Official Luthiers Forum!

I wanted to know if people like Olson or Ryan thickness the top/back/side differently per guitar as well as tweaking the bracing pattern and the bracing shape for each guitar to meet certain "voicing"?

Or are they more like Taylor guitars where they pre-shape the bracing and top to certain thickness and then put it together?

It seems that people like Ryan and Olson automates much of the process (which is great) and puts out a lot of guitar per year. I am trying to figure out exactly what process are automated and what process are not.

In your case, what part/pocess is "hand built" to make sure that the voicing comes out the way you want, and what part/process is build like a "factory"? 

I am assuming things like neck and finishing can be built in an automated fashion, but the thickness of the back/top and the bracing pattern/shape has to be changed for every guitar you build to achieve the best tone?

For what it's worth, when I talked with Jim Olson about 5 years ago he did not tune each top. He has spent many years coming up with his sound and generally, he can get that with each guitar he builds. I asked him if he tapped each top during all the top building stages and he said not really.

He told me that he runs them through the sander to a specific thickness (depending on the material) and flexes the tops to make sure they are stiff enough. Than he pre shapes his bracing and glues it on. He said that he will tap each top to make sure it sounds similar to "his sound" and just keeps on building.

Don't know what Kevin Ryan does, but I bet it's something similar.

On the other hand, once you've built as many guitars as these guys, how much time would it take to really fine tune a top.

I once read that Dana Bourgeois takes about 5-10 mins (maybe John Mayes can verify) to fine tune a top once it's glued to the rims, so it really doesn't take much effort once the experience level has gotten you "almost" there.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

With variance in body styles, cutaway, custom inlays, etc.... but I would agree with you Todd, that many of his tasks are production line like.

For Jim, the Fadal CNC would be helpful to pump out 60+ guitars a year.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

I'm sure I've pointed this out before but I just love the way language adapts and develops. Manufacture comes from the Latin manus factore which translates as "made by hand"

_________________
Dave White
De Faoite Stringed Instruments
". . . the one thing a machine just can't do is give you character and personalities and sometimes that comes with flaws, but it always comes with humanity" Monty Don talking about hand weaving, "Mastercrafts", Weaving, BBC March 2010

Dave, that mot is as bon as they come!

The perennial debate about the relative merits of "factory" vs "hand-made" is always a circular chase.

The main thing that differentiates between what we think of as "factory" guitars and "hand-made" guitars is the amount of care and hands-on attention that goes into each of them.

All the rest is semantics.

_________________
D..

I was told that Santa Cruz voices each top by a SCGC dealer. Do you know if that is true or not? For production line guitars, that must get pretty expensive, but their prices is not that expensive (compared to comparable Martin, Taylor, Huss and Dalton, Collings and etc) 

I wonder if there are small scale (50-100 guitars a year) builders who can voice each top/back while still staying in business? If so, they must charge a ton of money for each?  

I don't want this thread to become "factory" vs "hand made" discussion. That is not the intent.

However, I did assume (naively I guess) that most of high-end luthier would "voice" each guitar by hand/machine/monkey, so the outcome of the "tone" is consistent.

Using the same thickness, and same bracing shape is what factories like Martin and Taylor does, and they don't seem to produce tone that are consistent across the guitars (the physical product itself is very consistent, but not the tone).

How do you guys build? Assuming your experimental phase is over, do you try to voice each guitar in some manner to get the results you are looking for?

[QUOTE=microsmurf] ......Using the same thickness, and same bracing shape is what factories like Martin and Taylor does, and they don't seem to produce tone that are consistent across the guitars.......[/QUOTE] When you make 80,000 guitars per year, you will have a lot of variation in wood.
I suspect James Olson is either able to choose wood to his liking, or has a stash of very similar wood, and that is how how is able to maintain consistent. Once he is happy with the design of his product, making small numbers of duplicates is pretty easy.

That's just my guess, i could be totally off.
YMMV

_________________
"An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered." G. K. Chesterton.

[QUOTE=microsmurf]

Using the same thickness, and same bracing shape is what factories like Martin and Taylor does, and they don't seem to produce tone that are consistent across the guitars (the physical product itself is very consistent, but not the tone).

How do you guys build? Assuming your experimental phase is over, do you try to voice each guitar in some manner to get the results you are looking for?

[/QUOTE]

Understand that a factory operates under an entirely different philosophy than artisans do.

In a factory the bell curve takes hold. The vast majority of guitars are going to be "pretty good" (however they define it), a few will really suck, and a few will be great (imagine the extremes in the bell curve). This variance is due to the differences in the materials from guitar to guitar, despite precise machining. If you are building 5,000 - 1^100 guitars per year this is a good way to go. Then you work to raise the bar on what "pretty good" means. Bob Taylor has done a great job with this - IMNSHO he is a real innovator and someone who has done a lot for the industry.

Whereas, small builders operate under the philosophy that EVERY guitar needs to be to the HIGH end of pretty good, to excellent. That is part of the reason customers turn to individual luthiers. If ANY guitar gets out of our shops that "suck" it is going to damage our reputation, so care must be taken with each instrument. I think guys like Kevin and Jim are not immune to these market forces. Their reputation is on the line with every guitar that goes out with their name on it.

So from that perspective they are still artisans, regardless their production method. My guess is they have a minimum expectation for every guitar and if it doesn't pass muster it doesn't find its way into a clients hands without first being corrected - or rebuilt.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

I would not consider them factory at all. Having an apprentice or some other person in shop would probably not fall in "factory". The small factory or manfg would be Bourgeois, Collings, McPherson, Santa Cruz etc. Small 1-3 person shop is not that. We do 30 or more a year and by no means are we a factory in the basement and garage of Bills home.

If the Taylor/Martin is making the guitar per physical spec (thickness and shape), then the end results will be a "production line or factory" like guitars, falling in under the bell curve.

If an "artisan" makes a guitar per physical spec (thickness and shape), then his guitar will also fall under the bell curve.

In fact, there is a higher chance that Taylor has a better shape bell curve than an "artisan" would be, because they have a lot more control and automation in place to ensure quality (or consistency). 

Again, how do artisans (olson, ryan, etc) or how do YOU ensure that you have consistent quality, if you are building it per spec? By pure statistics Taylor will build better guitar than you do, becasue they can play "build per spec" game better than you.

To me only way to out smart Taylor is doing eihter:

1. Change shape/bracing/thickness of every guitar to ensure the same output in tone

2. anything that falls below average gets thrown away (or fix it. But fixing it would be #1 option above)

Either option above gets expensive, if you are trying to make a living building guitars and you need to pump out 50+ guitars by 1 or 2 people.

Jim uses his cnc mostly to make the jigs, fixtures etc so all of his building stays consistant from what i have heard. the small shop folks do each guitar and get the results by taking time and effort on each one. I have had some factory guitars and they are good, but I have found some defects in them also. don't know how to tell you, but small builder with name and consistant good product will make as good and my opinion better guitars going out of their shops. if one want the factory they should go for that, but i think they are missing out on some great small shop instruments. many right here

[QUOTE=microsmurf]

If the Taylor/Martin is making the guitar per physical spec (thickness and shape), then the end results will be a "production line or factory" like guitars, falling in under the bell curve.

If an "artisan" makes a guitar per physical spec (thickness and shape), then his guitar will also fall under the bell curve.

In fact, there is a higher chance that Taylor has a better shape bell curve than an "artisan" would be, because they have a lot more control and automation in place to ensure quality (or consistency). 

Again, how do artisans (olson, ryan, etc) or how do YOU ensure that you have consistent quality, if you are building it per spec? By pure statistics Taylor will build better guitar than you do, becasue they can play "build per spec" game better than you.

To me only way to out smart Taylor is doing eihter:

1. Change shape/bracing/thickness of every guitar to ensure the same output in tone

2. anything that falls below average gets thrown away (or fix it. But fixing it would be #1 option above)

Either option above gets expensive, if you are trying to make a living building guitars and you need to pump out 50+ guitars by 1 or 2 people.

[/QUOTE]

It seems like you have multiple thoughts working at once. 1) What is a manufacturer 2) How do individual builders do it

First, I do each one by hand, and a lot of individual builders do, but some build to spec. So does that make them a manufacturer? Not necessarily.

I think the main difference is at Taylor, Martin, Gibson, or any big manufacturer there is no ONE PERSON who owns the responsibility of each guitar sounding good and being a testiment to their name. True enough, all of these firms may turn out a very fine product but the individual builder must hold himself to a higher standard.

Every guitar must meet the expectations of the builder and the customer. Small builders have the opportunity to spend the time with the instrument regardless of how it was made to ensure that it measures up. If it fails they have the opportunity (responsibility?) to fix it or scrap it before it goes out the door.

So even though the process may be similar, I think the philosophy may be what holds the key to who is and who isn't a manufacturer.

But this is ultimately musing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is an interesting question, but one not likely to produce any significant answers.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

[QUOTE=microsmurf]

To me only way to out smart Taylor is doing eihter:

1. Change shape/bracing/thickness of every guitar to ensure the same output in tone

2. anything that falls below average gets thrown away (or fix it. But fixing it would be #1 option above)

Either option above gets expensive, if you are trying to make a living building guitars and you need to pump out 50+ guitars by 1 or 2 people.

[/QUOTE]


one obvious way to out smart Taylor in it?s own game is to come up with better specs. That is what for example McPherson seems to be trying to do, or that is at least how it looks like to me from the detail pictures they have in their website. I may be wrong though. Maybe John can clear if there is individual attention payed to the instruments or is it a spec game?

[QUOTE=microsmurf] I was told that Santa Cruz voices each top by a SCGC dealer. Do you know if that is true or not? For production line guitars, that must get pretty expensive, but their prices is not that expensive (compared to comparable Martin, Taylor, Huss and Dalton, Collings and etc) [/QUOTE]

I did a tour of SCGC last year and at that time they had one guy who's sole job was brace shaping and voiciing.

[QUOTE=Brock Poling]
But this is ultimately musing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is an interesting question, but one not likely to produce any significant answers.
[/QUOTE]

My original question has been answered. People like Olson do not necessarily voice each guitar, but really build it per spec. I am now realizing that there is a market for this kind of guitars (but you need a good reputation to do so).

As noted above, I naively thought ALL the custom/hand-build/CNC luthier was different from a "factory" (such as Taylor, Gibson, Martin and etc) because each instrument was tweaked until it met the tone requirement. However, that is not the case it seems.

Here is how I would break down the builder categories (ignore the naming convention):

1. “Custom hand built” builder - each guitar is unique (not just different purfling or wood selection), but the design is made to suit the player's need exactly. I think luthier in this category is few and far between.

2. "Hand built" builder - build limited models, and allows some variations (decorations, wood selection changes) within that. However, each guitar is voiced individually during the build process to ensure the consistent tone. I think many of us belong to this category?

3. "Production Line Hand built" builder - same as #2 above, but does not voice each guitars during the build process, but might touch up afterwards to make a “bad” one “better”. It sounds like Olson and Ryan like people falls under here (we could be wrong however).

4. "Factory built but with individual attention" manufacture - Maybe Santa Cruz falls under this. They build it per spec, but do individual voicing for each guitar. Very similar to #2, but in much higher scale.

5. "Factory production line built" manufacture - Built per spec, and no individual voicing. I am assuming people like Martin and Taylor falls under here. Very similar to #3, but in much higher scale.

If I were to start a guitar business, I would exclude group 1 & 5 because it will be tough to survive in that category (existing players, or demand too low).

 

Yeah, I would pretty much agree with your breakdown. I think a common lexicon would be good, but I don't think we are likely to ever agree on a common usage of terms. But I do think the way you stratify them make sense.

But with respect to starting a business.... I think you will starve with choices 1 - 5    However, I think #1 is a viable option. There are a lot of guys in this category that we would call the "mega" boutique builders. Some get $10k - $20k per guitar. Clearly you can't start out at those prices, but it isn't a bad goal to aspire to.

I think regardless of the choice of segment, the trick becomes selling everything you can produce and then some.

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

I don't know about Jim Olson, but since he and Kevin have been friends forever I'd assume their methods are at least similar. Kevin does pay attention to each top, individually. I'm not sure exactly how much of his process he wants out there, but it's mostly physical testing and he tends to avoid subjective testing. One thing I remember him saying last time we spoke was that he can't afford to make a poor guitar.

_________________
Bob Garrish
Former Canonized Purveyor of Fine CNC Luthier Services