Official Luthiers Forum!

Hello all --

I'm zeroing in on my next build, and I'm upping the ante a bit -- I'm going to attempt my first venetian cutaway with my Blues Creek side bender that should be arriving very soon. Woo-hoo! I've got some practice wood I plan to use before I tackle the gorgeous koa I just procured from Bob at the swap.

First question -- am I insane, or completely naiive to be trying this with koa my first time?

Secondly, I had pretty much made up my mind I wanted to do an SJ, but seeing the plans here for both the SJ and MJ got me to wondering -- what are the differences between the two? Is it merely a slight difference in body size, or is it more than that?

If anyone has images of their MJ's, I'd love to see em.

Whichever one I go with, I plan to alter the lower bout to waist recurve a bit to "slim it down" a little. I feel that would be more aesthetically pleasing to my eye.

Thanks for any input.

Ken

_________________
Mountain Song Guitars www.mountainsongguitars.com

Here are the basic spec drawings



Both are about the same length, The SJ is a 15 1/2"very round lower bout and 4 1/2" deep. The MJ is 16-1/4" lower bout 4-3/4" deep with a more voluptuous shape.

I designed the SJ to be cross between a jumbo and an OM and suited well for finger style play but still have the voice for flat picking. The MJ was designed to be a bigger sound but still be versatile.

Aha... Thanks for the clarification, Michael. I mistakenly thought MJ stood for mini jumbo -- thought I'd seen that somewhere. Dream Guitars, perhaps? Anyway, the MJ is definitely more the shape I'm after -- beautiful design, btw, but I'm still interested in the smaller size of the SJ.

Now I'm really torn. Would there be any downside tonally to using the MJ shape on the SJ size? Of course, it'd have less bottom end, but probably still a bit fuller than an OM?

_________________
Mountain Song Guitars www.mountainsongguitars.com

Some may build a mini Jumbo and call it a MJ. I had assumed you were referring to the plans I have donated to the forums library of plans. Many shapes and dimensions are referred to as SJ and MJ by many builders. Martin jumbos have a more Dreadnaught shape, Gibson Jumbos ie J200 have a more curved shape. Confusing I know.

Down side to MJ is you can't lay back in your recliner and comfortably play it due to the large lower bout like you can with the SJ or an OM

The MJ is just an SJ on Prozac.

Not Prozac, Steroids! Congress is calling for a hearing to investigate unfair completive advantage over smaller body guitars

I didn't know what you meant by "MJ." But now I get it: both SJ and MJ are abbreviated oxymorons. What's next, a JP?

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

OK I'll bite JP?

One of the Aussie luthiers has a "PJ" as one of his models. Petite Jumbo. A clever oxymoron, I think.

Dennis

_________________
Dennis Leahy
Duluth, MN, USA
7th Sense Multimedia

Jumbo Parlor.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

I build the PJ, but I'm really liking that JP Howard.

_________________
Allen R. McFarlen
Barron River Guitars & Ukuleles
Facebook
Cairns, Australia

GOOD ONE

how about a modified dred similar to the one Ervin builds?...same amount of volume with a slight narrower waist for players who sit

Sooo, any thoughts on Michael's MJ shape superimposed on an SJ size? I'm planning to use koa b&s with an adirondack top with this. I believe this will be a good combo, but might the materials combined with the body style wind up a little on the snappy, bright side?

It's important to mention this will be mostly strummed and flatpicked, at least for the next ten years or so.

_________________
Mountain Song Guitars www.mountainsongguitars.com

I used to have real issues with terms SJ/MJ! This was because I didn't really recognise, as others had, that the proportion of bouts to waist and length was distinctive in the jumbo compared to smaller guitars! After recognizing this and seeing that I really liked, not just the size of the jumbo, but the shape too, I am much more comfortable with the terms.

I guess it would be somewhat analogous to,... God forbid,.... shrinking down a dreadalot and calling it an SD! I really, really hope this doesn't give anybody any bad ideas!

_________________
Billy Dean Thomas
Covina, CA

"Multi famam, conscientiam, pauci verentur."
(Many fear their reputation, few their conscience)

I guess using the nautical context of the name dreadnaught we can the extrapolate that a scaled down dreadnaught would either be a destroyer of Cruiser. Right?

Man Michael! Let's just let this "Cruiser" concept die! I got this really creepy feeling right now!

_________________
Billy Dean Thomas
Covina, CA

"Multi famam, conscientiam, pauci verentur."
(Many fear their reputation, few their conscience)