Official Luthiers Forum! :: View topic - achieving even tone up the neck

Colin, are advocating a Spanish heel for a steel string guitar?

I am very interested in your comments Colin. I have been experimenting with this issue on my last few guitars. I'm a long way from drawing any conclusions yet, but your comments will figure into my further explorations.
I have ordered a batch of CF rods, so I plan to try that out. My current two guitars have a heel block arrangement like you described.
Do you believe the fingerboard extension should be glued down? I am planning a "double mortise & tenon" (bolt on) system, but will gladly change that idea if you think it will make a difference.
I would be very interested in seeing a pic of how you shape your braces.

Macassar has lower dampening that Gabon Ebony? Hmmm..... Customers seem reluctant to go for Indian Rosewood fingerboards because they wear fairly quickly. Are you using Brazilian? I'm playing with the idea of Cocobolo for my next few fingerboards... Any comments?
Thanks! Dan

Howard, I am curious about your arching system, are you arching laterally and not with the dome? I have been using a compound system for the top and back which I have had success with but I would love to hear what you are doing. I spent a lot of time looking at your unique bracing pattern on your website, especially as you mention it gives power up the neck, something I crave in a guitar. Using a wider bridge is interesting also, I wouldn't have thought of that. I saw too that you use the buttresses and I wonder what you noticed as changing in the sound when you switched over to them.

Something I forgot too about the Claxton guitar is that the back braces were massive. The lower bout braces were possibly 1/2 wide by 5/8 or more tall and did not taper out really at all to the edges. I only had a quick look inside but I was surprised by that. I didn't get a peek at the neck block.

Good point Laurent, I alwas use a stiff X-braced back as well.

Colin S wrote:

Good point Laurent, I alwas use a stiff X-braced back as well.

I've not done it on my guitars, and am hesitant.
X-braced back plates (on the lower bout) I've seen are always too floppy across the grain, especially on the lower bout, and not much stiffer along, if at all. It may make sense to use it on the upper bout structurally, maybe?
I've always perceived it more as a visual thing, but I am probably wrong.
How do you feel about x-braced backs Colin, what changes have you noticed?
Some builders (Sobell) slant the 2nd back brace, to gain a bit of rigidity along the grain I assume.

Author:	Burton LeGeyt [ Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:40 am ]
Post subject:	achieving even tone up the neck
I had the chance to play a really beautiful guitar by Ed Claxton last week and although I only had a few minutes to play it I was struck immediately by how the notes up the neck, even above the body joint, had the same even tone and sustain as the notes down by the nut. For those whose guitars share that quality, is there something you are doing with that in mind to enhance that area of the fretboard? Most guitars I play seem to lose something the further up that you go and especially above the body joint. I realize too that that evenness is what sets really great guitars apart but if there are some small deatils to keep in mind to accentuate those notes, I would love to hear about them. Thanks!

Author:	David Collins [ Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:59 am ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
I have a feeling there's not an easy answer to this question - just too many variables from the box to the plate tuning, to the neck itself. I will say though that it's something you don't often notice until you play an instrument that is exceptional in this regard. The last guitar of Brock's that I played struck me this way immediately. Ironically, the tone of that guitar was not in line with my personal preferences - it was beautifully warm, full and round, while I lean toward a bit more punch and dynamic shimmer as you really dig in, but that's why different players want different guitars. Fingerstyle playing up and down the neck though immediately caught my attention at how beautifully it maintained it's qualities from the nut to the last fret. A guitar that is exceptional in this regard can really catch your attention.

Author:	Colin S [ Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
I play a lot in altered tunings, so even balance up the neck is a major consideration for me, and a problem I found with most of the commercially avaliable guitars out there. Over the last 20 or so guitars I think I now have a handle on some of the things that influence this. I may be totally wrong with any or all of them, but they work for me. This is just for the relatively high energy system of the steel string. The problem as you move up the neck is that the amplitude of the string vibration and therefore its energy reduces, what you have to achieve is the maximum transfer of this available energy to the top. What you need to do is reduce any damping of this reduced energy. Remember that the whole guitar is a system, so every part of that system will affect the final result. So, stiffen the neck by adding CF rods, I also now prefer using Cherry as the neck wood or a denser mahogany sample. Two, use a Spanish heel and top extension on the neck block, the neck block is often underrated in importance, it's the component that all of the other major parts attach to, top, back, sides and neck, all are glued to it. Again I like to use cherry. What we are trying to do is get a stiff solid neck/block system, that doesn't dampen the energy of the strings. Next, use a rosewood rather than ebony FB, in the tests we did at my University, ebony was the wood that damped the worst. So it goes without saying that you should also not use it for the bridge. (maccassar is OK though). However, the single change that I made to the system that made the greatest difference in getting uniformity up the fingerboard, and I know others here have experience the same, is by switching from scalloped top braces to "parabolic". Colin

Author:	Ricardo [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:37 am ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
Colin, are advocating a Spanish heel for a steel string guitar?

Author:	Howard on another compute [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
While there is less string momentum available as you go up the neck, the good news is that on the high strings this is compensated for by the hearing system's greater sensitivity to treble frequencies. Measured volume may be lower, but the notes can be perceived as balanced in volume. So playing up the neck on the lowest strings will pretty much always suffer a volume drop, but the high strings can seem in balance. A majority of the guitars I try get a sound up the neck on the plain strings that I call "plinky." Strong treble fundamentals all the way up the neck is what I strive for, and the first thing I would say is characteristic of my guitars, if I may toot my own horn for a minute. Among the things that I think contribute to that are my top arching system, somewhat wider than standard bridge, and double sides. I also think that the standard X-bracing system tends toward a weak treble fundamental; you can keep them strong--I usually do--but the system is biased toward the bass.

Official Luthiers Forum! http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/

achieving even tone up the neck http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=16186	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Colin S [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
Ricardo wrote: Colin, are advocating a Spanish heel for a steel string guitar? No not a Spaninsh heel as part of the neck but a neck block that has an extension in the same way as a Spanish heel. the neck block I like supports the FB over the body and has a Spanish heel type extension to resist torque. Like this one, the top section of this one gets a pocket routed in it to take a neck extension supporting the fingerboard. Attachment: Cherry block.jpg Attachment: Headblock.JPG Colin

Author:	Daniel M [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:37 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
I am very interested in your comments Colin. I have been experimenting with this issue on my last few guitars. I'm a long way from drawing any conclusions yet, but your comments will figure into my further explorations. I have ordered a batch of CF rods, so I plan to try that out. My current two guitars have a heel block arrangement like you described. Do you believe the fingerboard extension should be glued down? I am planning a "double mortise & tenon" (bolt on) system, but will gladly change that idea if you think it will make a difference. I would be very interested in seeing a pic of how you shape your braces. Macassar has lower dampening that Gabon Ebony? Hmmm..... Customers seem reluctant to go for Indian Rosewood fingerboards because they wear fairly quickly. Are you using Brazilian? I'm playing with the idea of Cocobolo for my next few fingerboards... Any comments? Thanks! Dan

Author:	Alexandru Marian [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
I am looking for alternative FB woods too since I try to build lighter. I like bois de rose, dalbergia maritima from madagascar. It is a strong purple which seems to oxidize to a very dark chocolate pretty fast.

Author:	Burton LeGeyt [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
Thank you everyone for your responses. I have experimented with many of the things you have suggested and had some success, but nothing like the guitar that I played and what it sounds like Brock's guitar sounded like. Colin, you had mentioned before about the importance of the neck block and I have taken it to heart. It is the first thing I build (with the neck) and I run the extension and carbon fiber into the body and neck block extension. I have been laminating them also, something gleaned from Howard, and using the spanish foot style, though not quite as much as the one that you have shown. It is interesting too that you advocate a denser neck wood, I have been going the opposite route but maybe I will try something different. Howard, I am curious about your arching system, are you arching laterally and not with the dome? I have been using a compound system for the top and back which I have had success with but I would love to hear what you are doing. I spent a lot of time looking at your unique bracing pattern on your website, especially as you mention it gives power up the neck, something I crave in a guitar. Using a wider bridge is interesting also, I wouldn't have thought of that. I saw too that you use the buttresses and I wonder what you noticed as changing in the sound when you switched over to them. Something I forgot too about the Claxton guitar is that the back braces were massive. The lower bout braces were possibly 1/2 wide by 5/8 or more tall and did not taper out really at all to the edges. I only had a quick look inside but I was surprised by that. I didn't get a peek at the neck block. Thanks guys.

Author:	Colin S [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:27 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
Daniel M wrote: I am very interested in your comments Colin. I have been experimenting with this issue on my last few guitars. I'm a long way from drawing any conclusions yet, but your comments will figure into my further explorations. I have ordered a batch of CF rods, so I plan to try that out. My current two guitars have a heel block arrangement like you described. Do you believe the fingerboard extension should be glued down? I am planning a "double mortise & tenon" (bolt on) system, but will gladly change that idea if you think it will make a difference. I would be very interested in seeing a pic of how you shape your braces. Macassar has lower dampening that Gabon Ebony? Hmmm..... Customers seem reluctant to go for Indian Rosewood fingerboards because they wear fairly quickly. Are you using Brazilian? I'm playing with the idea of Cocobolo for my next few fingerboards... Any comments? Thanks! Dan Dan, I don't bolt or glue the fingerboard down to the body, it's just glued to the Neck extension which just sits in the routed pocket, look here on a recent thread you'll see a few pictures that might explain better. In my neck system the FB is glued to the same piece of wood for virtually its whole length. There is a longer picture sequence somewhere in the archives. http://luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=15954&hilit= I use a butt joint, and always either BRW or Madagascan rosewood for the FB and bridge. This is the top bracing that I usually use. Attachment: Top 2.jpg Colin

Author:	Howard Klepper [ Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:32 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
blegeyt wrote: Howard, I am curious about your arching system, are you arching laterally and not with the dome? I have been using a compound system for the top and back which I have had success with but I would love to hear what you are doing. I spent a lot of time looking at your unique bracing pattern on your website, especially as you mention it gives power up the neck, something I crave in a guitar. Using a wider bridge is interesting also, I wouldn't have thought of that. I saw too that you use the buttresses and I wonder what you noticed as changing in the sound when you switched over to them. I use a spline curve, laterally only, as described by Jon Sevy here: http://gicl.cs.drexel.edu/people/sevy/l ... oards.html I learned about this kind of arching from reading on Jon's site.

Author:	Laurent Brondel [ Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:46 am ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
blegeyt wrote: Something I forgot too about the Claxton guitar is that the back braces were massive. The lower bout braces were possibly 1/2 wide by 5/8 or more tall and did not taper out really at all to the edges. I only had a quick look inside but I was surprised by that. I didn't get a peek at the neck block. A stiffer back results in "fatter" trebles, more volume (perceived or real), a stronger initial attack and better projection. At least this is what I noticed on my guitars, and with harder rosewood type B&S. Sounds like this is what Claxton is going for, I assume the lack of (or small) taper and size of the back braces really stiffen the plate. Stefan Sobell uses a spline curve for top and back, quite exagerated in fact -looking at the guitars from the tail, the center is much wider than the lower bout edges-. His guitars have a lot of clarity and volume.

Author:	Colin S [ Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:43 am ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
Good point Laurent, I alwas use a stiff X-braced back as well. Colin

Author:	Laurent Brondel [ Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
Colin S wrote: Good point Laurent, I alwas use a stiff X-braced back as well. I've not done it on my guitars, and am hesitant. X-braced back plates (on the lower bout) I've seen are always too floppy across the grain, especially on the lower bout, and not much stiffer along, if at all. It may make sense to use it on the upper bout structurally, maybe? I've always perceived it more as a visual thing, but I am probably wrong. How do you feel about x-braced backs Colin, what changes have you noticed? Some builders (Sobell) slant the 2nd back brace, to gain a bit of rigidity along the grain I assume.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Colin S [ Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
laurent wrote: Colin S wrote: Good point Laurent, I alwas use a stiff X-braced back as well. I've not done it on my guitars, and am hesitant. X-braced back plates (on the lower bout) I've seen are always too floppy across the grain, especially on the lower bout, and not much stiffer along, if at all. It may make sense to use it on the upper bout structurally, maybe? I've always perceived it more as a visual thing, but I am probably wrong. How do you feel about x-braced backs Colin, what changes have you noticed? Some builders (Sobell) slant the 2nd back brace, to gain a bit of rigidity along the grain I assume. Laurent, I use two cross braces with the X overlaying the lower bout one, like this. Attachment: Dsc01502.jpg I find this gives a very stable back, which holds the radius well. I have found increased projection, and percieved clarity. Colin

Author:	Howard Klepper [ Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: achieving even tone up the neck
I use both X-bracing and traditional straight bracing on backs, and frankly I haven't heard a tonal advantage with the X. A couple of my best sounding guitars were laddered in back. With either bracing style, I try to get the best of both worlds: stiff in the center, and compliant around the edge.