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

Worth the effort ? [pic
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=13194		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  James W B [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:24 am ]
Post subject: 




This is a paper profile of the sides ,Thanks to Colin and his tutorial of a wedge shaped guitar my nephew wants me to build for him.It`s sitting taped to the mold top side up with the back side down sitting on a
15 Ft. radius dish.The thing about it is,he is convinced that he wants me to wedge the top instead of the back.Which I`m not sure if this has been done ,or can be done properly.The differance from lower bout treble to lower bout bass is 1 1/2 inch.Which looks huge to me.The top is radiused to 25 Ft and the neck will be laying on the top side to side wedge angle,which I think is going to be very difficult to play,because of the reach factor.Not to mention as Rick Turner has pointed out.It`s difficult enough to set a neck angle and fret work and set up on a normal guitar,without throwing this wedge top into the equation.Is this whole thing possible,or worth the effort? This being only my third guitar,I may be in over my head.I`m hoping some voices of experience will chime in here.And also anyone out thre that has built a top wedge or whatever it should be called.
                          Knee Deep In It
                               James
Author:  Mattia Valente [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:31 am ]
Post subject: 
Wedging the top is asking for all sorts of neck trouble; you'd need to mount the neck at an angle (left-to-right) to the sides, which curve away quite a bit, and/or alternately build the neck so the entire fingerboard surface is tilted relative to the fingerboard face. In short: wedge the back, forget about wedging the top. Your nephew's wrong.

I was under the impression that a 1" difference is fairly common, although perhaps a bit subtle depending on the size of the body (bigger the body, smaller it looks). Haven't decided on the wedge for my current jumbo build yet (1", 1.25", 1.5"), but the actual wedge process (prop in dish, mark bent sides, cut away excess, sand as per usual with dish) went smoothly for me on my second guitar (first one I wedged).
Author:  Pwoolson [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:36 am ]
Post subject: 
Did he say "why" he wants the wedge from the top?
I've never built one but I've studied them pretty extensively and talked at length to a few folks that do build them. So take my advice for what you paid for it.
The way I see it, you have two options if you taper the top. The first is that you'll have the extension flush on the treble side and you'll have to shim the bass side. From the player's perspective, it will look like the extension is elevated like many classical guitars.
The other option is to "twist" the neck so that the finger board lies flat on the wedge. You'll have to figure out how the heal and the rest of the neck will fall into place. Lots of work on that one.
Or you could do the right option and wedge it from the back.
Author:  James W B [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:52 am ]
Post subject: 
He wants to wedge the top because he has a bad back, and he is convinced that it will be easier to play than a back wedged guitar.He wants me to lay the fingerboard flat on the top with the angle of the wedge it won`t be built up on the bass side.This will also make the headstock look crooked if you ask me.He also wants the neck to be flush on the cutaway side.I think I`m gonna puke.         & nbsp;    James

                                                     
Author:  Pwoolson [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:59 am ]
Post subject: 
It's not going to make it easier to play. It will be the same, but next to impossible to build. You are going to have neck alignment issues that will indeed make you want to puke.
If you twist the neck, literally carve it so the headstock isn't crooked like you don't like, there will be a slight benefit of having the first few frets perpendicular with the floor and then start to angle as you go up. That would help a bit with not having to cock your wrist as much. But doing that would make me insane for sure.
Author:  James W B [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:22 am ]
Post subject: 
He wants the neck, fretboard and headstock all on the same plane as the top wedge.I guess the big question is.Should I go forward with this project,or just tell him that I don`t think I`ll be able to do this guitar justice.It would be a dang shame to put the effort into it and he`s gonna break his wrist.If I can even make it so it`s playable.
                      Supid Predicament
                           James
Author:  James W B [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Hesh I have offered other possibilities.He is the kind of person that will never be happy , unless it`s what he wants.It`s a shame to say this, But True.
                          James
Author:  Chansen [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:12 am ]
Post subject: 
Just take a look at the Ergo guitar by Charles Fox. HERE. It has the wedge angled on the top and has a compensated neck twisting the other direction for easier playing (the fretboard doesn't have to be elevated... that is for another reason).

I am not an expert but it looks like you're heading in the right direction with the geometry. Maybe it's inexperience, ignorance or just plain stupidity... but these types of puzzles don't scare me - they only make we want to try harder and figure it out. Why be timid with trying new things????

Ergo-
Author:  crazymanmichael [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:33 am ]
Post subject: 
There are times when it is best to say no. considering your comments about the potential client, it seems that this may be one of them.
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:53 am ]
Post subject: 
That Fox guitar is a pretty cool item.  Nice sound.
Author:  Rick Turner [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
Mock it up in styrofoam first.   

He will not feel a difference whether it's wedged from teh top or the back, though he may just be so hung up on his concept that he won't let go of it.   Simplified, it's just two planes at an angle to one another. The only difference is in which plane the sides reference to, and I doubt that is a serious matter other than building it.

Quote a thousand bucks more to do it his way...and no returns, no money back, you're doing it against your (and many of our) better judgment.

I made a semi-hollow wedged double cutaway bass once, and I bent the top as well into an armrest. The bend was diagonally across the grain of the top.   It came out very cool.   



Author:  James W B [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
Rick ,he has made a styrofoam body that he seems real pleased with.Of course there isn`t any neck attached.I don`t see any serious problems with the body.I think the whole neck situation may get a bit hairy with a wedged top as compared to a wedged back where the neck alignment would basically be the same as any other guitar.So when you said "you`re doing it against your
[and many of our]better judgement", Would this be against your better judgement considering my experience?
                Thanks for the input
                                James
Author:  Sam Price [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
I would have thought that if the angled body was too difficult, how about reverting to traditional methods and build a lighter guitar, with bevelling in the front (armrest) and the back (ribrest)? There are brilliant tutorials that exist within this forum like this one

Perhaps somehow the ribrest could be slightly "larger" to create that desired angle without compromising guitar neck problems
Author:  Mattia Valente [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
Christian: good point. My brain was stuck in tradition-land for necks; if you build with a cantilevered fretboard extension, you can do more or less whatever you like, although you will be changing how the forces act on the bridge. Isn't the Ergo wedged both top and back (and let's not forget the composite braceless soundboard..there's much more to that guitar than meets the eye).

Sam: if you own radius dishes, I'd think doing a wedged body is far, far, far simpler than adding a bevel. Binding's a bit of an extra pain (more funky angles to deal with), but that also applies to armrests/ribrests.
Author:  James W B [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
Christian,it`s not that I`m oppossed to trying new things,I wouldn`t be building guitars if I were.My trouble is I actually think I can do this.That`s what kind of has me worried.As far as the Ergo goes,I agree with Mattia,that is a whole different ballgame,and something that I have no interest in attempting to build,and probably couldn`t anyway.
                        Thanks James
Author:  Mattia Valente [ Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
Also (to essentially reply to myself), I think the Ergo is even more subtle/complex/elegant than it looks, with a wedge and a tilt and a twist and yet still having the strings all line up and sit in the right plane, the right place. I'd love to have the insight and chutzpah to design something that complex - and yet perfectly balanced in terms of aesthetics and design - but I fear I'll have to build a few (dozen/hundred) more, and possibly grow an extra creative brain extension.
Author:  Chansen [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:18 am ]
Post subject: 

[QUOTE=Mattia Valente]Also (to essentially reply to myself), I think the Ergo is even more subtle/complex/elegant than it looks, with a wedge and a tilt and a twist and yet still having the strings all line up and sit in the right plane, the right place. I'd love to have the insight and chutzpah to design something that complex - and yet perfectly balanced in terms of aesthetics and design - but I fear I'll have to build a few (dozen/hundred) more, and possibly grow an extra creative brain extension.[/QUOTE]

Yeah you are absolutely right in the fact that the ergo is far and away a whole new ballgame. The tilt down and to the side adds all kinds of strange predicaments that I can't even comprehend because I am not even that far along on my first build. I just used it as an example because what he was asking can be accomplished - and I don't think it would have to be done in the extreme fashion Charles Fox does it. My big thing is "what's the worst that can happen?"

I probably wouldn't try it with Brazilian... but why not try it at all? If nothing else James, you will probably gain some experience you never would have before.

Take what I say in stride.... I'm just a newbie.
Author:  Sam Price [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:29 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Mattia Valente]

Sam: if you own radius dishes, I'd think doing a wedged body is far, far, far simpler than adding a bevel. Binding's a bit of an extra pain (more funky angles to deal with), but that also applies to armrests/ribrests.[/QUOTE]

LOL, good point; however bevels are all the rage at the moment and would be a good skill to learn if one should make guitars for a living (speak for meself..), plus the guitar would have good resale value should that happen somewhere down the line...
Author:  Bob Long [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:55 am ]
Post subject: 
James, I'm wondering if you could use a neck that bolts into a pocket (like a fender) instead of a neck with a heal. It seems like then it wouldn't matter how it beveled. Danny Farrington does necks like that on acoustics.

long
Author:  Billy T [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:59 am ]
Post subject: 
    If you look at the Ergo, you see, the angle of the neck heel is, in reality, perpendicular too the top!

    Further examination shows, the bridge to be parallel to the top also. It's more of an optical illusion, or wishful thinking to say the top is wedged.

   On consideration, this would require the bridge be substantially thicker on the bass side of the bridge. Now this may or may not be advantagous, but it is definitely an unknown factor! It also brings up all kinds of points about bridge heights and tone affect.

    The main issue is most people angle the fret board upward when playing anyway. I would suggest that you sit your nephew down, or stand him up, and notice just what angle he naturally holds the guitar. I think you'll both find you'll want to angle the back to the sides not the top.
Author:  Pwoolson [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:02 am ]
Post subject: 
James, in looking back at this thread and the responses, I realize that I'm pretty quick to say, "that's not the right way" and for that I apologize. What I should have said it that it wouldn't be my way of doing it (beveling the top that is).
If you feel up for the task, I think you should dive into it. Maybe you'll find something innovative that changes the whole process.
I'm not sure if you've ever seen these but Leo Burrell makes some guitars that just make my head spin. I'll admit that I find them unnecessary and gimmicky but that's neither here nor there. The craftsmanship is
to die for. Check this out:
Yes, the whole guitar is twisted. Just crazy.
Author:  Sam Price [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:09 am ]
Post subject: 
/\ Ugh, it give me veritgo looking at that...amazing design, though

Check this out too!!
Author:  Philip Perdue [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:32 am ]
Post subject: 
James,

With one ukulele built and one guitar only half finished I recognize that I have little building experience or knowledge. However, in the spirit of this forum I do have some thoughts about this possible adventure.

I like your mock up but I’m not seeing much of a problem. The back, soundboard, bridge, bracing, fingerboard are all normal like any other guitar. The sides profile appears to be different but is essentially normal. The tail block would only need to have the top angled to match the soundboard angle. That only leaves us with the neck and the neck block as having any real difference from a normal guitar. I’m still not seeing much of a problem. Keep your neck normal like any other neck aside from adjusting a bit at the bottom to match the back plane. After all, the neck will be placed on a normal plane with the soundboard and bridge. So as I see it, the only real alteration of the guitar would come at the neck block. Design the neck block to receive the neck at the desired angle to match the soundboard angle. Maybe make the block a tad larger or some carbon fiber for extra support. Is my understanding that this area in not really producing any sound so you should have room to work with the neck block. Anyway, these are my thoughts.

Is it worth it? Ultimately that decision is yours alone.

Philip
Author:  burbank [ Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:53 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=James W B] Hesh I have offered other possibilities.He is the kind of person that will never be happy , unless it`s what he wants.It`s a shame to say this, But True.
                             James [/QUOTE]

Sorry, but he sounds like the kind of customer I would politely send to another builder. I'd be afraid he'd be unhappy even if he got what he wanted.

Perhaps Charles Fox could help him without getting ulcers.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/