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

Do all laminates ’sound’ the same??
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=12260		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Raj Snake [ Thu May 31, 2007 2:35 am ]
Post subject: 
Hello Gentlemen,
When laminated wood is used for back/sides,do
they sound the same?
I say this because I used to own a K.Yairi 'New
Yorker' and a fine guitar it was too.The bacvk sides
were laminated..but the only wood uesd was
EIR.Apparently Mr Yairi does this quite a
lot..effectively a 'solid wood laminated 'ordinary
'laminated wood.
a lot of Django style guitars use a laminated
back/side construction,yet some cost not very
much,and others cost thousands of dollars why is
that...are some laminates better sounding than
others (can't be down to just different hardware)..or
is it kidology.
Your thoughts please gentlemen..
Raj
Author:  TommyC [ Thu May 31, 2007 3:12 am ]
Post subject: 
Hey Raj.  This is just speculation but I can't imagine that all laminates sound the same.  I mean the glue would seem to have a factor.  The core on one might be stiffer on one than the other.  The core could be a hardwood or softwood.  The outer veneers on one may be thinner than another.  Just too many variables.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu May 31, 2007 3:30 am ]
Post subject: 
Not all laminats sound the same. But a laminates tone will not age with time. How a laminate sounds coming off the bench is pretty mych how it will sound 30 years from now. Now if the laminates are on the back and sids only this is not true because if the top is solid wood then it will mature with age. But a total laminate guitar will not mature in tone with age enought to notice anyway.
Author:  John Elshaw [ Thu May 31, 2007 6:57 am ]
Post subject: 
Speaking from the classical side, laminates are often used in lattice braced guitars and there is virtually NO difference in sound. The back and sides are buit to be as stiff as possible to help transfer the energy to the top. Every single builder I've talked to who build in the Australian "lattice" style have all said that the back and side laminate will not affect their sound. The key here is that there is no difference within builders, but there could be differences between builders.

John
Author:  Colin S [ Thu May 31, 2007 8:38 am ]
Post subject: 
I think that a lot of the flat cut wood being sold now would benefit from being laminated. I'm thinking mostly of the slab cut BRW that seems to be around. Cut thin and bonded to a nice quatersawn layer of EIR could be positively beneficial in terms of stability. Some of the high figure mahoganies would possibily also benefit from being bonded to a straight grain bit of Honduran. If the woods were matched for density etc I see no problem and the advantages of bending some of the difficult woods at only say 40 thou possitively beneficial.

Do you think the tone fairies would really know the difference between 80 thou of BRW and 40/40 BRW/EIR?

Colin
Author:  John Elshaw [ Thu May 31, 2007 11:50 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Hesh1956] Some of the finest guitars built today use "double sides" and these builders are careful to not call their sides "laminated sides."

The term “laminated sides” means to me more of a cross grain, plywood type lay-up. And of course in some cases laminated sides have been used on many low end guitars too.

For some of the users of "double sides" the idea is to make the rim as stiff as a drum. Many of these builders also believe that the sides do not contribute to the tone of the guitar beyond the contribution made by providing an ultra-stiff rim. It's notable to me that the users of double sides still will use solid, one piece backs.

A number of OLFers have moved to double sides with solid backs and I plan on joining the fray soon.

IMHO to milk the ultimate tone potential out of tonewood, and I am speaking of the back now, nothing can compete with solid wood.
[/QUOTE]

Hi Hesh, I gotta disagree--some VERY high end builders clearly use the term laminate such as Smallman, Redgate, Byers, Schramm, Woodfield, et. al. Laminate is defined as 1.) To divide into thin layers.
2.) To make by uniting several layers. 3.) To cover with thin sheets. Their laminates usually use a 5-layer sequence such as roseweood/maple/cedar/maple/rosewood. Laminate clearly describes what is being done and calling it a "double side" seems much more misleading to me, although I've never seen the term used as you mention. As for the back, there are very good reasons for using a laminate. The high-end laminated backs are constructed by taking the five layers and gluing them up in a vacuum mold with a much more pronounced arch (very much like a cello). The arched back needs no back braces and focuses the sound out the sound hole for considerably more volume.

The people that use laminated back and sides milk the tone out of the top and milk volume out of the back and sides. Also, there is a distinct difference in the knowledge level for the people shopping for laminated guitars. The people shopping for a $10k-$20k laminated guitar know exactly what they're buying and the builders don't need to use the term double side to keep from scaring them off. The people that get scared off by the term "laminate" are the entry level buyers who know nothing other than the myth of "stay away from laminated guitars". It seems like using the term "double side" might be used to avoid scaring away these customers rather than the educated customer.

Cheers!

John
Author:  Raj Snake [ Thu May 31, 2007 7:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
Interesting repiles chaps,I've learnt something
new...but none of you have mentioned reasons for
'laminating' pieces of the the same species of wood
eg. EIR/EIR for back / sides, as Yairi does, or why
some (handbulit) selmer type guitars are very
expensive and others not even though the spec on
paper seems very similar.
Over to you.
Author:  John Elshaw [ Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:15 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Raj Snake] Interesting repiles chaps,I've learnt something
new...but none of you have mentioned reasons for
'laminating' pieces of the the same species of wood
eg. EIR/EIR for back / sides, as Yairi does, or why
some (handbulit) selmer type guitars are very
expensive and others not even though the spec on
paper seems very similar.
Over to you.[/QUOTE]

The backs are laminated because it would be impossible to get the cello-like arch with a single piece of wood unless it was carved out like the top of an archtop. The laminates are just veneer that is stacked up on top of an arched mold inside a vacuum press. The vacuum pushes the veneer against the mold making a perfect arched back every time. The sides are laminated because they can be made to be very stiff but lighter weight acting like the drum rim Hesh mentioned. Using laminated back and sides is much more labor intensive, but also gives outstanding results for the style of guitar it was meant to be used for. With the arching of the back and the strength of the laminates, there is no need for any additional back bracing. I would really like to hear a steel string guitar built in the Australian style of lattice bracing. I bet it would be a friggin CANNON!!!!! The projection of these guitars is amazing. Classical players can fill a 2000 seat auditorium with sound and never need amplification.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/