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

All Rosewood guitar
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=9129		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  af_one [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:34 am ]
Post subject: 
I didn't want to hijack MP's thread, but I saw there was work done on an all roseood build--that struck a nerve with me--Why haven't I seen one before or heard of one?? Is it not a good idea? Anyone built one, if so, whats the sound??
This could get interesting.
Author:  Alain Desforges [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:49 am ]
Post subject: 
Funny you should start a thread on that subject. I was thinking the very same thing yesterday.

You have all Koa, all mahogany... Why have I never heard of an all-rosewood?

I think I'm going to try one just for the fun of it...
Author:  Chris Cordle [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:55 am ]
Post subject: 
My instructor, Robert Sayers, told me of an all-rosewood guitar he built once
and he said it was simply unremarkable. He used a rosewood bridge, bridge
plate, back & sides and fretboard with a sitka top. He said it just kind of
muddied up and sounded like a bunch of mid range crud.

I know a buddy of mine is currently building the same recipe with the
addition of a rosewood neck as well. Robert tried to talk him out of it but
you can only lead a horse to water.

Then again, maybe some folks here have had some success with it.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 6:14 am ]
Post subject: 
Bruce actualy had blans to build the one I rendered but I guess that went by the way side. I would suspect that the tone would be very tinty and some what muddy
Author:  Serge Poirier [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 9:33 am ]
Post subject: 
I'd go with all koa anytime as it was proven by others to have great sound but i have a gut feeling that using all rosewood would not give satisfying results, don't know, maybe like Michael said, muddy tone, perhaps because of the oil in the rosewood?
Author:  Shane Neifer [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
My thoughts are that it is just too dense. A top needs to MOVE, there is a reason they use this stuff for fretboards!

Just my thoughts

Shane
Author:  TimDet [ Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
ditto
Author:  crazymanmichael [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:23 am ]
Post subject: 
rw b&s, with rw fb, bridge plate, bridge and sitka top is probably the recipe for a more great guitars than any other i can think of. if that one was muddy, etc., look for the cause in the way it was built and the quality of materials, particularly the top, not the combination of materials used.
Author:  Don Williams [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:33 am ]
Post subject: 
Well, since nobody has done it, there's no way to really know what kind of results there could be with a rosewood top. As when Bruce Dickey was thinking of trying it, you just have to try and see. I'm guessing you would want that top pretty thin though.
Author:  Dave White [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 4:30 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Don Williams] Well, since nobody has done it, there's no way to really know what kind of results there could be with a rosewood top.[/QUOTE]

In Andy Manson's book "Talking Wood - a guitar maker's diary" there is this:

"Bill tells me he's been sitting all morning playing Charlie's Flamenco guitar. Says he can't resist it. A guitar with voice. It's a wierd one, the back's half Rio rosewood, half cedar, and one of the sides is Indian rosewood, the other cedar. Reminds me a bit of the guitar I saw at Frankfurt a few years back made by Bernabe in Spain. The back and sides were spruce, the soundboard was Indian rosewood. Sounded great."

That was the diary entry for 21st May 1996. Not all rosewood but a rosewood top and from the description a classical guitar as well.
Author:  Mattia Valente [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:22 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=uncleshish] My instructor, Robert Sayers, told me of an all-rosewood guitar he built once
and he said it was simply unremarkable. He used a rosewood bridge, bridge
plate, back & sides and fretboard with a sitka top. He said it just kind of
muddied up and sounded like a bunch of mid range crud.

I know a buddy of mine is currently building the same recipe with the
addition of a rosewood neck as well. Robert tried to talk him out of it but
you can only lead a horse to water.

Then again, maybe some folks here have had some success with it.[/QUOTE]

That's a regular rosewood guitar, and one of my fave combos; rosewood bridge, fingerboard, back/sides, but a non-Sitka top (Euro, f'r instance). Muddy isn't what I'd use to describe it....
Author:  CarltonM [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:16 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Don Williams] Well, since nobody has done it, there's no way to really know what kind of results there could be with a rosewood top.[/QUOTE]
Hmm...how about a quartered rosewood veneer/Nomex double top? Might mitigate the "harshness" that's often attributed to double tops, while still being very responsive.
Author:  bbeardb [ Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:39 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Dave White]
In Andy Manson's book "Talking Wood - a guitar maker's diary" there is this:

"Bill tells me he's been sitting all morning playing Charlie's Flamenco guitar. Says he can't resist it. A guitar with voice. It's a wierd one, the back's half Rio rosewood, half cedar, and one of the sides is Indian rosewood, the other cedar. Reminds me a bit of the guitar I saw at Frankfurt a few years back made by Bernabe in Spain. The back and sides were spruce, the soundboard was Indian rosewood. Sounded great."

That was the diary entry for 21st May 1996. Not all rosewood but a rosewood top and from the description a classical guitar as well.[/QUOTE]

I've been thinking about trying that. Half rosewood back and alaskan yellow cedar, do the same for the sides, one of each. And then you could go crazy and do half cedar half spruce top, and make two guitars, in an exact mirror image of eachother. In fact, I really wanted to do that, but I figured I would copy a couple Torres guitars frist.bbeardb39024.7369560185
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/