ramped down at the far end by about 3mm, so that the correct angle between the neck and body is built into the instrument."

Also, since radius dishes to curve the top (and sometimes the back) are less commonly used by classical builders, the solera takes care of putting the curve where it's deemed best to stabilize stresses and focus sound production and projection (and I'm not gonna go there).

"When choosing your process woodworkers have the added advantage of being... woodworkers."

It sure helps to already know how to sharpen chisels, use spokeshaves, tune handplanes, use backsaws, bore straight holes, prepare scrapers and finish/polish before attempting luthiery, although there can be a tendency for woodworkers to overbuild, I'm told, especially in the beginning.

You'll have to admit it's a paradigm shift from cabinetmaking, though, to build a lightly constructed box that can take the stress of taut nylon or steel strings for decades, survive occasional bumps and handling insults, intemperate humidity/temperature swings, stay in tune while being energetically played, responding sensitively and accurately to the performing artist... oh... that sounds rich, pure, powerful and balanced. Other than that, I suppose it's easy enough, yeah. Like poker is easy, heh.

Re: Mold v. solera

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Thanks, David & Thom, very interesting. I like the solera approach, for its flexibility if nothing else.

David, I've had Courtnall's book on my wish list for quite a while, but since I'm building steel string figured I could delay spending a week's groceries.

Pam

Yeah, pricey *LINK*

David Barnett - SW Florida

>This cost me even more with the shipping, but is truly worth every penny (certainly not needed for steel string), but if you're building a Bouchet -- yeah, starts to add up, doesn't it?

From the 2003 facsimile edition of Bouchet's "Cahier d'atelier: la construction d'une guitare classique", with Friederich's commentary.




Bouchet's shop notes

That's so cool. Do you read French?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

If that last sentence on the lefthand page says:

David Barnett - SW Florida

>"With my gramil I have satisfied many a protestant hamster", then yeah. And I speak Esperanto like a native.

:)

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Re: Mold v. solera

ThomD

>"You'll have to admit it's a paradigm shift from cabinetmaking, though," to build a lightly constructed box that can take the stress of taut nylon or steel strings for decades, survive occasional bumps and handling insults,"

Compared to chairs? The loads are high, but they are almost parallel to the surface of the guitar, we aren't talking bows here.

It just "seems" realy highly stressed, on the SS the main load carrier in the neck is metal, and the 4+" deep box is more than strong enough.

"intemperate humidity/temperature swings"

That is going to be a problem with anything in wood except a hydrometer. It wrecks furniture also. The worst instrument damage in our house was the veneer that peeled off my dad's piano. Soundboard was fine though.

", stay in tune while being energetically played,"

Sure am glad I don't need to make the strings or the tunning machines...

" responding sensitively and accurately to the performing artist... oh... that sounds rich, pure, powerful and balanced. Other than that, I suppose it's easy enough, yeah. Like poker is easy, heh."

Building a great guitar intentionally is the work of a lifetime. Making a guitar that sounds great, though, is a completely different level of dificulty and probably 90% of the people who make one these days, and finish the project, stuck to the basics and didn't go off in goofy direction are going to get there first time out.

As far as the skill required to build a guitar I don't think there is anything in guitar making that would wow someone who can do a simple dovetail joint. I have seen projects that require that in PM. It's almost 100% butt joints. The dovetail neck joint is not too comonly used today, and is sometimes quite sloppy in fit. For instance there is little of it that is in actual contact in the Benedetto. Classicals don't have one, and many SSs use a mortice and bolts arrangement. So if you went to the most difficult DT joint it would certainly be comparable, but there are many alternative paths.

Side bending was the big hurdle at one time, but most people today build a jig that removes almost all the skill.

I wouldn't bother with Courtnal's book. It consists of instructions that are not particularly edifying, and plans that are widely available elsewhere. I have a copy of it, and his violin book. Certainly worth a look. If I wanted to build a fan brace guitar to someone else's plan, I would probably use Jeff Eliiots plan or his Hauser plan.

David thanks for posting the pics. I built a Bouchet shaped guitar from Courtnal's book early on, so seeing those notes and that book is interesting I speak french, there is always something else to get...

Benitto Juipe (sp) video is worth a look. It is pure spanish/mexican building. Every step he does just looks simple, except I would use a version of the fox side bender, rather than the method shown. periodically I get the urge to build a wood heated side bending mold like one I saw in an article about Mexican builders. That would be something different.

My main point to anyone who wants to try is give it a whirl, it's easy. Certainly easier than a spinning wheel: Turning, joinery, blacksmithing, machining, no good plans, etc... Of course it doesn't mater what it sounds like!

Re: Mold v. solera

ThomD

>"The real advantage of the Spanish method is the sequence in which the instrument is assembled -- this ensures that the central axis of the guitar is accurately maintained, and the entire structure is rigidly held to the solera by means of a large bolt which is passed through the soundhole and the solera. The instrument is assembled face down, and the large, lower bout area on the solera is scooped out so that the soundboard is pressed into this concave shape. All the fan struts and harmonic bars are glued to the soundboard while it is face down on the solera, and the fan struts, which are straight and flat along their gluing surfaces, are forced, under pressure from cramps or weights, to take up the domed shape of the solera. The solera has an extension to support the neck, and this is usually ramped down at the far end by about 3mm, so that the correct angle between the neck and body is built into the instrument."

Also, since radius dishes to curve the top (and sometimes the back) are less commonly used by classical builders, the solera takes care of putting the curve where it's deemed best to stabilize stresses and focus sound production and projection (and I'm not gonna go there)."

I think that somewhat overstates the case. Most of the stuff refered to in that section is going to happen in just about any method, and most of it is easy. I like the way the guitar's action comes together, on a strongback, it is a lot easier that what the SS guys have to go through. The main compromise is that you introduce quite a bit of distortion into the body shape. There is no real reason to believe that is problem.

I think the full jig is more complicated than it needs to be. You can set the neck angle with a strongback. You can get the braces glued in place in a building form and the single advantage there is that it requires less integration of the jig, which for a beginer may simply put up unecesarry hurdles, though a lot of people love the jigs.

The great advantage of the Spanish method is you can build any guitar that way, you can change almost everything with each guitar and the tooling requirements don't slow you down, because there aren't any. So it could be counter to that advantage if the solera is too complex. Though once one has settled on a design it makes all the sense in the world to build tooling to make it easier to produce.

Re: Mold v. solera

David Barnett - SW Florida

>(Can't work in my shop today, so am most grateful to 'talk' guitarmaking.)

"Compared to chairs? The loads are high, but they are almost parallel to the surface of the guitar, we aren't talking bows here."

True, I suppose I'm thinking more about what I've heard about guitars being a compromise between construction free and light enough to permit lively resonance short of flying apart from stresses. It is kind of balancing act. Even changing the scale length from 650mm to 640mm requires changes in the bracing, bridging, top tuning. There's enough stress that Bouchet adopted Torres' bridge bar to hold things together, and lengthening the scale usually requires added reinforcements and often a larger plantilla to compensate. (I can't even imagine playing an older Ramirez with greater scale length, these days. My hands have lost their strength and stretch for that.) But yeah, relative to chairs or bows I see your point. A lightly built chair isn't exactly what I'd construct for myself to intercede between my considerable avoirdupois and terra firma, though.

"That is going to be a problem with anything in wood except a hygrometer. It wrecks furniture also. The worst instrument damage in our house was the veneer that peeled off my dad's piano. Soundboard was fine though."

I'm probably overwrought about relative humidity now that I can practically spit into the Gulf from my yard. Although this spring has been amazingly dry, moving from the AC areas into the open areas I can practically hear my beater guitar squeak and moan on 'normal' days.

"Sure am glad I don't need to make the strings or the tuning machines... "

Funny, it totally intrigues me. Right from the start I wanted to make machines. For now, though, I'll get by with Schaller or Gotoh until I decide my builds are worthy of Rodgers, Sloane, Alessi, etc. I'm dubious of ever making them for myself but it's fun to dream.

"As far as the skill required to build a guitar I don't think there is anything in guitar making that would wow someone who can do a simple dovetail joint. I have seen projects that require that in PM. It's almost 100% butt joints. The dovetail neck joint is not too comonly used today, and is sometimes quite sloppy in fit. For instance there is little of it that is in actual contact in the Benedetto. Classicals don't have one, and many SSs use a mortice and bolts arrangement. So if you went to the most difficult DT joint it would certainly be comparable, but there are many alternative paths."

Oh, I think you're completely right as to woodworking skill levels. There's nothing too daunting about any of the steps if you are careful and have a reasonable skill set for handtools. Carving the neck is straightforward enough. The joinery is nothing to worry about at all. What I really meant was knowing how to move the guitar towards the desired sound. It's not the chisel or finger plane technique but knowing what to shave away, how it taps, how it flexes.

As for dovetailed necks on Spanish guitars, while Ignacio Fleta used them it's true they're fairly rare, although, as you mention, alternative neck joints are showing up more and more on recent classicals.

"I wouldn't bother with Courtnal's book. It consists of instructions that are not particularly edifying, and plans that are widely available elsewhere. I have a copy of it, and his violin book. Certainly worth a look."

I learned from Courtnall, which only highlights how much I have left to learn, I'm sure. I have heard his violin book is superior to MMG, though. Most of my exposure to guitarmaking was secondhand from aspiring luthiers studying with Wm. Cumpiano, et al, when I was living in Northampton and studying ww at One Cottage Street in Easthampton. Lived there ten years intending to take the course. Same with Dmitrios Klitsas. Now I'd kick myself if I could. I also want to see the Benito Hiupe video. I hear that the Mexican makers can build a guitar with a shop knife. Kenny Hill moved away from Paracho because of unsteady OA, although the actual ww skill was never in question.

"Building a great guitar intentionally is the work of a lifetime. Making a guitar that sounds great, though, is a completely different level of dificulty and probably 90% of the people who make one these days, and finish the project, stuck to the basics and didn't go off in goofy direction are going to get there first time out."

That's encouraging! It's reassuring to hear from one who's been there, done that. So much to learn.

Erratum: 'Huipe'. There, that's better.

David Barnett - SW Florida

>

"unsteady OA"??? What's OA?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

Re: Mold v. solera

ThomD

>"True, I suppose I'm thinking more about what I've heard about guitars being a compromise between construction free and light enough to permit lively resonance short of flying apart from stresses. It is kind of balancing act."

Perfectly true though it may be more reasuring to think of it as not being overly stressed. I have this trimaran and the wood in the floats is 3mm thick, or about the same as on a SS soundboard, wood isn't as good either. I was involved in wooden plane making, the people carrying type. I don't think the wood was quite as nice as the wood in guitarsm not as fine grained or straight. Wood is strong stuff and one would have to do something catastrofic to really see one break. Making one that lasts forever is difficult, they are built light enough that the loads can take their toll. Generally, though, a guitar built so light it would be seriously short lived, is also a guitar with a dead treble, assuming anything like normal dimensions were followed so you would have plenty of indication of any problems.

"Even changing the scale length from 650mm to 640mm requires changes in the bracing, bridging, top tuning. There's enough stress that Bouchet adopted Torres' bridge bar to hold things together, and lengthening the scale usually requires added reinforcements and often a larger plantilla to compensate."

It is really the same with anything though, for instance small chairs loose more length than part diameter, because stiffness governs. Same with guitars comparatively small changes in the part size will adapt to a smaller sized guitar. A guitar that is overly stiff often sounds great. So if you dropped the size of your guitar from 650-640 and kept the same structural dimensions it would be very unlikely to be a bad guitar, but it would not have the same sound (probably won't anyway) as your 650. That would probably be obvious in the material as you prepared them and glued them up. Your 640 board would probably feel a little tight, and you might loosen it up just a touch. That change sounds to me to be in the area of 3%. So how much do you need to reduce the thickness of a component to affect it 3% in stiffness, something in the 1% order. So you can see how relatively subtle changes, if any at all would be required. It might be in the way of a more open grain, or a piece of wood where the riff started a little sooner (that would be a more than 1% change!). I'm just trying to nudge stuff in the correct direction. It's a whole other game to look at a player and say he plays with a bit of a Sor finger action and gets less vertical displacement in the SB, and therefore, xx. I have no idea.

"I'm probably overwrought about relative humidity now that I can practically spit into the Gulf from my yard. Although this spring has been amazingly dry, moving from the AC areas into the open areas I can practically hear my beater guitar squeak and moan on 'normal' days."

Forms are probably indicated for that kind of thing or at least a good strategy for keeping the upper bout together.

"Funny, it totally intrigues me. Right from the start I wanted to make machines. For now, though, I'll get by with Schaller or Gotoh until I decide my builds are worthy of Rodgers, Sloane, Alessi, etc. I'm dubious of ever making them for myself but it's fun to dream."

I am interested in that too. I was watching a video on cutting gears, and the lights when on when I saw some of the processes. I have a lifetime supply of good tuners, since I don't think i could wear out a single pair of Gilberts. I have certainly work out several Schallers. I even made one guitar using SS tuners just to see whether it would work. SS tuners are a much better deal.

"It's not the chisel or finger plane technique but knowing what to shave away, how it taps, how it flexes."

That's mostly a mater of making lots of guitars, which starts with making the first one. It's also a mater of knowing a lot of good players since you can make relatively random guitars and people will sort through them and pick something they like without one really controlling a process. I read something by Greg Smallman, he is a fanatic for shaping the sound, and it was amazingly simple what his initial goalposts was.

"As for dovetailed necks on Spanish guitars, while Ignacio Fleta used them it's true they're fairly rare, although, as you mention, alternative neck joints are showing up more and more on recent classicals."

I was thinking even on SSs. For me to say rare is probably ridiculous but a lot of big manufacturers and major makers have made a switch.

"I learned from Courtnall, which only highlights how much I have left to learn, I'm sure. I have heard his violin book is superior to MMG, though."

It is a good book, but the way people build has moved on, and one can learn almost all one needs from the internet. Just as an example, what book covers jigs as well as the factory tour of Charlie Fox's place on Luth.org? Because of the way lutherie is currently practiced and organized, the info just isn't in books. There are plenty of books with adequate information in them, but the more up to date info in in catalogs and on the net. I think that cherry picking some issues of American Lutherie is also very useful.