Official Luthiers Forum!

I need to make two Macassar Ebony guitars this year. I do have a traditional set with a 2 piece back I'll be using, but have been having a hard time locating another set I like.

I was able to located a few boards that I think will work, but none wide enough for a two piece back. I came up with these alternatives.

Which of the two would you prefer? If you don't like either please say so.

Thanks for the help!

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

I like the top one, but I would taper the center section similar to what Martin does with the D 35 series guitars (and also use the added purfling lines).

Thanks Clay, i might experment with a couple backstrips. It would also be a good way to pick binding. I'm thinking gaboon ebony or flamed koa

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

I agree with Clay, I like the top one better. The symmetry of the center piece in the lower one is nice, but for me, the two type of woods don't go together as well as the three panels in the top one do.

_________________
Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right - Robert Hunter

Top one for sure.

Top one for me,

Top one for me too.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

I'm beginning to think the top one may have it.

Any thoughts on using back strips between the pieces? Or maybe just glue them together and go for a 'one big board look'?

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

+1 on top
+1 on tapered
-1 on back strips (it is busy enough as it is).

Of course top one. If a strip black and maybe 1/8" wide at most. Or (ok things are getting weird now) maybe a strip of the same wood you have shown, cut from the opposite side or cut and flipped around so that it has the same texture (visually) but it declares separation between the boards. I do like how most of the joined areas blend in with its mating surface but the lower right hand side of the middle one does not seem to work with the adjoining piece.

I hope that made some sense. Otherwise, I love the wood.

Top fo sho.
Bottom one would be good if you were doing a Flying V shape.

_________________
Pat

No backstrip on top one which I prefer. You have a got a nice grain match there so you don't need a back strip. Bob

Nice set of macassar in the classifieds

Top one, no backstrip!

_________________
The name catgut is confusing. There are two explanations for the mix up.

Catgut is an abbreviation of the word cattle gut. Gut strings are made from sheep or goat intestines, in the past even from horse, mule or donkey intestines.

Otherwise it could be from the word kitgut or kitstring. Kit meant fiddle, not kitten.

Top one, no backstrip.

Top set, tapered, no back strip.

It does make sense. I was leaning the way you suggested, but then I decided that since I had three bookmatched pieces I would join 2 and rip the other one and make a 4 piece back.

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

I like the top one and agree that tapering the middle slice would look good. Especially if you can get the taper to go well with the angle of the grain in the upper bout.

I'm assuming you only have 3 slices. If you have 4, it would be cool to bookmatch two halves then bookmatch that but still tapered. By that I mean tat the center section would be wedge shaped but bookmatched and the outside of those pieces would be bookmatched to the outer two pieces. The 4 seams would not be parallel but each seam would have a repeating pattern.

_________________
Bryan Bear PMoMC

Take care of your feet, and your feet will take care of you.

I like the bottom one. It's unique.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"After forty-nine years of violin building, I have decided that the search for a varnish is similar to the fox hunt. The fun is in the hunt."
Jack Batts Maker and Repairer of Fine Violins

Chuck,
The bottom one is kind of interesting. Actually, the center wood is also Macassar ebony.

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

Wow, triple post... don't have a clue how that happened

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

Wow, triple post... don't have a clue how that happened

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

I'm with Chuck. Top is nice but looks like every other high end guitar out there.

"Top is nice but looks like every other high end guitar out there."

And that's a bad thing?

To me, the pieces in the bottom picture have an interesting look individually, but don't work well together. I may be just a "stick in the mud" and sticking with an option I have seen done before. When I first saw a D35 I wasn't too keen on it, but later appreciated it for it's original raison d'etre - a way to use good wood that was too narrow for the two piece back of a Dreadnaught guitar. The tapered center section allowed for the maximum utilization of the wood (two tapered pieces from each back half and less waste of side pieces) and the back purfles created some visual separation of the three sections.
But some people prefer the unusual and unique - if you are building these for someone they would be the person to ask.

Not a bad thing at all. Variety is however, the spice of life.

The bottom piece strikes me less as a piece of wood and more as a scene. There is drama... a focal point of darkness is cut through by the light, in the periphery is chaos.