| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Question before starting 2nd guitar http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=7802 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm beggining my second guitar, I was going to use EIR but I discovered that you can't buy a rough stock board of EIR. So I'm going to use the four boards in the picture, gaboon ebony, honduras rosewood, span cedar, and western red cedar. 
One thing I didn't like on my first guitar was the string clearance on the head. I think they are too close, there should be more clearance, the e-strings have less than a mm clearance. Any ideas on how increase this? My scarf is 14 degrees. 
Thanks Marc |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Marc, if you put the nut on the surface of the headstock instead of the surface of the fingerboard. This will require you to angle the bottom of the nut at the 14? you are using but will move it back by 1/4" or so, so it will give you more clearance. |
|
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks Paul, I see how that would work, is this commonly done? |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually it might be more common than not. A LOT of people put the nut on the head stock surface. So it is definatly not a bush league fix. |
|
| Author: | John Elshaw [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi Marc, I'm sitting here looking at 4 different classical guitars, specifically comparing them to your scarf joint. Yours looks to be a bit more than 14 degrees, possibly closer to 18 or 20. Is it possible that your joint got off a bit when you were sanding the edges smooth before glue-up? Another thought, did you go back and take additional material off the face of the neck before adding the fingerboard and headstock veneer? That won't change the angle, but it will make your nut sit lower. I'm not trying to criticize, just some things to think about. Cheers! John |
|
| Author: | CarltonM [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Many classical builders use a 12 deg. angle. Remember, due to the string rollers being lower than the surface of the headstock, the actual string angle is greater than the headstock angle. I don't think you really need more than 12 deg. for good sound. |
|
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=John Elshaw] Hi Marc, I'm sitting here looking at 4 different classical guitars, specifically comparing them to your scarf joint. Yours looks to be a bit more than 14 degrees, possibly closer to 18 or 20. Is it possible that your joint got off a bit when you were sanding the edges smooth before glue-up? Another thought, did you go back and take additional material off the face of the neck before adding the fingerboard and headstock veneer? That won't change the angle, but it will make your nut sit lower. I'm not trying to criticize, just some things to think about. Cheers! John [/QUOTE] Thanks John, I realize you're not criticizing but honestly criticism is welcome and appreciated, I won't improve nearly as fast without it. I'm totally open to criticism or any observation or suggestion. Actually, it is 14 degrees, maybe 14.5, I've remeasured several times trying to figure this out. It must just appear like more from the photo. Yes, I did take additional material off the face of the neck before adding the fingerboard and veneer. I did this to acheive a neck taper. But, I then just make the nut tall enough for the correct string action. The headstock is 20.3 mm thick, perhaps a little too thick? It seems like the headstock should have a mm taken off the top and put on the back, maintaining the same thickness but reducing height of the face below the fingerboard more. Does that make sense? |
|
| Author: | burbank [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Make the slots longer? Or can the tuners be mounted a bit further up (away from the nut) on the headstock? |
|
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Moving them up is a good suggestion, the original holes were drilled for traditional tuners with lyres, so they wouldn't go higher, however these tuners could have gone much higher. Thanks |
|
| Author: | TonyKarol [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think as well a lot of your issue is due to the layers of veneer and headplate thickness - look how deep the nut slot is on the headstock side - if you only had a 70-80 thou headplate, even with your angle it woudl be a lot different. |
|
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=TonyKarol] I think as well a lot of your issue is due to the layers of veneer and headplate thickness - look how deep the nut slot is on the headstock side - if you only had a 70-80 thou headplate, even with your angle it woudl be a lot different.[/QUOTE] I think your exactly right, but if I reduced my headplate to 70 thousands I would only be 18 mm thick total on my head, too thin for the tunners. Seems like I need more thickness on the bottom of the head. |
|
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Hesh1956] Paul is right that it's a toss up if the nut is on the fretboard plane or the headstock. The majority of the guitars I have built have been on the headstock. I like the look of the angled nut. But I have also made them with the nut on the fretboard plane. If you do move to the headstock plane for the nut plan ahead and know that you fretboard will now be closer to the headstock by the width of the nut and off the body by the same amount all things being equal.[/QUOTE] Thanks Hesh, I don't doubt you and Paul are both correct and putting the nut on the head plane is probably the best solution and more than likely what I will do, but I'm still convinced that I've done something incorrect with my first build that has another fix. I should be able to have the nut on the plane of the neck with a 14 degree scarf and a 20 mm thick head and still of a few mm clearance for the strings. Right? |
|
| Author: | Marc [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Pwoolson] So it is definatly not a bush league fix. [/QUOTE] Paul, I apoligize for any unanticipated implications, my questions emerge out of my own ignorance. |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Marc] [QUOTE=Pwoolson] So it is definatly not a bush league fix. [/QUOTE] Paul, I apoligize for any unanticipated implications, my questions emerge out of my own ignorance.[/QUOTE] No implications implied at all. I just wanted to make sure that you didn't think this was a band-aid type fix. As I've said, you'll probably find as many if not more nuts on the headstock plane as on the FB plane. I've done it both ways and prefer the look of the angled bottom of the nut on the headstock plane. Keep in mind that you are essentially shortening the neck by 1/4" because you are moving everything up by the width of the nut. Make sure you have that planned before you cut the heal or it will end up too small. |
|
| Author: | Michael McBroom [ Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Marc, Placing the nut on the headstock veneer is common practice with steel-strings, but I personally have never seen a classical with a nut installed in that fashion. Not saying it hasn't been done, but it is uncommon. I would recommend that you stick with tradition and continue to do as you did with your first. It is hard to tell from your photo regarding the clearance issue. Are you referring to the clearance between the strings and the relief ramp carved into the headstock at the bottom of the tuner slots? The relief between the strings and the veneer at the nut should be way more than 1mm. If the ramp does not extend far enough toward the nut, this might be your problem. I build classicals with a 15 deg scarf angle, and have run into an occasional situation where I didn't extend the ramp far enough and had to go back and carve it out a bit more. As long as the strings are not touching, however, I haven't worried about the amount of clearance. Best, Michael |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|