Official Luthiers Forum!

Todd Rose replied to the bridge design thread and I liked his reply so very much that I thought that this would make a very interesting topic:



Very well said Todd. We are not sinking pilings into bedrock as a prelude to building the world's tallest building. Instead we want to permit and encourage vibration but still, as Todd said, have a structure that will hold up.

Now this begs the question, at least to me, hold up to what besides the forces that we can calculate and anticipate that an acoustic guitar will need to endure?

Factories IMHO do not have the luxury of optimizing their instruments to encourage maximum vibrational responsiveness when you consider that they have to build with it in mind that their potential customers represent a wider spectrum of folks who may or may not care for the instrument properly.

For the folks who build on a commission basis I think that it is reasonable to have an expectation that your customers will be more knowledgeable in terms of caring for their commissioned guitar and more diligent in making this higher standard of care so. Of course there will always be exceptions. But in my way of thinking people tend to value things more when they have skin in the game so-to-speak.

So is it reasonable for a builder to believe that when their clients are paying more, waiting longer, and personally participating in the process of specifying what their instrument will be that they will exercise a higher degree of care with that instrument going forward? If this is a reasonable assumption then custom built instruments may approach this fine line between holding up and sounding great a little closer than the factories but always being mindful to not build something that will not hold up.

I think that this is reasonable and I also think that builders may help in this regard by educating customers as to how to properly care for a high-end, high-performance thoroughbred instrument.

What do you think? Based on your expectations of your customer's ability and desire to care for a guitar do you build closer to the edge so-to-speak? Do you take the opportunity when discussing what you might deliver to a customer to gage the customers knowledge when it comes to caring for a guitar and if need be educate the customer as to what proper care is and what might result if proper care is not a reality?

Thanks!

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

Funny you should mention - I just had a similar conversation with a buddy of mine regarding banduras last Saturday. Luckily for me there was a piano guy nearby to help support my arguments.

It started out with him first stating that the instruments I make sound great and that the next generation of instruments need to be built for durability. He then started to whine about how the other builder of banduras in N.A. is telling people to take care of their instruments, not keep them in the hot car, keep them in a case with a humidity control device etc...

This was when the piano guy chimed in stating that he had to hang some device under his piano to keep the soundboard from cracking in the winter and I started to explain to him that durability and tone are pretty much mutually exclusive and that these instruments need to be taken care of if they're expected to last. I don't mean that they must be babied, but how about at least treated like a 3 year old girl . I.e. don't leave them in an extremely hot or cold car. Don't drop them. No rough housing. etc.

As far as skin in the game goes - I totally agree and for that reason, once I get to a point of making concert instruments, I am expecting a price tag between $7 and $10k. Student instruments in the $1k range. Part of the reason for this is that most of the banduras around today were bought in the 70's, 80's and early 90's, were built like T-34's and are traded for next to nothing these days - less than $500 in most cases. Because of this, people treat them like crap. They're not worried at all about taking care of them because they got them for practically nothing. Bumping the price up and including "care and feeding" instructions I think will go a long way to get people to take better care of their instruments.

on a related note - I've seen these devices on shipping containers that turn red if a certain shock force is exceeded or if the box is tipped more than like 45o from vertical. I'll bet they have those for temperature too. If they had one for humidity (low humidity tip point) one could mount a temp and humidity gauge deep in the box. Customer comes to you to warranty a guitar they left in the car on a hot summer day - one look at the gauge and you'd know it's no longer a warrantee item.

_________________
http://www.birkonium.com CNC Products for Luthiers
http://banduramaker.blogspot.com

Hello Hesh.
Long-time lurker, new poster, here.

A customer seeks a builder based on the type of guitar he builds.
If I advertise that my guitars are “very light and resonant” there should be an early understanding that I am building closer to “the edge.” As the conversation evolves, I explore the customer’s expectations. If he has an expectation of a build that is “light as a feather” a discussion of what that means is my due diligence.

I have decided not to be persuaded to build something overly light, mainly for tonal reasons, because a too-light guitar can be irritating to the ear. The wonderful Manuel Velasquez waved his ancient hands and said “the tone is in the wood, you must leave some wood for good tone”. If I build a good-toned guitar, it will be strong enough, and light.

The fear of a thin, but otherwise well-built guitar exploding is overstated. Years of repairs have shown that it is mechanical defects such as poorly glued braces or poorly chosen materials, not a light build, that make a short-lived guitar.

In conversations with Dana while working at Pantheon I remember him saying that guitars built too light, "close to the edge", do not tend to age well. Not necessarily because of structural issues, but rather because the tone becomes too "unfocused" with time. Hence his, and others, choice to build a little thicker to start with, and let the guitar's voice mature with time and playing. His argument was that Martins from the '50s to the '70s are coming of age now and a lot of them sound great, whereas at the time they suffered in comparison to pre-war guitars. By all standards '50s, '60s & '70s Martins would be considered overbuilt, and of course that's Dana's opinion.
But one of my favourite guitars was a '74 D-28, unscalloped braces, big EIR bridgeplate and not necessarily "light". But a beautiful open voice, yet focused and rich.

That goes a little bit against the instant gratification so prevalent in our culture these days.

Personally I still build too light, although I've been beefing up parts of the build like the back and sides. Where is it going to take me I do not know but I see a certain common sense in Dana's observation.
That opens another can of worms, what's the effect of age and use on an acoustic guitar? And is it OK for a new guitar to sound a little "green", even when we can hear the potential?
Also I think everybody can agree on what's "equally good" vs. "less good" tone in AB comparisons, but any musical instrument is a cultural artifact and tastes change with time. Maybe the '60s and '70s saw more strumming and rough handling of steel string guitars, whereas now there's a fair amount of more refined players looking for more subtlety and delicacy out of the instrument.

So yes, probably buyers of handmade guitars tend to be more careful, if only because they payed such a steep price and enjoy the unique qualities of their custom guitar.

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

I think this can be more concrete, so let me ask a question in helping it get there.

Care against what?

First: I think a big part of the way factories build is predicated on the fact that they have to assume that the weakest set of braces is going to end up on the weakest top. Even a little QC on the incomong material side goes a long way on this, and allows them to lighten up a bit, but no factory can take the time we can to optimize this.

Part of the problem comes down to what people are used to. Most players start out with a factory instrument that has a pretty thick and hard finish. If you hand them a new guitar that is French polished they simply can't get calibrated to what 'careful' means in this instance before they've dinged it up.

There's 'light' and there's 'light'. Are we talking about a dragster, with an engine that will put out 1000 HP for two running minutes, or a stock car with the same number of cubic inches that has to last for a couple of hours? All guitars change in pretty much the same way as they play in, so that where they end up, and how long they take to get there, will depend on where they started out. It's certainly possible to make a guitar that will sound good out of the box, and get better with age, and I tend to think building a little on the 'heavy' side, but 'balanced', is the best way to get there.

Some styles are more hazardous. Bluegrass players tend to be harder on their instruments than Classical players, and you just can't expect some guy who's scratching for gigs in small venues to be able to baby the thing. One of my customers used to bring his instrument in for adjustments and apologize for the paint marks on the sides, where he'd knocked it against door frames in nursing homes. I'm sure glad I put the tapes on those nice BRW sides!

I remember hearing Doc Watson say that the small shop guitars he got (Gallagher) could put up with a lot more abuse than a Martin, and sound better too. This is another area in which the little bit of extra care we take at each stage pays off, and we need to educate people about this.

When people are used to buying throw away GLOs at WalMart they tend to treat every guitar as a throw away. A decent hand made should last longer, and sound better than the usual factory box. However, in the course of it's longer life it's likely to pick up more dings, especially given that most of us don't use the cast iron finishes the factories do. You treat the one you marry differently from a one night stand, and the signs of shared experience become marks of endearment rather than blemishes.

Right James my friend let's cover that base.

Care against the kind of things that a high-end guitar owner can do something about. Although the guys who would most likely be able to answer this question with perhaps even a prioritized order are the repair guys I'll throw a few out here:

1) Drying out - keep the instrument in such a manner as to prevent it from drying out. If this means in a case, humidification of where it lives, not on display sitting on top of a forced air heating vent - what ever.

2) Accidental damage - keep it in a case and use a good, well designed case as well. Tell folks that you are a rock star when you fly and that your guitar needs to be in the first class cabin closet. Or get a travel guitar and leave your pride and joy safe and sound at home when appropriate and possible.

3) Use the guitar as this particular guitar was intended - don't put heavy gage strings on a guitar that was built for and specifically documented to have light gage strings. Avoid pretending to be Jimi and using lighter fluid on an acoustic guitar....

4) Long term storage - reduce string tension, proper humidification, avoid storing where drivers education classes have the cones out.

5) Maintenance - choose your repair techs as if your life depended on it. Check them out, have some conversations, etc. I suspect that repair folks frequently see guitars that have in the past had repairs done improperly which in some cases can lead to more serious repairs being needed down the road.

Perhaps the term ordinary care applies? For a 3 year old (good example Andy my friend) most would have some understanding of what good care might be. How would you treat a fine violin? Perhaps the same standard of care applies to acoustic guitars.

Great posts everyone.

David my friend welcome to the OLF!

The Velasquez quote is not only very interesting but very likely so IMHO.

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

I don't think anyone can really build to take into account the hot car scenario unless we are going to move to heat resistant glues. Overbuilt or lightly built, you cook it it will fail.

Likewise, a thin top is no more prone to cracking from low humidity than a thick top. and no amount of bracing can resist this. Maybe the paradym of building at 40-45 RH needs to be reconsidered.

As far as weight goes as an ex engineer I would say make every piece of wood count.
Don't just put in a huge headblock and not consider the stress path from there and brace appropriateley
Wide flat back braces as in a Martin----why?
Big headstock that makes the instument neck heavy?
Look at the function of a part and it's role in the whole structure rather than just traditional design.
Laminate things like headblocks and tailblocks for strength and make them only as big as they need to be.

I think it has to do with the larger glue line, and thus the lower back braces are more likely to resist knocks on the lower bout and come unglued. They're also much lower and perhaps allow more of the back to vibrate.



I don't really know for sure, but a heavier neck doesn't suck up vibrations as much. Maybe the larger headstock is there to precisely add more mass, i.e. older archtop guitars.

Between 40 and 50 RH during construction seems the happiest compromise thus far, a guitar should last a long time if living in conditions at which humans are comfortable. Of course, if left in a car trunk in the sun, or 2ft from the woodstove during the whole winter, then all bets are off…

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

So what advantage do small builders have that your average factory doesn't? Is it simply a lower overhead rate that allows them to put more time into an instrument for X amount of money? How do any of us, as small builders, feel that we can get away with building closer to the line than high end production folks like Collings or R. Taylor? What justifies us building thinner, were we to choose to do so?

_________________
http://www.PeakeGuitars.com

I build mine for the new owner.
Not to a preset standard -so to speak.
Many of my guitars are used & abused -I ask each client what the instrument will be subjected to-Most know-I use the water base finish for the traveling ones & F.P. for the others-
I build according to the woods picked and the desired tone -volume-and feel for each individual player.
I write every conversation ;or e-mail with a player in a log!
So that there is NO misunderstanding when the guitar is ready!
Never had someone say-this is NOT what I ordered!!
I build at 40-45%
I use Fish glue & A.R.Glues.
Also Poly where needed!!

All I ask the buyers to do is -NO long time exposure to less than 40%
humidity!
NO near heating sources or in hot cars !!!!!!!!!
Damage is a fact of life for most players.so I lock all X's,back braces ,and # 1 & 2 braces(classicals) into the linings!!
I use a patch under my rosettes(classicals) that is 90 degrees to the top-less chance for a crack-to spread !
I brace my sides!

Then it's a matter of -change your strings-keep the guitar clean with a non-silicone (sp) product.
Do not al-cabong someone with it !!

And most important -stay in touch with me if you can!
That way i can help or advise as needed !!
Hesh-was this to much of an answer??
Mike

_________________
Mike Collins

We can spend our time designing an instrument that will play well enough and stand up to most expected abuse Or we can focus on building instruments that play superbly and educate our clients in proper care and reinforce that with warrantee disclaimers and written proper care and maintenance procedures.

The other issue of build a tad heaver and waiting 30 years to age into its best voice. Well that is a sub issue. My feelings are that a great guitar should plays great and sounds great right off the set-up bench. Opens up some in a few weeks of play and only gets better with time.

If we build too loose it will sonically age to a muddy sound, and likely structurally suffer from unwanted deformity. Built to tight and it may never open well. Build appropriately and structurally the guitar will age just fine and sonically blossom. Finding tht balance is at the heart of why this is a craft. Why our work gets better from build to build.

Personally the concept of designing an instrument with the criteria of withstanding unforeseen abuse is to distracting from the real goal of building a fine musical instrument that will with proper care last two or more generations.

Yes we must build structurally sound. But that does not and should not imply ding proof.

If you look at the great vintage instruments none have survived even 20 years without some cosmetic issue and even some have structural issue induced by poor care and environment that have had to be address.

Take care to build structurally and sonically sound. Educate your clients of the proper care required. A specify what your warrantee will and will not cover. The rest is out of your hand.

Mike that is a great answer - thank you!!!

Parser my friend I think that the small builder has every advantage over the factories. Of course this is my personal opinion and nothing more.

Mike's example is a major part of why I feel as I do. The small builder has one advantage over the factories that is huge - direct and detailed communication with each and every individual customer.

When a factory builds a guitar beyond the model being built, say a dread, the factory can't know what sort of music will be played, the playing style of the player, or even be able to get a feel that the customer may or may not understand how to care for an instrument and attempt to educate the customer, if needed, accordingly.

Also IMHO the small builder has another huge advantage over the factories and that is that every detail of a guitar could, if the builder is skillful and willing, be optimized. We are dealing with wood and with wood no two pieces are ever going to be the same. Where the factory is able to use a bell curve model, some will be exceptional, some dogs, most good enough, the small builder has the opportunity to strive for perfection with every guitar that they make and of course other possibilities are unfortunately present as well.......

This of course in my mind leads to the question of tone. Certainly tone is as subjective as the number of humans on and off the planet. Individual builders are often reluctant to attempt to quantify their tone again because it is so very subjective.

But if the possibility of killer you-can't-buy-this-from-a-factory tone is what drives some folks who commission guitars is not a reality why then are we even building guitars? And again we go back to that edge where a guitar can sound open and alive this week and not take several decades to come to life.

I also think that this pursuit of perfection and the ability for an individual builder to do so is the biggest incentive for customers to commission a guitar. But what do I know.....

Back to the original question - as a builder do you build, or try to, closer to the edge with the idea that your clients will be better stewards in terms of how they will care for the guitar?

I want to add another question here too:

As a builder in your experience what is the single most important thing to your customers? Tone, quality, personalization, something else? As Brock says there is romance in commissioning a guitar made just for you. I am sure that each client will be different too in terms of the major motivating factor. But if you had to pick one of the above or even something not mentioned as what drives the majority of your customers what would it be?

If you do not sell guitars but are a player - what motivates you and what motivates you the most to choose one guitar over another?

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

Michael we posted at nearly the same time.

I completely agree with everything that you said in fact in IMHO I believe that there is a fairly common expectation with customers that they are purchasing an instrument that is engineered to sound great today and for years to come too. But now I am answering my own question......

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

With all due respect, what percent of your soundboards do you scrap for not being stiff enough? I have yet to meet a small builder with a large scrap pile

I completely understand the romance of, and the desire to have a custom instrument built. If I had the money (and I didn't build myself), I would MUCH rather buy something that is more unique. It's not like the high end factory stuff is cheap (or necessarily overbuilt)! It's just not as personal..

_________________
http://www.PeakeGuitars.com

Parser bro I have actually scrapped something like 1/3 of my sound boards but not always because they are not very stiff. Some I screwed up and took them too thin, others had the dreaded you-can't-see-it-until-it's-too-late pitch pocket. Some were given to class projects at a guitar building course and I have a pile of junk tops right in back of me at the moment.

But you know a floppy top can be braced heavier and will still make a fine guitar. We are never going to always have great materials so I think that builders just learn to adjust to what they are dealing with.

OK you answered my question that for you the idea of a guitar that is personalized for you is important. Very cool!

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

Subject: Building For What Standard Of Care?




This is really interesting stuff to hear, but to ask a provocative question: Is there a tendency amongst smaller builders to over engineer? whether light or heavy, simply put to over analyse the whole construction process? Afterall, you can still find factory based high end guitars that are VERY VERY good in tone, if not up the the bespoke craftsmanship we see from an experienced hand build (of which so many are displayed on this fine site) - and for a professional player whose choice is usually based on tone and tone alone, the advantage of being able to try 20 D28s v Santa CRuz or Collings Ds and pick the best tonally that suits his needs cannot be underestimated - Do the smaller builders such as yourselves begin the process with a 'tone' in mind and get close through experience and choice in woods, or would you ever simply 'build and see what happens' - knowing that the outcome, will be unique, possibly very good but perhap not what was expected - just to let the simplicity of the box and tonewoods 'do their thing'?

I would guess that many pro players are not as romantic about their instruments as perhaps those who buibild them are? - Many will be seen as workhorses, or tools of the trade - when they wear out, they are exchanged or retired, which is good as it keeps folk buying the things! - so the needs for many will be instant good tone - if it lasts long and gets better great, but if not, in years when its well and truely past its best , its replaced.

I guess the question is are folk producing heirlooms/works of art or working instruments that will inevitably have a shorter life depending on the hard work they are exposed to... but with killer tone? or is there an unrealistic expectation of achieving both? - An indestructual tone machine?

I ask this because it is perhaps one of the biggest frustrations of being a player and someone who loves the beauty of instruments, is that the sparkle and perfection of a new instrument - declines with age, unless you leave it in the case- it needs to be loved and played though - you want to show it off in the pub you play in, even knowing the risk of a drunken ding...a spilled pint etc - the first few dings, the first tiny crack - all break your heart, but like any relationship - you get used to yourself and your love 'aging' There is also a certain charm about the beaten up old guitar - played hard and passed through many hands - 'stories it could tell etc' (now I am getting all romantic again)...

I dont think whenever I have purchased a guitar, I have ever had a 'tone' in mind, or ever asked the question will it last 50 years - simply tried loads and you fall in love with one or five, can only afford 1, agnonize over a decision, make one, take it home, play it like mad, agonize over the 1 you now feel you should have bought, or so you think (the grass always being greener), play the thing live, get admiring looks and envious daggers, .... then ding it.

There is an old joke about violins.
Q. What is the difference between a violin and a fiddle?
A. The violin doesn't have beer spilled on it.

If I make a guitar that the customer is afraid to take on the road, I feel that I've failed at bit. I'd rather see one of my instruments on the stage at the Honky Tonk or Coffee House every weekend, than to hear that it was only used on a recording or two. I've french polished a few steel string guitars and had the end users dissolve the finish on the neck and the body where skin came into contact. I think that this is my fault and not theirs. I chose the wrong finish for the application. If you showed me a 40 year old guitar with no dings or scratches, I'm sure that it will be a guitar that wasn't worth playing all that much.

That being said, I believe that we can make a guitar that both sounds very good and is structurally sound. Al Carruth's guitars, for example, have excellent tone and he uses a thicker than average top. I've become a fan of the A braced upper bout because I think that it does a better job of resisting stresses and it has no negative effect on the tone. Extending the heel block to the upper transverse brace is another technique that improves structural integrity and doesn't kill the tone. I also tuck my braces under the linings. All of these things make for a more robust guitar that still can have the very best tone. Bias tape on the sides is another.

We do have the advantage that we can usually talk to the first owner of one of our instruments and give them "the talk" about proper care. If they leave their guitar in a hot car and it cracks or comes unglued, at least, we know that they had been warned.

Lately, I've been considering building at a lower humidity. More like 38%-42%. The initial setup would have more set to the neck and a slightly taller saddle. In the humid summer, the belly would bow up and the player can switch to their summer saddle and still have enough saddle to get good tone. Has anyone tried this approach?

Mike my friend I can't comment on building at a lower humidity but I do know that Mario delivers his guitars with two saddles, a winter and a summer saddle for exactly the reasons that you mentioned.

My personal favorite guitar, a BRW/Adi OM also has two saddles and benefits from them too. The summer saddle is a tad lower because this top will indeed show more dome when the RH is higher and conversely the winter saddle is higher to compensate for the reduced dome at lower RH.

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

I usually brace and assemble the box around 35 RH, I find the plates keep their radius and do not flatten when it's getting dry.
I do not know, but I suspect builders who use cylindrical plates (like Sobell), as opposed to domed plates, probably brace and assemble at the lowest humidity they can achieve. It's pretty hard not to have a cylindrical back cave in the middle otherwise. That being said IMHO 40 to 50 RH is optimal for the rest of the build and set-up.
Carving 2 saddles seems a good idea, although I've not had to do it yet.

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

"I usually brace and assemble the box around 35 RH, I find the plates keep their radius and do not flatten when it's getting dry."


I think also that many builders using HHG are effectively building at lower humidity levels by heating top and back plates(and hence reducing their MC) before gluing on bracing.

Jeff Highland asked:
"Wide flat back braces as in a Martin----why?"

I think that's for tone: it lowers the pitch of the 'main back' mode so that it will couple more strongly with the 'main top' resonance. This helps with both bass end power and 'fullness'.

Parser asked:
"With all due respect, what percent of your soundboards do you scrap for not being stiff enough?"

Stiffness is a product of the Young's modulus of the material and the thickness. Any top can be left thick enough to be as stiff as you want it. You can also alter the brace angles to take a low cross grain Young's modulus into account, although there are limits to what you can do with that. It's usually better to figure out, as Mark Blanchard does, for example, just which shape of box each top will work best on. Other than that, the real question is how heavy the resulting top will be, and sometimes the penalty is not that great if the density is low enough. I've run into very few tops that _couldn't_ be used on a guitar, and most of those made great harp soundboards (one advantage of diversifying!).

I think we have a lot of advantages over the factories, and not just in working closer to the edge. As an example, no factory can take the time to scrape, let alone hand plane, every joint before the parts are glued. Gluing freshly worked surfaces results in measurably stonger joints, and the planed or scraped surface is going to glue better than a sanded one in any case. This is one reason we can usually count on our products taking more abuse than the factory boxes, even when ours are often more lightly built.

Factories use high volume to amortize high tooling and finance costs. Taylor can afford to buy a quarter million dollar 5-axis CNC to cut neck pockets, and spend probably that much again to get it up and running, because they are going to cut a lot of neck pockets every year. The flip side is that they _need_ to cut a lot of neck pockets to pay for that thing! High volume means low man-hours per instrument; time is their costliest input.

We tend to have very low overhead by comparison. If one of us spends an extra hour on some operation there is not some big dedicated machine standing idle while we do: we're not tying up many thousands of dollars worth of capital and bank financing during that time. Sure, we end up working for minimum wage a lot of the time, but that's our choice to some extent.

Given the variability of wood any decent luthier should be able to make guitars with more consistent tone than any factory. There is no way they can do what we do economically. We should also be able to build a more more responsive instrument that is more durable. If the customer really needs a 'street fighting' guitar, because they play in the sort of venues where there's chicken wire between the stage and the audience, then we should be able to make one that sounds better than the factories can. The one big advantage they'd have in that regard is in the finish: there aren't many things tougher than UV cure, and that's pretty capital intensive.

top stiffness.
This should be another post!
BUT!
You can add stiffness without adding weight.
The top of a classical or small steel is a short span and a loose top may help here.
I've made many guitars with really stiff tops and some nice pliable ones.
I like the new sound of the latter-even after years if braced correctly the more flexible top responds fast and sound great!
I thin tops for the instrumant they are intended for and the tone the client needs .
graduated thinning always !
No 2 are the same.
Mike

_________________
Mike Collins

Down deep I think the biggest reason folks commission a luthier guitar is the romance of the builder/client relationship and the uniqueness of owning the product. It certainly helps if someone with some credentials plays one of your guitars as well. I don’t kid myself, I have played plenty of factory guitars--Collings, Santa Cruz, Huss and Dalton, etc. etc. that sound every bit as good to me as anything that has ever come out of my shop.
I’ve evolved gradually to selling mainly through a dealer. I actually like it better. A well established dealer gives you some credibility early in your career, and whoever buys the instrument will be doing it because they played a bunch of guitars and like the way yours sounds and plays at the time of purchase. I go for the most killer tone I can produce on every instrument. Everyone gets a detailed care sheet and a humidifier. The ball’s in their court

I actually built a great sounding guitar for a singer/songwriter guy I didn’t know too well but who was quite popular. Gave him the whole lecture on instrument care. Didn’t take him long to totally trash the thing. After the third repair he said, “You know, I don’t think I’m capable of taking care of a nice guitar”. He was right!!

What I’d tell a guy like him now would be to forget the hand made thing and go out and get one of those $600 Chinese jobs like a Blue Ridge that sound and play pretty darn well. Bring it to me for a good setup and a high quality pickup and off they go. Most of the guys that are rough on instruments are hard working entertainers (or teenagers) and play through a PA 95% of the time anyway.

Terry

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

Al, I was referring to the young's modulus (both with the grain and perpindicular to it), however, I failed to explain that in my response....thanks for elaborating.

It seems like the overall answer to this question is that there is an acceptable range of "standard of care" depending on who you are building for. Some players want a Ford and some want a Ferrari. As long as we do our part and communicate the service requirements, and the player knows what they are getting into, then there shouldn't be a problem anywhere...

I personally have a lot of respect for the factory side of things as well as the small builder/romantic thing as well. The advantage that I think factories have is that they can - and have to - evaluate their design and construction much more rigorously than the average small builder. I think this applies for everything from finish to bracing. If they don't do this, their reputation is at stake...as would be any builders.

_________________
http://www.PeakeGuitars.com