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

Sound ports
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=12860		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  BobK [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:52 am ]
Post subject: 
After seeing all of the positive things that guys like Al Carruth, Tony Karol and others have said about sound ports I tried one on my last build. I just strung it up late last week (an L-00) and was amazed at the result. The sound is much "fuller" for both the listener (as confirmed by my MAGI pals) and the player. And, so far based on the research I've done, I haven't been able to come up with a downside. My question is, why aren't the factories cranking out guitars with sound ports? They've been putting holes in sides for electronics for years, so it's not a production issue. Are they concerned about warranty claims or would it mean spending more time making the inside neat and tidy? Anyone have any ideas?


Bob K
Author:  Chansen [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:34 am ]
Post subject: 
Don't know, but I've been thinking about doing this on my build. I've been tearing through the archives for all the info I can. This is an interesting question though - you would think factory-built guitars would start doing it if it is indeed an improvement with little to lose and no down-side.
Author:  Pwoolson [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:24 am ]
Post subject: 
I think R. Taylor is doing them which means that Taylor will be close behind.
Basically, it's one more large step in the assembly line. And there are a lot of players that aren't convinced that they are a good thing. So the factories aren't willing to take a risk like that.
Author:  Rick Turner [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
There is a Martin model with a side port now.

I like them, and my clients like them, too. Side sound ports are now standard in my acoustics and we'll do them in tenor ukes as well.
Author:  letseatpaste [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
Is there a relationship or some sort of give and take between the size of the port and the size of the soundhole, or are they relatively independent? i.e. If you use a soundport, should you reduce the size of the soundhole?
Author:  BobK [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
Christian, I don't have any links bookmarked but if you search for Al you'll probably find quite a bit. FWIW, I can tell you how I did mine. I bent my side then glued in a veneer reinforcement midway between the waist and the upper bout. I used my bending form and both halves of the body mold as cauls. I then marked the location on the reinforcement patch on my body mold for future reference and completed the box as usual. Using the marks I made on the mold I centered my port on the patch. My port is just a simple 1-1/2 inch round hole. I used a brad point drill bit to make a rough opening and finished with a small sanding drum on my drill press.



Paul said:
I think R. Taylor is doing them which means that Taylor will be close behind.


And the foreign clones won't be far behind.    

BTW, Paul you gave me some advice on the double mortise and tenon neck joint some time ago. It took a while to implement, but it was spot on. Thanks.

BobK


Author:  Andy Zimmerman [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
I have been putting a dog port in all of mine lately
Author:  Sam Price [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
I've been a guitarist for years and cannot imagine having a guitar without a soundport. The difference it makes...

Every build of mine will have soundports, in one way, shape or other..
Author:  Chansen [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

[QUOTE=BobK]Christian, I don't have any links bookmarked but if you search for Al you'll probably find quite a bit. FWIW, I can tell you how I did mine. I bent my side then glued in a veneer reinforcement midway between the waist and the upper bout. I used my bending form and both halves of the body mold as cauls. I then marked the location on the reinforcement patch on my body mold for future reference and completed the box as usual. Using the marks I made on the mold I centered my port on the patch. My port is just a simple 1-1/2 inch round hole. I used a brad point drill bit to make a rough opening and finished with a small sanding drum on my drill press.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the quick insight into your method Bob! I will check the archives for that as well.
Author:  Rick Turner [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think a 12 gauge would do a pretty good job...full choke with buck shot would be a good choice at about three feet. Get Dick Cheney to pull the trigger, but stand back.   Oh, fill the body with sand so the shot doesn't go all the way through the other side...Think I'll do a video. We could do it when my partner is doing his cowboy Single Action Shooting Society practice. Should I put in a reinforcing patch first? Maybe glue in some Tyvek house wrap... I wonder how far back I'd have to stand to do a normal soundhole in a top? I'll find out.
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:38 am ]
Post subject: 
Maybe a shaped charge for just the right sized oval.   Buck leaves such ragged edges, and sanding smooth is such a pain.  Also, buck, unless shot at an oblique angle would only work for round ports.
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:09 am ]
Post subject: 
That's true, Hesh, but you have to quit dribbling when you play, because it will ruin the inside of the guitar, particularly if you dip or chew.
Author:  Don Williams [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:10 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=azimmer1] I have been putting a dog port in all of mine lately[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I love that! But, I believe that's called a Paw-Port.

My wife thinks I should do a cat's paw print as a port.
Author:  Tim McKnight [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:15 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=BobK] My question is, why aren't the factories cranking out guitars with sound ports? Anyone have any ideas?
Bob K[/QUOTE]

Bob,
A high ranking official (who will remain nameless) of Martin spent time in our both three years ago at the IBMA show. They asked a LOT of questions about our soundport design and even more questions after we had returned home. They were concerned about infringing on our sound port patent, which I propently told them that I did not own nor did I claim to be the inventor thereof.

Some time later he invited us to the factory for a private tour and then we were shown the prototypes in their R&D lab. Shortly thereafter Martin unveiled their own "Side sound monitor" at the winter NAMM show.
Author:  RobLak [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Sound port??? Ha-ha good 'un! Yes dear, it's a "Sound port"....

I just enlarged mine to be able to hold the beer-can insulator as well.

Rob

Author:  Dave White [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:42 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Tim McKnight] [QUOTE=BobK] My question is, why aren't the factories cranking out guitars with sound ports? Anyone have any ideas?
Bob K[/QUOTE]

Bob,
A high ranking official (who will remain nameless) of Martin spent time in our both three years ago at the IBMA show. They asked a LOT of questions about our soundport design and even more questions after we had returned home. They were concerned about infringing on our sound port patent, which I propently told them that I did not own nor did I claim to be the inventor thereof.

Some time later he invited us to the factory for a private tour and then we were shown the prototypes in their R&D lab. Shortly thereafter Martin unveiled their own "Side sound monitor" at the winter NAMM show.[/QUOTE]

It's interesting to see the big names following the smaller builders - first adjustable necks and now "Side sound monitor". I just hope they don't follow the smaller builders with any patent power
Author:  Alan Carruth [ Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:56 am ]
Post subject: 
I keep working on this series of experiments, trying to resolve some of the apparent contradictions. I still don't beleive that adding a port gives a _major_ increase in output overall: I'm still seeing increases in the range of 2%. However, it does seem that a large enough port can increase the output a bit in the range of the 'main air' resonance, possibly accompnaied by a drop in output for the 'main top' mode. I can't say just where 'large enough' begins. I just don't think there are any free lunches out there.

Adding in a port of any size will raise the pitch of the main air resonance. The further from the 'main' soundhole the port is, the greater the effect. The port will also 'hear' some things that you don't normally hear, and thus will alter the timbre of the guitar. Again, I usually decrease the size of my normal soundhole on ported guitars, but I can't tell you what muight work for you.

As for why they aren't showing up in huge numbers yet: tradition! (Thank you Tevya) As more people try them, and assuming they like what they hear, ports will become more common. Or maybe not.
Author:  RobLak [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:27 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Dave White] I just hope they don't follow the smaller builders with any patent power [/QUOTE]

Didn't a co. (to remain nameless) recently patent thinning the top around the edges to increase responsiveness? I am not sure if it was the idea they patented or the routed groove itself they patented, but i think as long as there is documentation that the idea was common knowledge in the public domain, you're safe - if you can afford the lawyers.
Author:  Brock Poling [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:53 am ]
Post subject: 

Al, Rick & Others who have done lots of work with these.

I would be interested to get your coments about what mega ports do over "regular" sized ports.

I am kind of thinking of the work John Monteleone is doing. I realize this is an archtop, but I would think that to some extent ports don't care what kind of guitar it is.



Author:  Dave White [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:34 am ]
Post subject: 
Brock,

I've played Raj Spolia's 4G guitar made by Alan Beardsell like this one:



Difficult to Aa full B comparison but I got the same "pesonal monitor effect" I do on the small upper bout ports I use on my guitars. The Beardsell has a small soundhole which probably balances with the big side soundports. The view inside the guitar while I played was fabulous and you could certainly check that the bridge pins were correctly seated
Author:  WarrenG [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:39 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Pwoolson] I think R. Taylor is doing them which means that Taylor will be close behind.
Basically, it's one more large step in the assembly line. And there are a lot of players that aren't convinced that they are a good thing. So the factories aren't willing to take a risk like that. [/QUOTE]

I asked this specific question at the Taylor Road Show in May-June. They said they had no plans to do a port. Maybe the rep was unaware?
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 4:46 am ]
Post subject: 
If something is good, then more of it is better. It's just logical.
Author:  Alan Carruth [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:28 am ]
Post subject: 
Howard Klepper wrote:
"If something is good, then more of it is better. It's just logical."

Like pepper.....

Those huge ports will prety much 'kill' any air resonances, or, at least, cut them down to nealy nothing. One of the 'selling points' of ports for some makers is that they 'release pent-up energy'. Well, 'pent-up energy' is just another name for a resonance, so if you release it all, there are no resonances. These can 'waste' power, of ocourse, but they also give you most of the 'color' of the sound. On my 'corker' pulling out all the stoppers seems to increase the 'monitor' effect, but also makes the tone 'flat' and 'harsh'.I did not get a chance to play any of the mega-ported boxes I saw at Montreal. Perhaps next time I can not only do that, but bring my equipment and run some tests.    
Author:  Chansen [ Wed Jul 18, 2007 6:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Interesting thoughts here. I was unaware that so many guitars have done ports especially of the size I saw above. There is also a lot more theory behind it than I expected. Good read!

Al - You said "I usually decrease the size of my normal soundhole on ported guitars". By how much exactly? I bound the soundhole on my guitar and mistakingly made the sound hole about 3/10" smaller in diameter (yes, I could just eliminate the binding for a fix). I posted my concern and someone (maybe it was you) suggested a side-port to compensate.

Thanks! 
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/