Acoustic Guitar Construction in the small shop -- Kenneth Michael Guitars LLC

Information, ideas and help for those constructing scratch built acoustic guitars or acoustic guitar kits - © 2017
It is currently Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


The purpose of this forum site is to provide a means for acoustic guitar makers at all skill levels to forward information, share experience and ask questions if project obstacles are encountered. We ask that egos be left at the door – the highest levels of courtesy and respect are to be shown to all. Posts containing disparaging comments will be removed. The “Acoustic Guitar Construction Forum” is owned by Kenneth Michael Guitars and is copy protected. Direct links to luthier suppliers are not permitted and will be edited.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:44 pm
Posts: 5043
I've used rubber bands with good success, and spool clamps with not quite as good a result; the odd couple guitar was clamped in the MM just using the MDF tabs tightened down and worked great. I would really like to try the 'bed-spring' clamping done by one of the great Spanish luthiers and also James Oberg, but can't find the right type of wire. Haven't tried a caul yet.

_________________
-Under permanent construction


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:44 pm
Posts: 5043
I just had an interesting phone conversation with Brian Burns; he had noticed my questions about building without binding and wanted to chime in.
He has over the years some anecdotal evidence that bindings have a very positive affect on response and sound, and he also has talked with Jeffery Elliott and a couple of other luthiers about that anecdotal evidence and they all agreed on the good effects of binding on sound.
Brian's most recent experienced with this was with two students who built guitars in his shop; both of them ran out of time after the back was glued on, and wanted to take the guitars home and string them up and play them awhile and then come back in a year or so for binding.
Both students were disappointed with their instruments once they got home, both were experienced players and knew what to look for as far as 'opening up' the instrument and both said it just was not happening. Both came back to visit Brian and he played the guitars and agreed they were - in his words - 'clunkers'. Since both had been built to his very exacting specs he was of course concerned and puzzled.
Until the binding was glued on - suddenly both students and Brian were very happy - they got the sound and responsiveness they were aiming for from the beginning.
No one seems to have an explanation for this, but the experience of those luthiers and students does point to a benefit of bindings over non-binding. These were all classical guitar builders, by the way, and I don't know if we can generalize to ss instruments.

_________________
-Under permanent construction


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 7:30 pm
Posts: 167
Location: Southern IN
Dave, I don't know enough concerning the finer points of construction as relating to sound refinement.
Different woods of different thicknesses, various bracing schemes, even different finishes! No doubt binding can be said to have some contribution.

I can only speculate, but many find the current trend of stiff (overbuilt?) sides appealing.
Sides that are laminated, additional reinforcement bars, reverse kerfing, etc.
So if one were to follow that line of thinking, then the presence of binding could theoretically have an impact.
No binding means one gluing surface for the top, whereas the installation of binding creates two gluing surfaces for the top.
Does this more solidly couple the edge of the soundboard to the sides?

_________________
Always have plenty of sandpaper; it's rough out there!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 5:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:44 pm
Posts: 5043
No doubt binding can be said to have some contribution.

I don't know the reasons why it would work, Robert, but the luthiers Brian talked to were pretty adamant about the contribution - a very noticeable one - of adding the binding. Your theory might be the correct one.

If I was cranking out guitars I would run an experiment on one - at least that would be 'one in a row' :-)

And maybe ss instruments would not react the same?

_________________
-Under permanent construction


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:23 pm
Posts: 3924
Re: BB students. Purely speculation -- but I suspect it was not the binding that invoked the better sound quality but rather the binding and purfling channels. Relieving the perimeter of the sound board (less glued on surface) I believe allows that plate to move more freely. The butt joint against the purfling is more of a hinge and is not nearly as rigid overall as the solid top.

_________________
ken cierp
http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/
Store Front
http://www.cncguitarproducts.com/
KMG Guitar Kit Information
http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/kitinfopackage.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:44 pm
Posts: 5043
That makes sense. Nuts. I'm not so fond of purfling...

_________________
-Under permanent construction


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 7:30 pm
Posts: 167
Location: Southern IN
Yeah, Ken's "hinge" theory makes sense. Sorta follows the same concept as thinning the perimeter of the soundboard, right?

Dave, yer gonna havta make at least 3 guitars. One with no binding or purfling, one with binding but no purfling, one with both binding and purfling. Otherwise you need to kep them all identical; don't worry, your wood supplier should be able to accomodate this.
Then make at least 4 more identical copies of each to truly validate the results.

No easy way out of this one! But at least it's only 15 guitars in the name of experimentation. Oh, I almost forgot about inlaying a purfling strip without binding, so make that 20 guitars.
So when is the grand opening for Dave's Guitar Lab?

Seriously, though, I see what Ken is saying.
Try to find out whether they (Burns and students) installed only binding, or both binding and purfling.

Myself, I like the use of binding to protect the grain on the soundboard, plus I don't like scrapping the wood that can be used for binding.
But if you're set on maximizing the potential of one without binding/purfling, maybe judicious thinning of the soundboard edge would give the improvement?

_________________
Always have plenty of sandpaper; it's rough out there!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:44 pm
Posts: 5043
Robert - that's what I've just done on the 'manzer-wedge' guitar. I am happy with it.

_________________
-Under permanent construction


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group