not just for luthiers

[novocaine]

complete rubbish, he didn't even make his own strings. and it wasn't hand threaded, disgraceful.

thanks for posting. stunning work, having spent years working on various guitars but never actually building one that just seeing him dress the frets is enough for me, never mind the actually working them.

needs to a buy a new tuner though, except for the strobe he did it by ear, doesn't he know a head clip tuner is like 3 quid.

 

[Ttrees]

Keeping a stable environment warm and relative humidity is quite a bit of trouble ...
Where does that steam go after bending those sides ?
Also dust extraction is soo important while working those tropical woods ...
Most builders don't get anywhere near minimum wage for at least 10 years so need a lot of capital or other
income to support them in their workshop .
Its a hard game and very hard to market your work, and convince someone that your guitar is on par with the
best ...aswell as that if you don't have brand recognition ,if someone was to buy your guitar ..if you don't make
it as a luthier ...that guitar might not have the best resale value compared to a high end top of their range, factory model

 

[novocaine]

or for around half the price you can have this lovely little number, because plastic is known to be good for musically instruments, look how well the kazoo did.

https://www.thomann.de/gb/adamas_1198_a ... oCSynw_wcB

 

[NazNomad]

Also, with a little experience and the entire contents of the StewMac catalogue at your disposal, most woodworkers could produce a high quality guitar. #controversialcomment.

Try it and see!

If I could afford to buy all the StewMac gear, no problem. I've made perfectly acceptable guitars without all those gadgets. I challenge anyone to notice the difference in sound.

 

[Ttrees]

If you can make an acoustic guitar, then you can make those jigs that Stu-mac sells .
Its the working environment that costs the money .
Those jigs are only time savers, which is critical in a production setting.
If your not in a production setting then theirs ways around everything and nothing will hold you back.
You could make nearly all of those tools or different tools that does the same job....
It might take a while though .
There was one dude mentioned on the OLF who made a entire guitar from a penknife .
Don't know if he had started with resawn bookmatched tops and backs though ?
Its the machines that cost more than those stu-mac jigs ...
Tools like a decent bandsaw and hand planes ...depending on species a decent extraction system too.
A good enough CFM and pump it outside, will dry out the shop at the same time.
Everything else can be done with cabinetmaking principals that are as old as the hills .
A few specialist tools are nice to have though ..
I dont know if theirs any stu-mac tool that I have that I could not make ?
I used to buy them, but now see my moneys better spent buying machines ,and doing them up .
Can't wait to get to the stage where I can start ordering stuff again .

 

[profchris]

Also, with a little experience and the entire contents of the StewMac catalogue at your disposal, most woodworkers could produce a high quality guitar. #controversialcomment.

Try it and see!

If I could afford to buy all the StewMac gear, no problem. I've made perfectly acceptable guitars without all those gadgets. I challenge anyone to notice the difference in sound.

I honestly think that if you can make a perfectly acceptable guitar without the StewMac gizmos, they won't help you make a better one (other than perhaps cosmetically). The steps up to excellent come with the experience of making more (don't think I'm saying you don't have that experience, for all I know your "perfectly acceptable" might be modest understatement).

For me the test is whether a professional musician picks up the instrument and then wants to keep on playing it. I've been fortunate to have that happen a couple of times, though as I don't make for sale only a couple of my instruments are used by professionals, both presents to friends but still used to perform, which they didn't have to do.

As a semi-pro musician myself (more semi- than pro, though) I can feel the difference between an instrument which wants to be played, and helps you give the best possible performance, and one which is just OK. These latter are perfectly usable, but need more work put in to achieve that good performance. Talking to professionals, they seem to recognise the same thing. None of us can define quite what makes such an instrument but we all know it when we play it. I've seen an instrument passed round a group of professional players, to general nods of "That one's got it".

Of course, 99% of buyers are not professional musicians, and for most of them (I'm told by builders) cosmetics are key. Not only will they not perform better with a top quality instrument but might even sound worse - a really good guitar requires a high level of skill to control. It allows you to do amazing things musically, but only if you can manage it. Think racing car. But plenty of abalone binding and a high gloss finish impresses everyone else, and here the StewMac kit makes a difference.

Maybe the analogy is with a high quality tool. An unskilled woodworker will do little better with a top-class plane than with a lesser one. The skilled woodworker can cope with a mediocre plane, but does his or her best work with a quality one.

 

[bugbear]

Not only will they not perform better with a top quality instrument but might even sound worse - a really good guitar requires a high level of skill to control. It allows you to do amazing things musically, but only if you can manage it.

There are now golf clubs - especially drivers - that have slightly de-skilled golf; within limits they always drive straight. Full time golfers don't use them, because full time players actually use the variability of a "normal" club to vary and control the shot, to deliberately curl left or right.

Which is exactly what you said.

BugBear

 

[novocaine]

that's an interesting way of putting it prof. I'm buy no means more than an amateur but do have an old Eko and a new (ish) Yamaha acoustic (along with the electric and bass) and the difference between these 2 is night and day, the Eko sounds good but is a hard guitar to get on with, it took me a year or more to get happy with it, the Yamaha (mass marketed, machine made) is a dream to play, letting you get away with a lot more. Yet it's the Eko I reach for, because it's a challange, if you can play it well it rewards you and it makes others seem so easy to play, so I gave the Yamaha to my mum (she still plinks occasionally, a bit more now she has a boyfriend who plays), she's happy, and when I visit her there is something there for me to mess with. I'm never going to play anywhere other living room so why not have a challange?

 

[Ttrees]

What do you mean by challenge ?
Do you mean wild high action that makes your fretted notes sharp, and sharper still as you go further up the neck ?
A good guitar is not a challenge to play ...
What Prof Chris said needs to be clarified a bit ....
He was basically saying that in a concert scenario, one has to be more accurate, as the guitar wants to be played...
The slightest touch provides you with sound ...If one's not skilled and hits a string by accident ...
You hear it.... especially in a silent concert
It might not be as noticeable with a guitar that has no voice ....
But who takes a dud guitar to the concert ?

 

[novocaine]

ok let me clarify, im not saying it's a challenge in it's own right, it has a high action and requires more force to play, it isn't a rubbish guitar by any stretch, it just needs more attention to play, you have to be perfect on it, I've given it to people who haven't been playing long but thing they are great (you know the sort, we were all there at some point) and they simply can't play it. Poor finger placement on the eko will show with muted notes, the Yamaha you can get away with it far more. it also shows in the strumming, because it has such a strong voice it will show up catching or missing notes far more. I have a few friends who I'd say were very good (albeit amateurs), they enjoy playing the Eko for the same reasons as I do, because it makes you have to be perfect instead of flattering and covering up mistakes for you, they also say that when they return to their own instrument (the age of takamine I'm afraid) they find them much easier to play.
It's like the modern vs old car analogue, a modern car hides the mistakes for you, so you even an amateur can look amazing as they drift it round a track or chuck it through the bends like the best of the best, put the same driver in a car without all the gadgets and it shows up their inabilities far more.

I think I understood what Prof was getting at, I may have used the term challenge in the wrong context I'm afraid. the Yamaha is simply more forgiving of my amateurish hands, which is why I choose the Eko, it makes me have to be perfect on every note, or else it tells me I'm wrong, which as an amateur is important to me, because it makes me a better player.

 

[Ttrees]

Is your Yamaha a laminate topped instrument by any chance ?
I'm willing to guess that it is....

 

[novocaine]

of course it is, so's the Eko. they are mass marketed, mass produced guitars.

I've PMed you to try and keep this thread about the original topic.

 

[Ttrees]

This is why most luthiers don't make it.
People don't believe that the product is worth it, and the price they command is outrageous .
My point has now been made in response to Naz earlier comments.

My argument was about quality guitars novocaine
I will watch the videos in hope for more music though ...
You don't have to have a good guitar to be good .

 

[novocaine]

I believe the product he builds is worth it to someone, it isn't to me, that 10k is better spent, I'm not his market though am I, his customers are existing players and people who have made it who want something special, who can afford to splash that sort of cash.
luthiers in general aren't (or at least shouldn't be) trying to beat the mass marketed gear, they can not win that battle, instead they should be targeting (and do to some great successes) the top end of the market.

sorry for getting this off topic, back to the OP, I watched it again last night, the time in finish alone shows why they cost so much, there is no quick dip and spray in the booth followed by a quick polish. 2 weeks set before final setup isn't cheap either.

 

[NazNomad]

...it has a high action and requires more force to play, it isn't a rubbish guitar by any stretch...

That's why they invented finger-sized necks on beer bottles. :-D It was a solution waiting for a problem.

 

[Ttrees]

Your argument on the other hand, is why luthiers choose to try to make a living doing so,
In despite of earning well below min wage they still persevere ...
Theirs always those who have had enough with their sub par guitars...
Especially, if they spend enough time around decent sounding instruments in real life..
There is a distinct difference in the sound of a solid topped instrument ..it does not show up
through a laptop or stereo though.
There is a lot more flavour to the tone of a solid topped instrument ....you might have to pick through them for a good while though ...and the music shops are not the best place to test this out for yourself, since its full of guitars bouncing the sound all over the place
About the only reliable amplified scenario is the concert hall ...and even then sometimes that fails too.

Then there's the joke about trying to save a few bob and make one yourself :roll:

 

[bugbear]

luthiers in general aren't (or at least shouldn't be) trying to beat the mass marketed gear, they can not win that battle,

Last night (by coincidence) I watched an episode of "How it's made" where they showed a Godin (Canada) steel stringed acoustic guitar being made.

The quality of the materials and work were good, but - WOW - the speed was astonishing.

Just as a simple example; the holes for the tuners were drilled with a fully made drilling jig; it was clamped to the headstock via locating pins, and the holes drilled straight through the 6 bushes. I don't suppose the whole operation took more than 60 seconds.

(quick google, I've found the video on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCDB301dyoM

)

BugBear

 

[whiskywill]

Lots of folks don't bother making their own kerfed linings
You would get scolded on the OLF if you mentioned that
For those who want to see a crazy contraption have a look at ho to do it yourself .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-pdUWoNjPo

That was a great watch, thanks for posting that Rob

I made one of those using a motor from an old ice cream maker.

 

[whiskywill]

doesn't he know a head clip tuner is like 3 quid.

You, sir, are a spendthrift. https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Acousti ... .23.rpp0n5

 

[novocaine]

doesn't he know a head clip tuner is like 3 quid.

You, sir, are a spendthrift. https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Acousti ... .23.rpp0n5

I only buy from reputable dealers.
http://www.banggood.com/Wholesale-ENO-E ... lookingfor

(note, please read with a hint of sarcasm)


besides, there's an app for that.