Official Luthiers Forum!

Your plan seems to me to be very good corrections of mistakes made by a first-time builder, while preserving the appearance of an instrument of historical significance. Well, it's historically significant to people who build guitars

_________________
A man hears what he wants to hear, and disreguards the rest. Paul Simon

As we say in the old car hobby - "it's only original once".

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

My only advice would be to thoroughly document the process and make up some type book or digital media to be kept with the guitar. That and the return of any unused original components should be enough to keep the history of the guitar intact, which in my opinion is what actually needs preserving.

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

hmmm ...2 3/16" fretboard width at the 14th fret...

Just out of interest, what is the string spacing at the saddle ?

Dear Mr. Stock,
If I was sure you didn't wear body armor 24/7 I would attempt to assassinate you and my son for even thinking of destroying my work. However, as a ghost, I really have little control over the physical world(despite what that awful movie with Demi Moore and the late, great Patrick Swayze lead you to believe) and as such I am forced to stick with blowing your curtains and making the hair stand up on the back of your neck. And of course the occasional missing object. But rest assured, I'm not happy.
Sincerely,
The Ghost of Irving Sloane

_________________
http://www.CostaGuitars.com
PMoMC

This quote says pretty much everything.

That instrument is a one-of-a-kind guitar built by famous Mr. Sloane. So you will not want to make it better by "upgrading" it to a more functional guitar. There are tons of well working guitars out there. No need to convert this unique guitar with less than optimal design to just another well working guitar.

Documentation of the restoration or modification has been mentioned. Even the best documentation will get lost over time while the guitar will go on if it is a nice one. The guitar itself is the best documentation of itself, so strongly recommend you to not change its main properties and geometry (even when less than optimal). The question if this guitar will get restored or modified is not a sentimental one but has to do with the history of teaching guitar building. It is part of the 20th century guitar building history. Even if this might be of lesser importance for a luthier in 2012, historians of the next century and further down the track will be thankful if the find this instrument in as close to original conditions as possible.

So, I'll step down from my soap box.
Have a nice day.

Sounds like a good plan. Much rather have an instrument that will be played and enjoyed as it was intended over a wall hanger any day. Showing respect to maintain the original look of the guitar, as you are planning, is IMO the proper thing to do.
I would agree that documenting the mods in some way is appropriate for an historical guitar like this.

Chuck

_________________
_________________

Todd
I recognized that guitar instantly before I even scrolled down and saw the book beside it - it unmistakeable for luthierie enthusiasts!!!
What a cool project - even though I dont really have the experience to make any suggestions concerning this guitar - I have to say kool beans to get to work on this box...
Cheers
Charliewood

Todd-

I think there are two Strad violins with original necks remaining, so I have no problem seeing this instrument modded for the original owner. It's not like the guy wants a P-90 and whammy bar installed - he just wants the guitar his dad built for him to be truly playable for the first time. That's kind of cool that you are the guy doing the work. Please document and post your progress on the forum. I love seeing repair and restoration work done "Frets.com" style. Neato!



Thanks-

_________________
John Lewis
Wannabe builder owned by 2 crazy dachshunds

I'm in the boat that says it's better for the son to have an instrument he can play and enjoy once again as his father had intended, than for it to be "historically" preserved by sitting in a closet.
I think you have a sound plan, and like every good engineer I know you'll document what you did.

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

It seems to me that the question is " How significant is this instrument ? "

I don't think you'd consider doing the things you suggest to the Rawlins Stradivari guitar, nor Django's Selmer 503. I doubt you'd consider it even if a relative of either requested it.

Mr. Sloane jr. should consider getting an accurate copy made, with any flaws corrected. Hang this one on the wall behind glass with a first edition of his Dad's book and play the new one. Or the two of you could decide that it's just a guitar built by a guy who built one steel-string instrument and wrote a craft book about it.

Would the value of this instrument (untouched) be high enough in the future to pay for an improved copy now? Or does the owner simply want to play the guitar his Dad made for him? I have no doubt that you could make a copy that looks the same but would blow this guy's mind. Have you presented that idea as an option?

Todd: Since the guitar belongs to David the son of the maker,it seems to me he is entitled to do or have done to the guitar was ever seems right to him.He could have chopped it up and burnt it and no one would be any the wiser. Look at any of the Stradivarius instruments that are here today. Doubt if there is even one original. Although Sloane plowed a lot of ground for the present crop of guitar builders, Stradivarius he is not. And I say that without a bit of scorne. I see nothing wrong with your plan and in fact encourage that it happens. The only thing I could add is to support Brian Howard in his suggestion for proper documemtation and from the photos it seems that is in progress. Also perhaps you could indulge us with a sound bite,perhaps before and after.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

I would say to discuss the options including a new guitar that is a copy of the original but with the changes you have proposed. Then let the owner decide.

If you give me a 1930 Model A Ford I will restore it. My best friend would make it into a hot rod. Both options are correct.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

My opinions on this subject are more based on the value and historicity of vintage instruments.

Modifying them can affect the value, and any time a guitar is modified from original we have one less original example to refer to when questions arise.

When the question arises in my shop I explain what I think to the owner. If the owner still wants the job done, I do it. If I don't someone else will, and it's better to have someone capable do the job than risk it going to hack.

In the case of this Sloane, I doubt the value will be damaged, as there is only one example of this guitar. There's no 100% original Stradivarious violin out there, and their value seems to be holding up just fine.

I would document every little detail nd every little change made to the guitar. But even if I didn't there's a book detailing the construction of the instrument, and so I don't think information about the originality of the instrument will be lost.

I also think the owner would love to play the original instrument as opposed to having a copy made and letting the original rot on the wall or in a case, never to be plyed or loved again, other than as a decoration or conversation piece.

So I say, since the guitar is in the hands of someone capable, go for it! It won't be regretted.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

To me, the most important fact is that the guitar is still in the hands of the original owner, for whom it was built. I think they have the ultimate moral say in the matter, rather than just ownership. If it was a second owner, or some such, then maybe things would be different. I don't think the (any) maker would want their work 'preserved' to the detriment of the musician they made it for.

_________________
Bob Garrish
Former Canonized Purveyor of Fine CNC Luthier Services

Im with Bob and Filipo....but if my Dad built it.....I would leave it as it is..
and show it to my kids

Thanks. It was getting crowded in my head...what with all the thetans in there and such.

_________________
http://www.CostaGuitars.com
PMoMC

I say go for it. I think Irving Sloane would understand and wouldn't have a problem with this.

_________________
Another day, another dollar.

I agree that it does seem strange for the son to want to change his fathers only existing steel string that was a present but as the guitar is of no real historical value i don't think there are any ethical issues.
The idea of documenting the work is very exciting and I would consider approaching a publisher before starting the work. Could be called "Steel String Re-construction". Outlining all the faults with the original and rectifying them would be an intersting, original book.
Good Luck!

_________________
We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at guitars.

The customer is always right, but I would try to convince the customer to leave it the way it is. I'm sure that guitar means a lot to him and he wants to have a playing guitar but that guitar means a lot to a lot of other people myself included and really is a historic object.

Has he been playing it all along or just wants to start playing it?

Considering all the modifications that are needed to the neck, I would remove it and build a new one using the same type materials and in a similar style. The old neck could be preserved intact and kept safe. The "new" guitar could be made more functional for it's owner, who if at a later date desired to reverse the changes would be able to. One goal of conservatorship is to make any modifications reversible, and I think making a new neck would allow this. How to have your cake and eat it too!

What Clay said.

_________________
Cut to size.....Beat to fit.....Paint to match.

If a guitar is kept behind glass for protection and display, is it still a guitar? The number one reason to build a guitar is to play and hear it play. I believe that the modifications to be made will allow this instrument to serve it's purpose (and presumably Irving Sloan's original purpose for it).
Todd, I am sure you will document the process and serve history in that way. I think modification is good in this situation. Please post a documentary thread for the repair, Todd. Very cool project!

Todd,
I'm solidly in the group that believes the son has every right to make the
guitar his father built for him more playable. Building a replica or things like
removing the original neck complete and replacing it make the guitar much
less the one his dad built. And your plan is moderate and sensible to me.
I'd go forward as you two have agree.
Regards,

_________________
Gene

Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason- Mark Twain

Modifying the neck so completely makes the guitar much less the one his dad built. As I read it, to increase the width and change the cross section of the neck and the peghead angle a whole new neck will need to be made, the fingerboard will be saved, but pieces will be added to the sides of it to make it wider, the head plate removed, modified, and reused. Fingerboards are commonly replaced, so the only piece of unique Sloane workmanship that would remain is the head plate veneer.
I agree that the owner has a right to do with the guitar what he pleases. If he feels that his father got it so far wrong then perhaps he should have it modified. I would only argue for making the work reversible.
I have transmogrified enough nice old guitars to be willing to have someone else do a few too. It will help spread the guilt around a bit