Official Luthiers Forum!

This is a resurrected build from a start almost a year ago with some pretty fancy white oak with "comb" figure.
I had originally built it with a ladder top, but rebuilt it with Larson laminated bracing when an oak guitar was commissioned by our old friend, Dakota Dave Hull.
So, here is the old back with laminated bracing.



Closeup of the comb figure.



Here is the new top with bloodwood/holly/black purfling.

[


Larson X bracing glued on with a 10' cylindrical radius. Note the very wide X compared to Martin or Gibson. Lamination is red spruce/BRW.



Completed Larson style bracing. Deviations are the soundhole doubler and popsicle brace. Also note the square tone bars. Bridge patch is BRW.



Dave likes a bit of red on his guitars, so we did a simplified purfling. Here is the binding and purfling going in. The black stripe on the ribs and back are for ease of scraping the binding after filling and dying.





Box ready for dovetail and neck.



Thanks for looking!

Haans always a pleasure looking at your builds.

_________________
久保
美智え

Does GC stand for Grand Concert?

Howdy Haans,

Another beauty. I was wondering about two things...

1) The laminated X Brace, is that traditional Larson style or something you do for added strength? How do you feel it differs from your non laminated X braces?

2) I've noticed most of your tops seem to fly in the face of what people are going for esthetically these days (lots of hard grain lines, wide grained, colour etc). Do you choose them for stiffness alone, to get a vintage look or is it simply that cleaner looking red spruce is unavailable these days? Anyhow, I like seeing them as its a nice change. I have a red spruce OM size top I plan on using once it's seasoned that's very similar to what's pictured here.

Thanks guys!
Kent, GC does stand for grand concert, a 15" box.
Murray, Larson's invented the laminated X brace. Think it is more for tone production than strength. I don't use anything but laminated X bracing, but I think it is less "muddy" sounding than Martin or Gibson style, but not quite as clear sounding as ladder bracing.
I have never like the looks of "Wonderbread or whitebread" tops. They just look to sterile to me. I like tops with a little more character, and the "compression grain" is in tradition for the instruments I build. I do have some rather stiff tops, but I don't like to speculate on what it does for tone. Really don't build by numbers...more by feel.
Glad to see a few folks using traditional looking tops. I love "flying in the face of what others are doing aesthetically". Not much for "modern guitars".

Here's the neck blanked out and glued up.



I thought about a white oak P/H, but decided to go with ebony and just a logo.

Exactly my feeling!!!

Thanks for all your kind words...
Wish I had time to post more photos, but just haven't done much in the building dept.
Have been doing a massive late spring cleaning in the shop, getting out the 10 year old dust in the corners, etc. and a little re-organizing. Should be done in a week or so and then back to building.
I do have 2 guitars in the spray booth, but nothing of interest to show yet...

Beautiful craftsmanship Hans! Your bracing looks super clean and very, very well done. What is the laminate for the bracing?

Thanks, Hesh, I normally use Wenge as it's relatively cheap, rings like a bell when dropped on the table saw and I love the splinters, but used BRW for this one. Larson's used just about everything including metal!
Got to do something with all that worthless BRW...

Glued on the F/B today after using the Luthier Tools neck jig to cut the dovetail. Reduced an all day job with the Stew Mac jigs to less than an hour!
I had spent a time familiarizing myself with the jig, and it looked pretty straight forward. I'll skip the dirty messy shots and show you the basic operation.
You anchor the arm with dial caliper and first calibrate the arm to the neck plate with a simple "T" shaped straightedge with a couple of holes drilled for the T/R pins. Here you see the straightedge going in with the top hole and a pin on the main plate.
Then the Dial indicator is centered on the line and zero'd out.





Now the jig is ready for the box. A box jig is clamped to the body and centered.



Then the dovetail template is put in and routed.



The box jig and body are attached to the neck jig by a couple of alignment pins. The dail indicator is checked for zero and then I dialed in .065" and tightened the jig up.



Here is the knob that dials the angle in, and on the left you can see the clamp to tighten it up after adjusting.



Box jig and body are removed and the male dovetail template is set into the neck jig, Neck is clamped in and routed.
Very accurate results with this jig and the neck sat less than 1/16" off the top when finished with the routing. A few swipes with my dovetail sanding stick and it dropped right in. I was amazed that in chalking the dovetail and fitting the neck, the chalk was all over the male part evenly on both sides. It just flat works perfectly.
Glued on the fingerboard and it's just about set for carving...

Great jig! I'll have to my first dovetail when I try to build what, for you is a classic design, and what to me is a "Haans design" in a few guitars time! (Not sure which one I'm going to attempt yet, I keep changing my mind! Ladder braced parlour with wide purfling anyway!)

May I ask what your thoughts are on the use of the square tonebars and the square ends of the finger braces and soundhole braces? Is it just following the original design? I've been thinking about in-letting all my braces into each other on my next build so that they are all "one unit" so it intrigues me to see relatively "independent" braces.

Thanks in advance, Haans!
Nick

Thanks Nick!
Just following the original design (for a change). So many different pieces to a guitar that you can't point to something and say "This makes that."
I let the main X into the kerf and sometimes the tone bars, but nothing else. Don't see any advantage to insetting all the braces into each other. As far as the square tone bars, worked for me. My rule runs along the lines of if it works...
Let me say at this point that I build traditional instruments for the traditional sound. Always looking for that tone and always trying different things to improve that tonality without losing sight of the sound.
I had a visit from another builder from another state (name and state kept private) last Friday, and while he was interested in ladder bracing, confessed that when tapping on my guitars, he didn't understand it at all. I said that I could understand that considering he was building "Son of Irvin" type guitars and mostly used Englemann spruce. Now, that is a far reach from what I am doing.
Point being, there are completely different worlds out there tonewise. Like a bowlback mandolin compared to a Loar. One is not better than the other, they are just different.
I couldn't tell you what insetting the braces would do tonewise. However, if that is what you want to do, have a go. I think experimentation is the only way to learn. As far as making it stronger or able to stand the test of time, lots of old guitars are still around today. Who knows???
Some folks think that leaving the inside rough with sawcuts, glue drips and such makes the guitar. Fine with me...

Fascinating words, Haans I always love hearing about various build philosophies from those who are experienced with them.

For me, notching braces together is a technique for thin plate building. e.g. if you have a .115" plate, and a tone bar meeting the X at zero height, the plate itself is still going to be pretty stiff, and all is well. But on a .095" plate, then you need to notch that tone bar at .020" height to get the same stiffness at the meeting point. Maybe even higher, to account for the effects of the surrounding plate stiffness as well.

And the square tone bars should be a bit heavier than triangular, but braces don't weight much anyway, so even in Somogyi/Gore/Gilet style thinking, I wouldn't fear doing it on just two of them like that

I like the laminate braces. I've been thinking about trying that, more for creep resistance than anything.

I'd love to tap on some of your guitars as well And flex unbraced and braced plates. One of my goals in building is to develop a feel for both modern thin plate and traditional thick plate building styles, so I can freely blend between them. My current theory is that thin plate style is best suited to large guitars, and thick plate style to small guitars. And the string-height-at-bridge is an underappreciated variable to push the tone even further. Have you ever tried using lower string height, to allow for lower total stiffness on a small guitar?

Dennis, I agree with you. It is so much more interesting to hear about folks different building styles than to debate the future of BRW, or which bandsaw is the best.
One of my pursuits has always been to make instruments that are on the thicker side. I have always felt that the tone is in the wood, not the shavings or dust on the floor. When I built mandolins exclusively, they were always thicker than most folks were building them. Always seemed to have a fatter tone than most others. Never have felt that building on the edge of collapse was the way to get the tone I wanted. But, today is the day of instant gratification, and lots of players buy with that in mind.
The thinner you make a top, the more it sounds like cardboard in my opinion. It looses it's identity and sounds more like every other spruce. Never much concerned with weight, so, .115 tops with proper bracing are more in my line of thinking. Folks think I am nuts when I tell them my 12's are up to .160 or so. I have made a few thin topped guitars and they aren't my cup of tea, so to speak. You also have to remember the bracing. Ladder braced guitars just are built heavier, tops need to be thicker.
I experimented a lot with bridge height with mandolins and some with guitars, but not enough. Now that I have the "dial a height" dovetail jig, I may do more with that interesting idea. I do know that there is an optimum height for different builds, and too high can be just as bad as too low. The top has to be driven just right to work properly.
I don't weigh anything anymore. Not important to me, but might be doing it unconsciously, who knows. I just don't haul out the scale and weigh bridges or braces. I drop them on a table saw and listen.
I don't flex things much anymore either, rely on tapping mostly. When I showed that visiting builder my tapping device, he laughed, but, I've been using it for years. It's a wooden handled bridge pin reamer held by the tip! I've got to the point where I can tell when the sound is right with that technical device...
Some may laugh at my technic, some my think my non tech building is missing the whole idea of building instruments, but. experience is a valid way of learning, and the best way I can think of.

I am changing the title of this topic to just include all of my builds.
Here are some photos of guitars on the bench. I have Dakota Dave Hull's white oak GC-6, a white oak parlor, and a GC-12 in Honduras that has been sitting around for a couple of years waiting for the neck.



In the background you can see the BRW ladder GC that is almost ready to final sand and buff and the new F5 mandolin ready to sand.

Here is the peghead to the new GC-12. I decided on a 25" scale. I have been trying to make shorter pegheads for 12's so they don't look so unbalanced.





Here is the purfling for this instrument. It is one of the toughest purflings I have ever done as the herringbone is split and the side without inside stripe is used. There is a tendency for this stuff to fall apart just looking at it.

Here's the start of another GC-6 white oak/red spruce.
I've spent lots of time researching a new Larson purfling, and while it is not exactly the same, it is very close and different enough for my own satisfaction. Instead of using dyed veneers, the red, white and orange are bloodwood, holly and osage.
This one is slated for Schoenberg's.






Thanks for looking...

Gorgeous purfling, as always!

You continue to inspire others Haans.

_________________
Doug

Don't let fear or common sense stop you from trying to build something

Thanks guys!
Really hoping to make this one look like the old ones. Instead of blocks of holly that I normally use, I cut the holly into veneers and glued it all up to give the tiny variations in grain and color with all the little glue joint variation too.

Meanwhile, back at the finished end of the shop...
My new BRW GC-6 Larsonesque style with laminated Stella ladder bracing...





















Here's a clip of Dave Hull playing it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUom7ZcMzFw

Thanks for looking, folks!

Hanna, that's gorgeous!! What did you use for the binding and tail graft?

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

Thanks, Steve, the binding and butt wedge are .090" ivoroid with BWB purfling.

I have some of the ivoroid binding but have not used it yet. Glad to see how good it looks on a finished guitar.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

Steve, it looks better than when photographed. Tends to look too washed out because of all cameras inabilities to cover a large ranges of light and dark.
Here is a new Stelle Auditorium 12 string that I finished a couple of weeks ago. Scale is 26.22" and strings are .070-.018. Instrument can tune to A, B flat and B.













Dave Hull is not a 12 string player, but offered to give it a spin...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAW3RikQSDQ

Has a room filling, jangly old time sound.


Here are a few photos of the start of a BBQ Bob Stella Grand Concert 12 in white oak. The first is the size comparison with the Auditorium mold...