Official Luthiers Forum!

Ya know as I was pondering this stuff during the morning three S's.... it occurred to me that we may be using another important term incorrectly as well.

I'm as guilty here as anyone but I did not originate the use of the word "plane" in respect to a "fret plane" but I use the term fret plane frequently and now I believe incorrectly.

By definition a plane is a two dimensional "flat" surface. A fret board is not flat all of the time. For steel strings we see either a constant or compound radius which with the operative word "radius" fails the test for a plane because a radius is not flat.

My apologies!

When I have in the past used the term "fret plane" I'm thinking of the fret board and frets as a single string sees it. Is this not a line then and not a plane?

Hey Glenn - bringing up zero frets was a great idea and thanks for that too! Even with zero frets folks do things a bit differently from each other. Some Luthiers who I know well want the zero fret a tad higher others level the zero fret level with the rest of the "fret line" in respect to a single string not making the zero fret a tad proud of the rest of the frets. The folks who do this, and I'm one of them, anticipate that relief and that tendency for string to ever so slightly arc over a fret to provide clearance.

Taking it a step further and back to what I believe is Murray's point that Tim addressed if a zero fret can be level with the rest of the frets and it most certainly can and the string still clears the fret crown of the 1st fret and it most certainly does as well even though we can't see it it stands to reason that a nut slot can be cut lower than the height of the first fret. I've known this to be true but the zero fret example that Glenn offers illustrates this nicely.

So what am I going to call the fret board in respect to what a single string sees now if it's not a true plane and in an effort to be more precise?

Thoughts?

Or we can simply say make the sucker so it does not buzz....

A radiused fret board with relief is somewhat like a hyperbolic Paraboloid in shape although I suspect the math would not be a straight plug and chug Perhaps we can just accept that it is not a true plane but is this special and variable thing we call a fret board plane

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

That works for me Steve! This stuff can get complicated....

Lets see ---- I've use that for personal visualization, teaching, instruction manuals and product descriptions for about 50 years now --- works for me!

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Me too Ken but not for as long as you have been calling it a fret plane. I didn't know you were such a geezer.... Kidding of course my friend!

Yep -- hit "geezer status" June 3rd -- 70!

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

I'm fine with "fret plane". I think we all understand it to mean something slightly different than a geometer's "plane". "Smooth continuation of the complexly curved surface tangent to the fret tops" gets a little cumbersome after the first few times it appears in a paragraph. There's an analogous corruption in the tool we all know and love (and occasionally swear at). A plane makes wood planar. But there are round-bottomed planes, and molding planes, beading planes, etc. These are not so plane.

Ze plane! ze plane!

Wow, didn't think doing a set up could be so easy.

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

first you need relief once that is set that you can set saddle then nut. I do my set up using a capo on the 1st fret. Once I am happy I then do the nut. In reality I don't know if it matters as long as you find a way that works for you.
If you make all the adjustments then do relief you can be back to square one. It also matters if this is a guitar set up or an initial set up when you are doing things for the first time.
A set up on an old guitar I still do relief first , but the nut and saddle won't be as critical. Since it is a 2 for one movement , I would most likely check the nut then the saddle.
the reason is the nut is not relying on the saddle , the nut slot is relying on the fret plane. The saddle will rely on the string plane and neck relief.

_________________
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

Let's stick with your assumptions. I like them because it makes the geometry easier to think about, and talk about. So we'll ignore "string deflection", and "relief". (We'll have to get back to those at some point, but for now, we're looking at straight-line geometry.) You calculate a first fret gap of .010" and .007". What do you calculate the gap to be at fret two, when the string is held down at fret one? Couldn't the first fret also be lowered?

Yes, but all of this gets taken into account in the third fret test, right? When we measure nut slots by fretting at three, we're measuring the deflected string, not the nut slot.

deleted

delete

Eric said: "When we measure nut slots by fretting at three, we're establishing a plane based on frets two and three. The upward deflection of the string at the nut is incorporated in that measurement."

[/quote]

Let me walk this out. (Perhaps that's a regional expression="Explain how this works" or "Work through the implications".)

You are quite right, Hesh, about the plane referenced in the third fret test. I meant to say "We're establishing a plane based on frets one and two." Fret three has nothing to do with anything. You can think of it either way. Obviously, the string is defining the plane between the nut and the second fret (or the plane between the real-world string deflections above those points). I think most of us use this test as a way of visualizing the nut slot height in reference to the plane of frets one and two.

As for "fall away", well, there we do disagree. Yes, I'm familiar with "fall away". Don Teeter talked about it. Dan Earlewine made it explicit. I would be surprised if the idea hasn't been something that has been taken into account by builders of stringed instruments for hundreds of years. I don't agree with your explanation of ''fall away". I'm not convinced that you understand what is really going on. Explain, for example, why a fingerboard tongue would rise.

My first encounter with the concept of fall-away is from Mario P. and his postings on this forum some years ago. Mario posted that he builds in "fall-away" into his superb guitars and described it as a second neck angle so-to-speak beginning at the 12th and ending at the last. There is no mention of relief in this region of the fret board and of course truss rods are not effective nor do they span this entire region. Mario said that what he is looking for is approx. .010 - .015" of string clearance measured at the last fret and in comparison to the "fret plane...." established by a straight edge placed on the 1st and the 12th. After the 12th the neck angle in respect to the what "the strings see..." meaning the area of the extension increases it's angle very slightly resulting in the frets from 12 to the last with this slightly increased angle dropping away from the fret plane established by the straight edge between the first and 12th.

My second encounter with fall-away was when I learned Dave Collins's method for fretting and dressing frets where we intentionally induce fall-away often to remove the single most limiting factor to lower action on certain guitars with certain players.

Which certain guitars? Instruments with Fender style bolt-on necks very often suffer from a "ski-ramp" with the over the body frets that becomes the single most limiting factor preventing lower action on these instruments. If you give some thought to just how many electrics use this style neck we are speaking of millions of instruments.

Why does a fret board rise you ask? You could also ask does the fret board extension actually rise or does it seem this way in relation to a changing neck angle? A number of reasons and in the case of the bolt-on Fender style necks that I just mentioned it's inherent to the design with wood moving as it does and no truss rod impact in this region as mentioned earlier.

With acoustics poor neck geometry, poor design and execution with the body joint transition and the 14th fret hump can play a roll in the frets over the body being proud of the desired "fret plane." Over time string tension and the distortion of the upper bout of an acoustic guitar can and does cause the neck to be more and more underset over time but since the extension remains constrained by being attached to the body as the neck angle decreases and the extension angle does not because it's anchored to the upper bout of the instrument this appears as a kick-up or ski ramp too over time and sometimes..... Depending on how well the instrument was built, by whom.... and if the materials were appropriate this can happen far more quickly then we would wish. We see guitars that are five years old that need resets..... often Luthier built instruments as well...

Back to Mario: Mario builds often for blue grass players who are well known to use mediums and tend to hit on the moderate to heavy side. Fall-away can also aid in providing additional fret/string clearance in the region where the vibrating and plucked string is moving the very most which is desirable. As such fall-away can have two purposes in my view: first additional clearance in the region where the strings lash the furtherest and second to eliminate the ski-ramp that can form and also eliminate the limiting factor to lower action when that's desirable, not always, but when it is.

No disrespect to Tetter, ever but Teeter is also an advocate of epoxying in frets over the body.... Not everyone agrees with this and many Luthiers will prefer to not even work on a guitar with epoxied over the body frets come refret time..... My point for bringing this up and I have no idea what Teeter's definition of fall-away is is the fact that there are lots of ways to do lots of things Lutherie.

Perhaps this may add to the conversation -- I see Don Teeter as a reference. I am sort of a long distance students of his from way way back. Anyway, during my conversations with the floor engineers at the Martin factory a point was made that is not surprising to me. Mark mentioned that until the advent of cutaway models in the Martin line up, the 12th or 14th fret hump was not considered a real big issue. So as long as the strings cleared the FB extension all was good -- I just wonder if this is Teeter's vision of what some makers try to accomplish on purpose?

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Okay, we're not as far afield as I thought we were. We agree about what's going on. We agree on many of the factors of design and construction that contribute to the problem. Where I'd do things a little differently (I think), is in the amount of fall-away "insurance" I'd put into a refret on a guitar that had settled in for a year or two. Measuring the guitar under tension, and simulating the tension (imperfectly) with weight on the shoulders, should allow you to come much closer to the "plane" than .010". If the player doesn't play past the 12th, then it doesn't matter. For players who do, things are already difficult enough without another .010" of action height. (It's worth mentioning that when fall away is excessive, it will cause back buzz.)

Teeter is very much worth reading, by the way. Epoxied frets? That's not the way I do it, but I wouldn't have any issues with doing a refret. A little heat on the fret, and it comes right out. Refuse to work on a guitar with epoxied frets? If your feelings were that strong, wouldn't you just replace the fingerboard?

Before there was the internet, you had to read what was available, and decide for yourself what was sound advice, and what was a little sketchy. Now, with numerous specialty forums on every aspect of guitar repair and construction, you have to read what's available, and decide for yourself what is sound advice, and what's a little sketchy. It doesn't hurt to have a little historical perspective.

We have a few local luthiers who are or have in the past done epoxy refrets so we see these interments as well and will also work on them but our preference would have been to nix the epoxy originally and simply fit well and glue (not epoxy..). Of course for repair folks no one brings us anything if it's all honky dory...

I absolutely agree with you, Eric, that Teeter is very much worth reading and lots of it is very applicable today. It's also worth remembering that these early writings including Cumpiano were/are really landmark efforts in documenting what previously had not been documented. Great stuff.

It's also worth understanding that times change, great minds are born perhaps not every day.... but often enough and others have also advanced the craft since these earlier publications. We don't always know of the advancements mostly because of the solitary nature of what we do but events/gatherings/drunken fun times.... are often important as well for folks to share what's new and.... what's new to them....

I'm on the fence if the age of the Internet is really all that beneficial as it may seem. Sure it most certainly helped me get started in the trade but when relying on the Internet and Lutherie forums there is also a lot of BS.... to weed though AND that can send someone the wrong way if they believe what they read.... Ed Roman comes to mind..... Ed, RIP is also a blast from the past who's assertions are not well accepted....

Instead besides the excellent offerings of those who came before us and the wealth of information..... including BS..... on Internet forums there is a third resource that needs to be both mentioned and promoted for all to consider participating with and making your very own advancements.

Our shop is a combination of a busy working Lutherie shop AND a university physics lab. Seriously! Within 15 feet of my work bench are several active, on-going experiments dealing with things such as fret wire hardness to how strings deflect. We have digital microscopes (excellent for showing folks what some brands of strings let out the door...) to high speed cameras that can capture what we can only speculate about. In addition to Dave's mind which is a great one we also are not shy about sharing what we do with our clients who in some cases are physicists and often happy to help. In one case Dave engaged and befriended a very notable scientist from Bell Labs to help him with a blind listening test regarding fret wire hardness. We also have grad students, physics grad students who are happy to help when there is an impasse.

A great deal of time goes into research at our shop, money too... but that's the price one pays when they started out life as that little kid who said "why..." too often.... It's also valuable as can be because at some point the understanding gleaned really can help us with our work AND of course explaining the value proposition of one method over another to a paying client. White boards live in our shop too and are an excellent tool for showing clients in advance what they might expect after say a neck reset, etc. or how a tapered tuning post, a modern innovation considering how long stringed instruments have been around and how the taper cinches the string end.

Other research that Dave is doing (and I benefit from) might be forensic in nature and engineered to uncover what the ones who came before us did and why. The rule of 18 and fret spacing on vintage instruments comes to mind. An on-going, multi-year study that has been active for almost a decade now where vintage instruments have their fret spacing measured as precisely as economically possible with long calibers, calibrated calipers in and effort to develop a database of the fret spacing of vintage makers AND what formula (if any...) they used for fret spacing. With over 400 instruments in the database at present we can definitively and forensically add a unique element of certainty to spotting fakes or verifying authenticity (and value) for vintage instruments. A digital fingerprint if you will.

We are getting known beyond our region for not only great work but taking this stuff to new levels and as such our world just keeps getting more and more interesting by the day.... Yesterday we had two gentlemen who had checked us out prior come up with two very valuable D'Aquisto arch tops that needed work. We had agreed to do the work on the spot while the guys waited because of the value of these instruments AND the fact that there were two of them.

The second gentlemen was the "body guard" and I'm not kidding either. His participation in the activity was to get the guitar owner from home to us and back home again safe and sound. This guy was a Vietnam era Navy Seal and I had the best of times with him sharing stories out on the balcony. It was one of those days where clients become friends.

Anyway long story short these instruments are all original and if you do the math you will discover that the value might exceed the value of some folk's homes... What they needed were the nut slots raised on the original nuts that Jimmy built into the instruments.

Because of our relentless pursuit of what will do the job as well or better than the methods commonly employed we filled the nut slots with UV cured dental fillings, filed to optimal depth, had the owner bless how it felt to him and that was that. I tried to rip up the bill because we really enjoyed these guys and the two killer guitars but the owner would not have it and even tipped us... Technology, dental technology gave us a unique capability that was desirable over removing an original nut, risking the finish where the nut sides are flush, etc. and this was the sort of client and the level of valuable instruments where it was a perfect fit. UV cured dental fillings are as hard as teeth, much harder than CA and dust and in our experience should last as long a s new bone nut, maybe longer.

So yeah great reverence for the past here and very skeptical of what I read on Internet forums these days but there is a third way forward as well - find out for yourself utilizing the scientific method and taking it where it leads. Sometimes notions held for a lifetime are proven incorrect so you also have to be prepared to be wrong.... R....O....N....G....

One last thing that I've noticed in my very own personal Lutherie journey is the notion that of many of the best Luthiers who I know it's not uncommon for folks to be doing many of the same things the same way. Seems necessity is indeed the mother of invention. So we also arrive at similar conclusions when we have proper problem solving skills and employ the scientific method.

One really, really last thing. Regarding the resources available on the Internet some of the best ones IMO are not forums but the writings of Luthiers who share their experiences. On the other hand have you ever visited some of the model specific electric guitar forums....? They seem to be a wasteland totally devoid of original thought and dominated by members who have a financial interest in promoting $20 caps with commercial intent leading the way. Try to introduce a scientific study and it's not uncommon for the resident know-it-alls... to pressure the moderator to run off the one who dares to say "OK, let's test this all out and see where it leads...."

Or, more specifically some of these forums do more harm than good IMO and stifle anything that might advance the understanding of what's not understandable at present.

So Eric my hat's off to the past, my eyes are open to what others have to offer today, AND with my business partner the future is often in view too and this makes me a pretty fortunate guy.

Thanks for your thoughts as well, Eric, much appreciated!

Cool post, Hesh. Thanks for sharing. Really.

_________________
sweat the small stuff.

Point well taken, Alex. Set-up is easy and can be easy and just because some of us wanna go off on tangents (especially me...) don't let us give you the impression that set-ups are difficult. That's not the case.

What's important is to find a system that works for you and when you do I suspect that you may feel as I do when I say that doing set-ups is one of the most relaxing things that I do and I completely enjoy the process beginning to end.

For me though and how I am most comfortable working I'm not a patient enough sort to be going back and forth with variables impacting one another and instead seek to eliminate the variables one by one until it gets me where I want to go.

Most importantly though and something that has not been mentioned yet.... is this: Just prior to starting any set-up take a close look at the ax and evaluate what you have. Make a mental plan for what you need to address, etc. and when you have a system that works for you addressing that plan with your system can be very helpful. This is how I was taught, that mental plan and it has served me very, very well.

One example of where the mental plan comes into play is with an existing guitar that may have lights on it, 12's, and the neck is kind of sort of flat without the level of relief that I want to see. Client is switching to mediums and I'm the one who is going to be putting them on. So with my mental plan I know in advance that mediums will pull the neck more and may get the relief where I want it or close without me touching the truss rod until I see how much the mediums get me to where I want to go.

Because of the mental plan I'm not touching the truss rod twice and from an efficiency as well as minimizing frustration this is all good stuff. By the way I try to work in such a manner that every tool that I pick-up gets used everywhere it needs to be used before I put it down....

That reminds me of a joke....

Customer goes to his favorite restaurant and is greeted at the door by his favorite waiter. After greetings the waiter takes the customer to his favorite table.

The customer notices that his favorite table has been moved to the back and asks the waiter why the table was moved.

The waiter replied that they had an efficiency expert in and the efficiency expert suggested that if that table was moved closer to the kitchen it will "save steps, save time, save money...."

The customer nodded in acceptance of the idea and then asked his favorite waiter what else they learned from the efficiency expert. The waiter pointed to his shirt pocket and a fork and spoon sticking out of his pocket and said "efficiency expert taught us that if I carry a fork, the most commonly dropped implement for eating I don't have to go all the way back to the kitchen to get another fork when a customer drops a fork.... saves steps, saves time, saves money..."

Just then the customer noticed that the waiter had a string hanging out of the fly of his pants.... The customer pointed at the string and said "ok I understand what the fork in your pocket is for but why the string hanging out of your pants?"

The waiter replied that the efficiency expert also taught them that if they use a string when the waiter goes to the bathroom waiter does not have to touch his.... thing... with his hand to go to the bathroom and as such does not have to wash his hands - "saves steps, saves time, saves money...."

Just then the customer pushed back on what he just heard and told the waiter that we all have to touch our thing to put it back in....

The waiter replied while pointing to the fork and spoon in his shirt pocket - "that's what spoon is for...."

So yeah this efficiency stuff can be taken a bit far but don't let that scare you not only is learning to do great set-ups absolutely key to anyone's success as a builder it's not difficult, can be a lot of fun, and when you learn a system that works for you the mysteries and issues fade away and it all goes fine.... next...

Thanks, Hesh. I hope this is a place where we can thrash out ideas without taking offense. You've made it clear that it is.

Re historical fret-spacing: I don't have a data base, but I get to see a lot of classical guitars by famous makers. In my experience, random error trumps any kind of system failure. On guitars by Jose Ramirez I, Santos Hernandez, Domingo Estesso, Jose Ramirez II, Ignacio Fleta, Masaru Kono, and a long list of others, the frets are all over the place. I routinely replace fingerboards to take care of intonation and action issues. On the other hand, the 19th century guitars I've worked on by Martin, or others in the German school, are so over-built that no repair can ever make them sing. (Many of them work well when converted to steel strings.)

As for experiments to calibrate fret-wear...that may involve as much chemistry as it does mechanics. Classical guitars don't usually have a problem with fret wear. You wouldn't expect them to. I have one classical customer who wears out frets in 6 months. A phenomenon called "fretting corrosion" might ironically play a part. I don't know. I know that there's more going on than simple mechanical abrasion.

Hey Eric - thanks for your thoughts and you do bring up some important considerations, Thank You!

I'm never going to take offense with anyone who wants to have an honest conversation about Lutherie - that's why I'm here along with the idea of giving back as well. The OLF helped me a great deal with my own personal goals and as such I will always want to help those who wish to be helped (maybe some who don't as well...).

Clearly you see far more classical instruments than we do and that's pretty cool! A number of our clients are classical guitar students, university level as well, and we get involved sometimes in when someone is selling a used classical to someone else and just did one of these last month when a Professor sold a used instrument to a student. But for the most part what we see in the high-value spectrum are vintage steel string instruments including vintage Gibsons and Martins, electrics and acoustics. Once in a while we deal with celebrity instruments such as Ron Ashton's (Stooges) white SG.

As such many of the instruments that we measure the fret spacing on the spacing was determined by various methods including the rule of 18 and then the f*ctory jigged up and often used a gang saw to cut the slots. As such and with this dependency on specific tooling and at times proprietary formulas to calculate spacing and jigs to make the cuts a fingerprint of sorts, including all the very same errors was produced.

Dave has visited the Parson's Street f*ctory (original Gibson and now Heritage) in search of original tooling as well.

With the individual makers I suspect that random error is indeed a huge part of it. On the other hand the production facilities (f*ctories) often relied in jigs and so we see the errors duplicated from one instrument to another over and over again until the tooling changed.

Each instrument is measured for every single fret with long, calibrated calipers and then Dave has developed a program complete with spread sheets and graphical representations of the location of every single fret. It's fascinating because you can do A/B comparisons comparing one instrument to another, tell when a f*ctory changed tooling, etc.

Regarding the study on fret material we wanted to know if stainless is really much longer wearing than say nickel silver and EVO these days as well but more specifically just how much more long wearing these materials are. This study, when complete, will likely be published for all to see.

For Dave's purposes though he's isolated the variable of material harness and is not going to get into body chemistry. Likely because that's a really tough one to design a study for but it most certainly could be done. For now he's got a machine set-up that has a counter on it and uses sample fret boards (mini boards) fretted with the various wires. Standard string material is used and the machine frets a note over and over again automatically. A counter is installed as well so that we can say do 10,000 iterations and then take the sample board and wire to a digital microscope and see what we have.

Don't want to ruin the possible surprises here but I will say some of the results that we have seen are surprising when you consider what we all have been thinking about these materials and that's as much as I can share about someone else's intellectual property and hard work. It's fascinating though.

So what's the value in all of this and how does it make anyone money? To us the value is that little kid that I talked about earlier who used to ask the question "why" so very often that they annoyed everyone else... More specifically though it lets us have intelligent conversations with clients and peers such as at the Northwood Seminar, etc. regarding what can be expected from the various fret wires. It's a bit of a myth busting effort as well but at the end of the day we hope to have definitive data that will support the conclusions that we further when we advise clients, discuss with peers, etc. Or, in other words, it's science.

It does not make us money and instead costs money to do these experiments but that's not a bad thing if it advances the knowledge base and relieves some of the drudgery.

The body chemistry thing is huge here and you are absolutely correct. We have clients who can trash strings in several hours. We also have a large group of clients from a specific church who all play Martins. These are younger guys, university students and several of them have been able to completely wear out stainless frets in 6 months time.

I always joke with these guys when they are picking up their repaired instruments to forgive me for not shaking their hands, I need my hands to make a living... But these guys have death grips and even stainless fret wire will not last them very long. All of these guys are from Asia as well and going back to body chemistry it also makes me wonder about diet... There is something about them be it body chemistry, playing style, how much they get into the jam..., etc. that has several of them trashing stainless fret wire in record time. Go figure.

Anyway I am sure that you are correct that there is more going on than simple mechanical abrasion. Maybe one day we can design a study that answers some of the questions associated with why some folks trash fret wire (and strings..) in short order with the study targeting the human factors.

This is the kind of stuff that interests us though, we wanna know why things are as they are.

As you know Lutherie is fraught with snake oil and it's not uncommon since many Luthiers work in relative isolation to have beliefs furthered for decades when the belief may be incorrect. As such and for our purposes this stuff is interesting, valuable, relieves some of the drudgery of working on yet another stinkin guitar, etc.

Our shop is a bit of a different animal than what some have experienced with that solitary Luthier endlessly toiling by candle light with sharp chisel in hand. We have such very high volume serving several states now and having clients drive hundreds of miles as well that the business of repair work is one thing and the research is often supported by the observations and experience that we gain from so very many instruments passing through our shop.

So it's a great environment for folks who want to learn more, learn what's really happening, etc.

If you recall the Collins Saddle Mill we knew in advance that it would have a very limited market not so much because of what it does and who wants them but because we just can't produce them inexpensively. With my extensive background in manufacturing including Six Sigma, Lean, JIT, supply chain, and abusing suppliers to get a good price... if we can't produce them less expensively I suspect that no great strides could be made in that regard by others either but I could be wrong, always.

Several of them are now out in the field doing great work and our latest Collins Saddle Mill client is Elderly Instruments. Elderly has one of the largest repair shops in the midwestern US with many Luthiers with most of them having decades of experience. They also have a superb reputation for the highest quality work and that's exactly were we see the fit for the tool.

I want to say that some of the things that we do or more specifically Dave does are very much the bleeding edge of Lutherie and as such this stuff will likely not have much value to the typical forum participant. For the folks who work in the trade though it's very well received and we also get lots of encouragement from the vets in the trade as well.

As for me I could not be happier and feel like I hit the jack pot in my own journey working in and being a part of a very rich environment with lots to learn, lots to do, great co-workers and clients and a wonderful community who by the way we also often share our work with as well. It's not unusual for us to have access to physicists, engineers, mathematicians, etc. when ever we need them.

I believe this is a valid concern -- so much so that I generally warn my kit buying customers about over browsing and over reading and frankly over confusing themselves. Instead I recommend they follow our instructions to the letter at least for the first build. The focus is on the "goal" and "required results" of each step of construction, rather than methodology -- which can vary wildly, especially if using the internet as the resource or training aide.

There's plenty of good stuff too -- but as John Hall notes, "you don't know what you don't know!"

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Ken's advice for newbies is indeed sound. There are many ways to do this. Beware that cross over info can cause some serious issues. Take advice from your kit supplier and get that first one under your belt. Once you understand the processes you can then modify and experiment.

_________________
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