| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Has anyone here built a Mahogany topped.. http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=4402 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
...guitar? I'm thinking of doing one for a show this summer and was wondering if someone could enlighten me on specs. Thickness? Bracing is the same I assume. (but you know what they say about assume). Anything else I need to be thinking about? Thanks in advance. Paul |
|
| Author: | Rod True [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Are you planning on binding the body or just hiding the edges together? I don't know if you've seen the low end martins all mahogany, they arn't bound and I think they look plane, boring and cheap. 
Just my opinion. I know that you know what your doing Paul and I don't question your skills, just thought I would give my opinion. |
|
| Author: | Dickey [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul, Looks like you are plowin' new ground here. |
|
| Author: | Josh H [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul I'm curious as to what got you interesting in trying a mahogany topped guitar? The only ones I ever played where the low end Martins and I didn't like them much. I'm sure that you could get a better sound than those Martins. Josh |
|
| Author: | zac_in_ak [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi Paul I havnt heard any mahogany guitars but have heard mahogany ukuleles and they sound good just because the martin mahogany guitars dont sound that good dont let that deter you. They also dont have too look plain like the martins I have seen some really nice quilted mahogany and some other really nice patterned stuff. What back and side wood were you thinking of? The ukuleles I have seen usually have mahogany for the top and the back and sizes. just my $.02 worth zac_in_ak |
|
| Author: | David Collins [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 6:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The mahogany topped Gibson jumbos from the 30's and 40's are some of the best sounding guitars I've ever played. They didn't alter thier thicknesses or bracing by any noticable amount, but the tops usually around .110"-.115" with a wide 102 degree X-brace angle. I've played a lot of the Gibsons and a good number of older Martin 17's, and I am a huge mahogany top fan. I vaguely recall using mahogany tops on some MacPhersons, but it's kind of a blur. Those were fairly radical designs and wouldn't be a good reference anyway. Other than that, I've never built a conventional top with mahogany but it would certainly be a favorite wood if I were to start building again. It's not that hard to find amoung current builders either. Larrivee, Collings, Santa Cruz, Gibson, Taylor, Martin, and many others are still building with mahogany. Of course they are not as common and some offer this only as an option, but it seems like you should be able to find some to try out if you look around. |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul, I made an all Cuban Mahogany parlour guitar as a copy of a turn of the century American guitar I have, but using X bracing rather than the ladder bracing of the original. I didn't really do anything that differently from when I was working with a spruce topped guitar in terms of thicknessing and bracing. I tend to have my tops about 3mm thick in the centre, and thinning out at the edges and in the lower bout behind the bridge. Here's a pic of the guitar and the bracing: 
I think mahogany topped guitars have an undeserved bad reputation. The guitar had great sustain, balance and projection and that growl you associate with early 20's and 30's blues. |
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
WOW! Beautiful guitar and bracing right to the end of the lower bout Dave! That growl you mention, could it be a combination of stifness, type of wood, the bracing or the way your bracing is made at upper bout, directing in a V? Serge |
|
| Author: | Laurent Brondel [ Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I retopped a '62 Guild M-20 last year, using the original mahogany top and new spruce bracing. I copied the original bracing, 1/4 thick, scalloped and not very tall at all. Very small bridgeplate too. I think the top was about .100 thickness. The guitar sounds absolutely amazing, great projection and attack and a somewhat complex tone and not lacking in bass response in spite of the small size (akin to a Martin 0). The M-20 was Nick Drake's guitar… I also had a '53 Martin 00-17 that sounded very similar, with a slightly softer tone, I don't think the bracing was scalloped on the 00-17, but I remember it being not very tall either. Both guitars have no binding whatsoever, with a 18-style rosette, it's an aquired taste, but personally I like the simplicity a lot. |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks everyone for the response. What got me thinking about this was playing a Larrivee' more than a year ago. That guitar is lodged into my head and I can't shake it. It was THE best sounding guitar I've ever heard. The kid that owned it commissioned me to make a 12 string for him. Talk about putting oneself under personal pressure. With that said, that's the interest I have in doing something a bit different. I've got no interest in trying to duplicate the old Martins. In fact, I've got no interest in old Martins at all. I know, I know, you can lecture me all you want about them "inventing" the thing and on and on. In doing my research, I found that Martin started doing Mahogany tops in the depression as a way to make sales. At that time Mahogany was much cheaper than Spruce so they were able to lower the price a bit to make them more attractive (financially) to the common folk. What they found is that they might have lost a bit of volume but gained huge sustain and got that trademark growl that is associated with old blues. |
|
| Author: | letseatpaste [ Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I love mahogany topped guitars. A local guitar shop used to carry a lot of the Larrivee parlors before they jacked up the price. My two favorites by far were an all-mahogany and an all-koa. I have an old no-name parlor that's all mahogany, and it has the sweetest tone, at least it did before the top bellied too much and the bridge started pulling away (ladder bracing). I think I'll eventually try building an all sapele guitar, I bought three b&s sets sanded and joined from LMI when I first started building. Haven't used them except for wasting one set of sides learning to bend, so I've got an extra back. I had wondered if .100 would be too thin, but maybe that's about right. Interesting that the braces might not need to be as tall. |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Serge, I think it is a combination of the guitar size/shape, and the Mahogany. the original has the same growl but with 80+ years more maturity (excuse the feet in the photo!!!): 
Martin Simpson played the old guitar and said that the only think missing to make it sound like Blind Willie Johnson was the "scratch, scratch, scratch . ." sound from the old 78rpm recordings. He thinks that these sort of guitars were used a lot by the early greats as they were very cheap and were "played to death". Martin played his repetoire of slide blues/gospel on the guitar for an hour or so and let us video the performance - awesome. The proof that most of the "digital enhancement" lies in the player's fingers as well as the guitar comes home to me every time I try and play the same things after watching the video 
I also suspect that a lot of these early guitars and early Martin's used Cuban mahogany as it was pretty readily available then. |
|
| Author: | Dickey [ Sat Jan 07, 2006 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dave your little parlor bracing is inspirational. Very well done, and quite original looking. Even the bridgeplate is oriented the way Mario mentioned the other day. Then to top it off you share the photos of the old mahogany parlor. That's an incredible looking instrument. Wish we could all see the Martin Simpson video with you. Thanks. |
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Sat Jan 07, 2006 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for your explanations Dave and sharing those nice pictures of the parlor. Dickey, i'll second that thought 
Serge |
|
| Author: | rick218 [ Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here is my take on the same thing; my guitar is based on Martin 2-17. The bracing is laminated like the Larson guitars,2.5 mm sitka either side of 1mm Ebony. I have also laminated braces on a Sitka, Zirocote OM it has very different sound than other OMs I have built. 
|
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Sun Jan 08, 2006 6:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Beautiful guitar and floor Rick! 
Serge |
|
| Author: | Kevin Gallagher [ Sun Jan 08, 2006 6:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul, I've built Mahogny topped guitars in all of my body styles and have really liked the tone of every one. I'm a Mahogany fan, though, so the more the better in my opinion. The perception of Mahogany being a lesser quality wood was derived from nothing less than its use by Martin on their lower models for so many years while the flagship models had rosewood backs and sides. It was called "the poor man's choice" by some uneducated tone affionado wannabes, but those who are diehard D-18 players will tell you that they wouldn't trade that 18 model for a 28,35,41, or 45 anytime for the simple reason of its tone. Well, they may trade in order to sell that Rosewood model to buy more Mahogany models, but those guys aren't nearly as common as the Rosewood model players. I've always been of the opinion that Mahogany has a tone that is thick and aggressive while offering a cool dryness to the sound that Rosewood isn't capable of. Regardless of what a builder tries to add to their reputation through boasting the ability to coax any sound from any wood, there are just certain things that can be gotten from specific woods and others that just can't be coaxed out of their counterparts. Some people understand and appreciate the diffeence and that's why Mahogany has reamined one of the most popular and common back and side woods in the guitar industry. What Mahogany brings to the tonal table cannot be duplicated using any of the Rosewoods just as it can't deliver what the Rosewoods can. It is a much more valuable wood than it is typically credited as. The Mahogany top provides a thump that is inique and powerful while not darkening the voice of the guitar too much. The ones that I've built have been perfect for solo play as well as being able to create a thick orchestra like blanket of sound when used to accompany vocals. You won't be sorry that you built it after you pull those strings tight and hear that first chord. Regards, Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars |
|
| Author: | Bobc [ Sun Jan 08, 2006 12:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Rick & Dave those sure are two beautiful guitars. After reading Kevin's post I want to go in the shop and start building a mahogany guitar. 
|
|
| Author: | Colin S [ Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Kevin Gallagher] Paul, I've built Mahogny topped guitars in all of my body styles and have really liked the tone of every one. I'm a Mahogany fan, though, so the more the better in my opinion. The perception of Mahogany being a lesser quality wood was derived from nothing less than its use by Martin on their lower models for so many years while the flagship models had rosewood backs and sides. It was called "the poor man's choice" by some uneducated tone affionado wannabes, but those who are diehard D-18 players will tell you that they wouldn't trade that 18 model for a 28,35,41, or 45 anytime for the simple reason of its tone. Well, they may trade in order to sell that Rosewood model to buy more Mahogany models, but those guys aren't nearly as common as the Rosewood model players. I've always been of the opinion that Mahogany has a tone that is thick and aggressive while offering a cool dryness to the sound that Rosewood isn't capable of. Regardless of what a builder tries to add to their reputation through boasting the ability to coax any sound from any wood, there are just certain things that can be gotten from specific woods and others that just can't be coaxed out of their counterparts. Some people understand and appreciate the diffeence and that's why Mahogany has reamined one of the most popular and common back and side woods in the guitar industry. What Mahogany brings to the tonal table cannot be duplicated using any of the Rosewoods just as it can't deliver what the Rosewoods can. It is a much more valuable wood than it is typically credited as. The Mahogany top provides a thump that is inique and powerful while not darkening the voice of the guitar too much. The ones that I've built have been perfect for solo play as well as being able to create a thick orchestra like blanket of sound when used to accompany vocals. You won't be sorry that you built it after you pull those strings tight and hear that first chord. Regards, Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars [/QUOTE] 
Colin |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|