Plywood for first guitar/prototype?
GarageGuitar
L-5 sized hollowbody electric I own. Before I lay out real cash for
quality tonewoods, I'd like to get some practice and experience
working with less expensive woods, and was wondering if cheap 1/8'
pllywood from the lumber yard would be a decent material to learn
with. Obviously lots of guitars are made with laminated materials, so
it seems to make sense. The finished product may not exaclty sound
like a guitar, but that's not really the point.
Has anyone done something like this? If anyone has other suggestions
for practice wood, I'd appreciate those too. I've also been wondering
about the best way to thickness sand the back/sides/top woods. Can
this be done by hand with any degree of accuracy or will I need to buy/
build a sanding rig?
JimLo...@aol.com
My first Appalacian dulcimers were made with 1/8" unfinished, non-
grooved Luan playwood, which could be had in 4x8 sheets for about $3
back then (maybe less). Dulcimer sides are not hard to bend. I don't
know how it would do for guitar sides. Today, I would never use this
stuff, even though I am just as much an amateur as I have always
been. What I have done, however, is update one dulcimer with a new
top and bottom, both solid woods. This way the use of the plywood is
less noticeable.
L-5? Isn't that an archtop? You certainly do not want to use ply for
the top and back of an archtop, unless you are planning to press the
shape on the top (and that only for a hollow/semi-hollow electric,
IMHO). Otherwise, you should carve from solid wood.
My neighbor is a cabinet maker, so when I need wood thickness sanded I
just ask him to do it (and we trade favors). The Cupiano book lays
out the whole process of doing this by hand.
Best wishes,
Dr. Jim Lowther
GarageGuitar
hi jim. Thanks for the reply. I should clarify the design, as you're
absolutely right about carving an arched top. I like the lines of my
l-5 clone, and thought it would make an interesting acoustic guitaqr
shape. I'm going to use the L-5 body shape, but build it with a flat
top and round soundhole. More of a jumbo cutaway than an acoustic jazz
box.
My theory on the plywood is to find some inexpensive practice wood to
use for...well...practice! I have my eye on some solid tonewoods for
the real deal (right now I'm thinking maple back/sides with Englemann
top, but that coud change!).
mcagu...@comcast.net
> My theory on the plywood is to find some inexpensive practice wood to
> use for...well...practice! I have my eye on some solid tonewoods for
> the real deal (right now I'm thinking maple back/sides with Englemann
> top, but that coud change!).
Ask yourself what it is you want to practice. I would actually make
a strong argument for using all solid woods...and you don't need to
use master grade and/or big dollar tonewoods. If it's no more than the
experience of assembling a project guitar that you have no tonal
expectations for, then plywood would do. But you'll learn nothing of
how solid wood works from a lutherie aspect. If you're starting out,
start by gaining applicable knowledge with the materials you
ultimately want to use. You need to have a foundation to base your
achievements and chart your progress.....plywood won't do that for
you.
RM
Steve
I was mulling over how to respond to your question about using plywood,
and RM beat me to it. I agree that you would be wasting your time
working with plywood because the issues, characteristics, and techniques
are different. There are inexpensive tonewoods available that you can
use to build that first guitar - and you'll have something that will
sound good when you're done as well. I've seen what look like pretty
good quality spruce tops sell on Ebay for $10 to $20. The top for my
first acoustic project was a reject from the Martin factory for cosmetic
reasons - I think I paid $30 for it, and it already had the rosette
inlaid into it.
Good luck!
--Steve
David Hajicek
<mcagu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1193435599.7...@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
You time is worth something.
Dave Hajicek
JimLo...@aol.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, I tend to agree with others that solid woods reward your efforts
better than practice with ply would give. I always thought Walnut was
a great wood to start out with, as it bends easy, looks good and I
think it sounds good (opinions seem to be mixed on this). I would not
make anything with a laminated top, and I am pretty sure I would feel
the same about the bottom. (I might consider a laminated bottom for
purely visual asthetics.) You can always ask someone for their
"seconds" or sub-grade wood to save costs. I am certain that the
result would sound better, look better, and reward your time more.
mcagu...@comcast.net
David's right, It's not about the cost of materials, it's about
gaining familiarity with the medium you choose to work. Never miss the
opportunity to gain applicable knowledge/experience through trial and
error...even if the ends results are a disappointment, you will learn
something.
Jim mentioned Walnut...excellent wood choice for starting out for
all the reasons he's stated. I have an Oregon Walnut/European spruce
12 fret guitar I've just completed and ready to ship...it's an
astounding little guitar.
RM
mcagu...@comcast.net
> <mcaguit...@comcast.net> wrote in message
David's right, It's not about the cost of materials, it's about
gaining familiarity with the medium you choose to work. Never miss the
opportunity to gain applicable knowledge/experience through trial and
error...even if the ends results are a disappointment, you will learn
something.
Jim mentioned Walnut...excellent wood choice for starting out for
all the reasons he stated. I have an Oregon Walnut/European spruce 12
fret guitar I just completed and ready to ship...it's an astounding
little guitar.
RM
tho x. bui
process. If this is you first ever musical instrument, and you haven't
had a lot of wood working experience, I actually will recommend that you
consider a kit (e.g., from stewmac.com).
Very few people can build a decent instrument first time out from
scratch. It will take 3-4 tries before most poeple can make a decent
one. If you're not sure you're in it for a long haul, get a kit, put it
together, lean how to finish it right. Chances are that the result will
be reasonable, and if you want to sell it, you might actually get back
20-30% of what you put in--much better than a crappy first try from scratch.
On the other hand, if you're like me and have determined to make this a
lifetime hobby from the get-go, then just go at it. You'll make another
so it doesn't matter what or how you make that first one. That was my
approach from day one. At this point, with 70+ instruments of various
sort under my belt, I don't even remember what the first one look like
or how much it cost me.
Tho
David Hajicek
"tho x. bui" <bla...@thoxbui.com> wrote in message
news:55NUi.27021$oC3....@newsfe08.phx...
>>
> You have a lot of advices on wood. I mainly going to talk about the
> process. If this is you first ever musical instrument, and you haven't
> had a lot of wood working experience, I actually will recommend that you
> consider a kit (e.g., from stewmac.com).
>
> Very few people can build a decent instrument first time out from scratch.
> It will take 3-4 tries before most poeple can make a decent one. If
> you're not sure you're in it for a long haul, get a kit, put it together,
> lean how to finish it right. Chances are that the result will be
> reasonable, and if you want to sell it, you might actually get back 20-30%
> of what you put in--much better than a crappy first try from scratch.
>
> On the other hand, if you're like me and have determined to make this a
> lifetime hobby from the get-go, then just go at it. You'll make another
> so it doesn't matter what or how you make that first one. That was my
> approach from day one. At this point, with 70+ instruments of various
> sort under my belt, I don't even remember what the first one look like or
> how much it cost me.
>
>
> Tho
>
So what did you do with those early instruments? Were you able to sell
them?
Dave Hajicek
tho x. bui
> "tho x. bui" <bla...@thoxbui.com> wrote in message
> news:55NUi.27021$oC3....@newsfe08.phx...
>>On the other hand, if you're like me and have determined to make this a
>>lifetime hobby from the get-go, then just go at it. You'll make another
>>so it doesn't matter what or how you make that first one. That was my
>>approach from day one. At this point, with 70+ instruments of various
>>sort under my belt, I don't even remember what the first one look like or
>>how much it cost me.
>
> Tho:
>
> So what did you do with those early instruments? Were you able to sell
> them?
>
> Dave Hajicek
>
>
fireplace. After I discovered ebay, they mostly got sold there. It's
amazing what people would give money for on ebay
Tho
JimLo...@aol.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Tho:
I was thinking to advise a kit as well. I wonder how many people here
started with a kit?
mcagu...@comcast.net
I think kits are fine for what they are...a chance for someone to have
a guitar they've assembled themselves. I still believe that if you
want to learn lutherie and gain all the understanding and experience
of building a guitar, build it all yourself. Kits do provide excellent
assembly knowledge and certainly a nice jump on your project, but I
still feel it's very important to handle and work as much wood as
possible when learning.
Unfortunately, most of my very early guitars went to family and
friends. I would love to go back and rework many of them and try to
bring up to my current standards, but these people cherish them for
the sentimental value and won't let me touch them. I suppose that's
better than an early client who brings me a guitar I built 25 years
ago and it doesn't have a scratch on it or any signs of use.
RM
David Hajicek
<JimLo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1193559186....@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> Tho:
>
> I was thinking to advise a kit as well. I wonder how many people here
> started with a kit?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dr. Jim Lowther
>
Here's the reason. One needs to deal with many details in building a
guitar, most of which are handled for you with a kit. Just the choice of
all the bindings and perflings and inlays (if any) take a lot of time, and
more important, experience that the first time builder doesn't yet have.
There are also forms and molds that need to be made. Anything that can be
avoided the first time is useful in getting off the dime, so to speak.
So, IMHO, start with just materials on the second or third guitar.
Dave Hajicek
GarageGuitar
taken them to heart and bought some inexpensive solid tonewoods (maple
back/side set and 2 engelmann spruce tops) off ebay. Cost less than
$50 including shipping, so I can't complain there!
I'm planning to take this slowly, taking time to research and plan
each step in the process. It will also take time to collect the
necessary tools for the job. I'm not completely inexperienced with
woodworking, but I haven't got a shop set up yet. With the tonewoods
on the way, I'm going to start making the body mold, which should be
done before the wood arrives.
I'm also hoping to document each step, for my own purposes if nothing
else. I'll try to post progress reports as the project develops.
Thanks again for everyone's help. You can bet on fielding lots mroe
questions in the near future!
Nick Odell
>I was thinking to advise a kit as well. I wonder how many people here
>started with a kit?
>
I built my first guitar, an electric guitar from scratch. I did not wind my own
strings or draw my own fretwire or make my own machine heads but I did virtually
everything else. The bridge/tremolo was made from stainless steel and motorcycle
clutch springs.
My first acoustic guitar wasn't a kit but it wasn't not a kit either. A friend
gave me a cheap acoustic guitar with an irrepairably broken neck. So I made a
new neck for it.
Unfortunately, because of inexperience (give me a break! I was still at school!)
I damaged the instrument top while taking the old neck out. So I bought some
pine from a London guitar maker and I made a new top for it.
Unfortunately he was a maker of classical guitars and my guitar was a
dreadnought. Not that it remained dreadnought shaped for very long: I rebent the
ribs and remade the back so that they would fit the top I had made from the
smaller pieces of wood. The only original part remaining was the fingerboard.
This all began in 1967: we were on the threshold of the year of peace and love,
man, and another friend decided that they wanted to paint this guitar which
explains how I ended up with a rather strange shaped instrument with Van Gough
sunflowers over the front, what Van Gough might have painted as "sunflowers at
night" over the back and the phases of the moon all around the ribs.
Nobody expected this ghastly, green, misshapen thing to play well or sound good
but it did and later, on the back of that, I built up an orderbook and I left
college trained to be a teacher and became a guitar maker instead and the
bracing system that I was "trying out" in that first instrument has been at the
heart of most of the guitars I've built since.
That's the simplified version. It leaves out lots of things including all the
help and encouragement I received from people in the profession who showed me
how to do things properly and were extraordinarily patient with me while I was
hanging around their workshops asking questions all the time etc, etc.
So did I build that guitar or did I only repair it? That's a question I've been
asking all the way through my career.
Nick
--
real e-mail is nickodell at bigfoot dot com
Steve
Garage;
Check out this web site - I find it extremely helpful as a reminder - I
was constantly referring to it as I built the first acoustic, and I
still go back for reminders:
http://www.hoffmanguitars.com/building_a_guitar.htm
And here's the page where I documented my first acoustic, which in some
ways was a kit, and it in some ways it wasn't:
http://www.cyrguitars.com/AcousticProjectPage.html
Enjoy!
--Steve
JimLo...@aol.com
Does anyone know how the laminate sides of high production guitars are
formed? I would guess that the laminations are glued up in a form the
gives the bends of the upper and lower bouts and waist, and that no
heat bending is done at all. Is this correct? (Come to think of it,
I really don't know how high production solid sides are bent. I do
know that C. F. Martin still heat bends them by hand.)
JimLo...@aol.com
Sounds okay to me. For a first build I wouldn't really worry about
things like book matched plates or annular rings per inch or any other
grain characteristics. Maple is not quite as easy as Walnut to bend,
but it isn't really too bad. I still like quarter sawn sides, but
first time out anything is okay (I guess).
I would strongly suggest building a friendship with a local cabinet
shop or a good full service lumber yard (a fading piece of the
American landscape). Or walk around your neighborhood on a Saturday
and listen for power tool sounds coming from a neighbor's garage.
You should get William Cupiano's book on guitar building. "Build Your
Own Acoustic Guitar" by Jonathan Kinkead is also very helpful.
BTW, www.stewmac.com has the instructions for their guitar kits online
in PDF format for to download. The price is right, and you might pick
up a clue or two.
GarageGuitar
other resources on hand already, but mostly focussed on repair versus
building. I did download the stewmac kit instructions, which I found
rather useful.
Here are a couple more general building questions for everyone.
1) What is your opinion on side reinforcement/bracing? I've seen guys
selling mahogany strips to reinforce guitar sides, but a look into my
acoustics reveals that at least Yahama and Washburn are not using side
bracing in their production guitars. I assume the bracing is meant to
stop the sides from bellying out under tension. Is this actually
necessary or just an added bit of insurance?
2) Radiused tops/backs -here is probably a very old argument! I know
most builders radius the top and back of acoustic guitars, but some do
not. Those that don't seem rather convinced that building tension into
the guitar body is not a smart thing, and those that do radius their
bodies argue equally strongly for improved structural stability and,
perhaps, tone. (I hedge on the tone argument as it is rather
subjective - I like the sound of things that others hate, etc). Anyone
like to weigh in on this one?
Thanks again for the great input.
mcagu...@comcast.net
The side braces are only effective on solid sides...you won't
typically find them on laminated sides. Their intent is mostly to stop
cracks from going along the entire side, but they do offer minor
structural support.
I've done quite a bit of R&D work with both true flat tops and a
multiple variations on arched braces....including compound radiusing
of the arch. Both techniques have very useful applications and
benefits/weaknesses...but I'll avoid stating my preference to keep the
flaming at a minimum. I would suggest experimenting with both
techniques as you gain more experience and find which method provides
you with the tone and structural integrity you want. Arched braces are
not a new technique.....most notably, the Larson Brothers arched their
tops, as well as laminated their braces with ebony sandwiched between
spruce.
RM
tho x. bui
>...but I'll avoid stating my preference to keep the
> flaming at a minimum.
>
Heh heh. There's not much flaming here. Probably the worst you'd get
is the 'silent treatment.'
I suspect that's because there are so many professionals (and semi-pros)
that everybody tends to be very business-like with their posts. It's one
of the best ng's out there, very high signal to noise.
Tho
mcagu...@comcast.net
I'm not sure how I ended up on this group. I've visited here a few
times, but this particular topic is of interest to me and compelled me
to join in. I've been asked to do a 3 day workshop on lutherie at next
year's Sarzana Guitar Festival in Italy....so this subject is on my
mind and listening to the questions of those getting started is very
helpful.
You're right, this group seems to be made up of relatively civil
folks.....which is very nice. But I have to say that most of the
flaming (in other forums) about preferences/techniques does indeed
come from fellow professionals....often sent in private emails to
maintain public composure. I actually try to avoid talking shop, just
to avoid the inevitable contradiction....regardless of all the
"IMHO's". But if no one minds, I'll think I'll hang out here for a
while....rmmga has become too volatile.
RM