Official Luthiers Forum!
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Breathing new life with a better finish.
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=10223		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 8:16 am ]
Post subject: 
This is number three. I made it for my brother. The finish was horrible. It came back home before Thanksgiving, slated for a refinish job. Needless to say, I wasn't looking forward to it.

When I got the guitar, I realized how much I'd improved on the two guitars since. The neck was unacceptable as well as the finish. This guitar just made the trip back home to Texas. I'd like to share the results.

No, it's not perfect. There is still room for improvement. But I'm happy to have sent home a much better guitar the second time around. It's breathing new life with a better finish and a reshaped neck.





















This is Indian Rosewood (allied) with an adirondack top (old standard) a honduran and maple neck (hogan). Body shape is grand auditorium (taylor), neck profile, (now taylor). Tail pin from a vintage D35, my brother saw it in my junk drawer and wanted it? Go figure.

Grover tuners with ebony buttons. LMI compression truss rod with glued in spline. Finish is fourteen coats of McFadden's lacquer, filler is the previous coat of hardware variety polyurethane. (not recommended, it's the reason I had to refinish)

Buffed with my DIY buffer posted on my website, 3M wet buffing compound, very messy. Then Menzerna fine white bar compound on the other wheel. Finally I used MacQuires 9 swirl remover by hand, and then MacQuires 7 polish by hand as well. Also, Ace polishing cloth available in the cleaning products section.

My brother has no idea how much work went into refinishing his guitar. It doesn't matter. What matters is, I'm proud of it again.
Author:  Dave Rector [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:02 am ]
Post subject: 
Looks great Bruce!

So, what did you do in your finishing process that was different from the first time you finished it?
Author:  Joe Beaver [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:07 am ]
Post subject: 
Who says its not better the second time around? Beautiful job
Author:  Don Williams [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:29 am ]
Post subject: 
Gorgeous instrument Bruce....
I sure am glad you're back here posting that great work you do.
Author:  JJ Donohue [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:37 am ]
Post subject: 
Bruce...Did you sand back to bare wood and redo the pore filling?...what is the new pore filler?

What was the effect of using the polyyurethane as a filler? What were the visible defects that it caused that led to your decision to re-finish?

Sure looks good now! Do you have a "before" pic. I'd be interested in learning more about recognizing the "defect".

Author:  matt jacobs [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:47 am ]
Post subject: 
Looks good from here bruce. I hope your brother appreciates how much work goes into these guitars.
Author:  old man [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:53 am ]
Post subject: 
Verrrry nice, Bruce. I didn't know you made mistakes.

It looks brand spanking new, and it is a beautiful guitar. I'm going to try a cutaway someday.


Ron
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:46 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dave, What's different? The finish itself. A change from Ace Polyurethane straight out of the can to McFadden's Nitrocellulose Buffing Lacquer.

Thanks everyone for the compliments.

JJ, the defect in the finish was the complete lack of pore filling. Spraying straight polyurethane, with no filler, left the surface of the rosewood orange peeled or pitted where each pore sucked the finish from the surface. The Spruce looked good with the thin poly finish, alas there were no pores to fill.

I will say this, polyurethane is a good sealer between rosewood and nitro. I say that because at the same time I was spraying this guitar, I was spraying a rosewood without poly on the surface. That guitar fisheyed big time along the back join. This guitar with a good coating of thin polyurethane took the lacquer like a champ.

The main problem I had spraying polyurethane is that my gun had too small a tip. It should have been much larger like 1.8 mm or 2.2 mm. I was shooting with a touchup gun and only a 1.2 mm gun tip. Let me say this, I know of a quality builder and all he uses is Ace Poly after many guitars came back to him with crazed Nitro finishes.

This guitar can be seen on my website under Paul D, Grand A! www.dickeyguitars.com with the poly finish.
Author:  Serge Poirier [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
WOW Bruce, that was your 3rd? looks like a 50th to me my friend, really nice job on the refinish!

Did you really say that you did not pore fill this one? That you used polyurethane on bare wood prior to shooting nitro ? or am i missing something??
Author:  burbank [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
Looks great, Bruce!

It's great that you got a second pass at it.
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Actually there was no pore filling on this guitar as a separate step.

The thin original finish allowed all the pores to show. At the time I did not own a buffer. While it looked nice, it was not by any means a great finish.

The poly acted like a great sealer for subsequent coats of Nitro though. I scuff-sanded the entire guitar wet with 400 grit and started over with the finish.

The nitro began building immediately without crawling, fisheyes or sinking into pores. It turned out much better than the other rosewood guitar done at the same time.

I'm definitely going back and trying epoxy fill again. I used it on number five but found it way too thick put on with the Rubbermaid Spatula from the kitchen....

Looking back at all the things I've tried I sure get a big laugh.... like John Hall says, learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
Author:  Serge Poirier [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:44 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks for clarifying Bruce, i sure will pore fill my next build then!
Author:  klhoush [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:39 am ]
Post subject: 
I haven't posted in a while due to work (kid in college $$$) but had to comment on mixing finishes. Generally, applying a "hot" finish over urethane will melt the urethane and create a sticky mess. The thickness and drying time of the coatings will certainly make a difference. Maybe if the poly is thin enough and the lacquer dries quickly enough one can achieve good results as Bruce has.

In my own work in remodeling, I find the more one knows, the less forgiveness one receives from the gods of finishing. My flooring subcontractor cringed when I described my finishing technique knowing he could never get away with applying water based finishes over a factory baked finish without scuff sanding. It's lasted for years.
Author:  Robbie O'Brien [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:30 am ]
Post subject: 
Looking Good!
Author:  Dave Rector [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:38 am ]
Post subject: 
Bruce, one more question. Did you remove the fingerboard and bridge or finish around them? If you finished around them I was wondering what you did about buffing into the corners? This has always been aproblem for me when having to work around the bridge and fingerboard. Yours looks very nicely buffed out and mine never do.
Author:  Dickey [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:50 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks everyone.

Dave, no, I did remove the original pickguard. Dovetail neck precluded neck removal, same as fingerboard and bridge.

I carefully taped the bridge and top of the fingerboard. When I removed the mask, I carefully cut the lacquer where the tape met the spruce. It turned loose pretty well due to the scoring of the lacquer and careful removal. Not perfect, but very acceptable. Fourteen coats is a lot of lacquer. I sanded every four coats very carefully around the bridge and fingerboard too.

I wouldn't wish a refinish on anyone. I could easily finish four guitars now in the time it took to do this one.

Whomever asked, no, I didn't remove the polyurethane except on the heel. Since I reshaped the neck, all finish was gone except for near the body join. I used stripper in that area after a careful mask of the body. Since the neck was originally finished seperately, there was no connection between the finish of the neck and the body, making that an invisible cleanup. Up at the neck angle change, though, I just scuff-sanded the poly and started shooting the entire neck. Unbelievably, there are no witness lines, the poly and lacquer appear as a single finish. I can't explain that but the results speak for themselves. If I get a phone call from my brother in a few months saying something is up with this finish, well.... we know it didn't work out. For now, life is grand....

The polyurethane was about two years old.
Author:  JBreault [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:07 am ]
Post subject: 
It's nice to see that you can go back again. Nice job Bruce.
Author:  Dave Rector [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:31 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks Bruce, but I was really asking about the buffing process. How the heck did you get in close to the bridge and fingerboard with those big ol' buffing wheels?

That's the part that give me fits and it looks like yours came out very nice. Guess I didn't phrase the question very well, huh.
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:57 am ]
Post subject: 
In my Elmer Fudd voice, "Vewwy Carefuwwy."

Dave, I hate buffing or spraying either one with the neck attached. These 12 inch buffs are great. I think 16 inch would be even better.

Buffing is an artform in itself if you don't want that guitar thrown to the floor after grabbing an edge. It kind of reminds me of a table saw, you do not freehand anything into the blade. Same way with the buff, you start buffing on a flat surface and buff right up to half the distance to the edge. Then you are forced to buff up to the center from the other side.

In the case of the sound hole, never buff up to it because it's an edge, it's better to buff past it, rather than to it. I hope this makes sense. Honestly, it's a real tedious thing to do and it's so much better if the neck is off along with the bridge.   
Author:  Dave Rector [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:20 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks again Bruce! I was just wondering if I was making it more difficule than it needs to be. That is one of the things I am known for afterall.
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Terry, you are a brave man. I'll cross that steaming bridge when I get there. I just want it to be a neck reset not a refinish though.   

Dave, I think in general guitar building is harder than it needs to be..... especially finishing, but I about have ... even that... whupped!
Author:  charliewood [ Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:33 am ]
Post subject: 
Beautiful Bruce!!!
Cheers
Charliewood
Author:  TonyKarol [ Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:36 am ]
Post subject: 
I wouldnt suggest to anyone to use poly as a sealer for nitro - they are pretty much incompatible - nitro will not melt into poly - once poly is cured, it is a linked finish, and correct me if I am wrong, but lac thinner will not melt it. You can spray nitro over it, and it will look fine, scuffing will help the adhesion, and so long as you dont rub thru into the poly anywhere you will never really know thats what you did. But what you may find in the future with this guitar is whenever it gets a bump here and there, the nitro will lift away from the poly and leave something akin to a blister - a whitish area - the nitro wont crack (unless you really bang it). Not to burst the bubble of doing a fine refin, but dont be surprised to see this happen down the road ...
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/