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

Why Serviceability Matters
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=52109		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Hesh [ Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:10 am ]
Post subject:  Why Serviceability Matters
In the late 70's and early 80's GM built a line of cars under several brands that required the engine to be unbolted and lifted somewhat out of the engine well in order to change the rear most spark plugs. Back then changing spark plugs was a regularly scheduled maintenance and tune-up thing before our current crop of 100,000 mile without tune-ups cars.

Shops didn't do the extra work, spend the extra time and take the extra risks in terms of liability and even bodily injury... without requiring more compensation from the client. This poor engineering and lack of serviceability created an additional financial and even where one could have a vehicle worked on burden to GM's clients. This was also the era of very poor quality US automobiles that did in fact tank Chrysler (the first time...) requiring the resulting government bailout AND trade restrictions placed on foreign competition.

My first Honda, 14 Hondas ago lost a head lamp once and it took me an hour to understand that I was not seeing where to place my wrenches or screw drivers because Honda engineered the car so that I would not need any tools and a head lamp could be replaced in two minutes.... Go figure - serviceability to the max.

Moving forward back in the days nearly a decade and a half ago when I was much more active on this forum and learning there was a strong emphasis on serviceability so much so that there were knock down drag outs back then over it and most of us, the ones who remain actually in the business and with real life clients, guarantees, warrantees etc. got with the serviceability program and if need be modified our practices to enhance AND... respect the importance of serviceability.

Rick Turner for one I recall being pretty blunt about it so much so that Rick pissed me off. I later met Rick and became friends with Rick and Rick was completely correct and I was completely wrong about serviceability and what we had argued over.

Mario P. is and was another one, a mentor to many of us who endeavored to build highly serviceable instruments acknowledging and respecting the value of serviceability even though he was seeing it though a lens of a superb builder with a five.... year.... waiting.... list.

Today alone there are more than one threads where the issue of serviceability comes into play.

I used to finish my guitars with the necks on. That's unserviceable and creates an undue burden on my clients in the future come neck reset time. It increased the risk of a poorly done reset with finish damage and it increased the cost of the reset for the client at a quality shop. I was wrong, R, O, N, G and after a dozen or so that I did this way I went for convention and finished the necks and bodies separately increasing what I call my "serviceability quotient" or how serviceable my instruments are and were.

When any builder does any practice that is not necessary or generally proven to add advantages over disadvantages AND that practice will create more burden and costs for clients in the future and they are also building to sell it's a poor practice and thing to do. Period.

Do you think that we repair guys will just take in on the chin and work longer hours, assume more risk of damage, etc without passing on the additional costs to the clients? My shop won't and my shop will also communicate very clearly and very well as we always endeavor to do just exactly why, just exactly what the builder did that decreases the serviceability of their instruments and has increased the quoted price of the work that the client wants us to do. We do this every single day regardless of who the builder was and is. Most shops do too in my experience, CYA.....

Getting personal here. I never had any kids of my own, could have, even wanted to but without going into the long story my guitars that I built are now my kids. I want them to be as good as possible, very well built, very much enjoyed, heirloom instruments designed and built to last with care 100 years or more AND always provide the utmost value to the very valued clients that I was fortunate enough to have had send their trust and faith my way.

Serviceability matters.

I read yesterday that someone didn't care if it takes a repair guy more time to remove finish from the inside of the box... Do they also not care when a pick-up transducer falls off in the middle of a performance. When a battery bag comes loose away from home for someone who has no skills to repair it... Where a LR Baggs mic loses it's grip and becomes the striker in a bell bouncing around in the instrument.

So that's my story. I'm disappointed that even a few posters that have been here long enough to know these things and didn't disagree with Rick or Mario back in the day are currently promoting unserviceable practices. I'm also disappointed that I don't see many folks taking the need for serviceability as importantly as they should. There are a few who are promoting the importance of serviceability and that's good to see and read.

No worries about we repair guys we will charge more, say more and do what it takes to provide the value to our clients that we wish to provide. The builder may not matter anymore at that point and that's why we have Reverb.com now isn't it.
Author:  DanKirkland [ Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
I'm glad you're posting here again Hesh, you've been missed.

Something that needs to be noted, if you have ever done work on instruments not designed to be serviced you will become extremely aware of exactly why certain things should be done. Here are some repair jobs that if you haven't done then you should so you can really understand how certain things should be done to make your instruments live longer and happier.

1. Guild Neck Resets. Guild used an extremely thin and wide heel design which is extremely prone to cracking if you put the *slightest* amount of pressure in the wrong spot. They also finish with the neck on the guitar.

2. Rickenbacker Re-fret. The insanely thick finish that is applied on the fretboard makes ANY fretwork a potential nightmare. The only way to really refret the thing is to refinish the board when all the fretwork is done.

3. Les Paul Neck Resets. Les Pauls do get to the point where this needs to be done. There is no easy way to do this job. Good luck. For that matter an SG, Firebird, or any other guitar with a massive mortise and tenon neck joint. Some are easier than others, most are insane.

4. Fender Maple neck refrets. These are usually a toss up for the customer between keeping the neck looking clean and new or just breaking the finish and making it more servicable than it was from the factory.

5. Spanish neck heels. It is impossible to remove the neck entirely on a traditional spanish style heeled guitar unless you remove the entire top to get at the joint. Instead the usual method I've run across is to completely remove the fingerboard and add a shim underneath that compensates for the difference in angle. This is a brutal job and is expensive for the owner to have done, and plus it can only really be done once. Frank Ford has had good success using a saw on a guitar and converted to a bolt on neck, but on a high end piece you'll not likely find people up to have that job done to their prized instrument.

If you have never done any repairs of these kinds or similar things then you should give it a shot and get a better idea of why serviceable instruments are so important.
Author:  Chris Pile [ Sun Jun 30, 2019 3:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
On this subject, I think removable necks on any guitar is a good thing. It's much easier to do refrets with the neck off the body. Fret levels, I prefer to do on the body - but I sometimes take it off to radius the frets and polish them if the body is getting in the way. This applies to acoustics and electrics.

On Chinese stuff... superglued necks. Ye Gods. You ever notice all the Epiphone Les Pauls on Squeebay with broken necks and pegheads. Good luck getting the neck off. I haven't figured out an easy way to remove them yet. If you do, let me know ASAP. Shame on them, as they know better.
Author:  DanKirkland [ Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Chris Pile wrote:
On this subject, I think removable necks on any guitar is a good thing. It's much easier to do refrets with the neck off the body. Fret levels, I prefer to do on the body - but I sometimes take it off to radius the frets and polish them if the body is getting in the way. This applies to acoustics and electrics.


Absolutely agree. On a strat I'll level the frets with the neck on and polish with it off. Much easier that way and saves me from the possibility of denting the guitar with a slip of the file.

Chris Pile wrote:
On Chinese stuff... superglued necks. Ye Gods. You ever notice all the Epiphone Les Pauls on Squeebay with broken necks and pegheads. Good luck getting the neck off. I haven't figured out an easy way to remove them yet. If you do, let me know ASAP. Shame on them, as they know better.


The only thing I've found that actually dissolves/softens the superglue/AMG crap is acetone. Some necks are doweled and are not meant to be removed. I've only removed 1 neck from a modern Epiphone and that was a Les Paul Standard and not a special. Took way too long and isn't worth the effort.
Author:  Hesh [ Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Dan thanks my friend much appreciated and good to see you posting too.

Completely agree with your points and might add that most any repair of a lifting bridge, replacing a nut, any kind of fret work will reveal "opportunities" for builders that may not have been appreciated prior. I say opportunity because any chance to improve the serviceability of your instruments is a value enhancer.

Thanks Chris. Completely agree too and enjoy Fender fret work for how easy it is to manipulate and handle the neck for good access. Some the "mystery glues" today can indeed ruin a Luthier's day.
Author:  meddlingfool [ Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
I try to be forward thinking. I would say though that most common practices are service friendly, it seems to be the outlying practices that cause grief.
Author:  doncaparker [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Hesh—

Have you ever considered writing a stand-alone guide to guitar building, from the perspective of the repair professional? It doesn’t have to be (shouldn’t be, really) a step by step guide. It could be a comprehensive look at the various methods used to build a guitar, with commentary on how each one affects the serviceability of the instrument. It could be a list of the repair person’s favorite, and least favorite, building methods, along with explanations of why some are good and some are bad.

I would pay real money for something like that.
Author:  B. Howard [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
My question then and now.... At what point is planning for serviceability planning for failure? (I remember those debates too)

Making things easier to take apart (that should not come apart in the first place...) Can lead to instability in the product and more warranty issues.

Let's take the case of finishing neck on vs. neck off.

Neck off makes a reset easier and cheaper, but is that better? Every acoustic guitar with a central sound hole will need a neck reset at some point, this is true. But at what point? how long of a service life before that? If your instruments are not capable of 20-30 years before this inevitability I suggest you worry more about bracing and structure than how easy to reset your necks are! So Planning for easy access to a job that most guitars never live long enough to actually see is a pure folly to me.

I can however provide evidence that a guitar finished with the neck already attached has benefits to actual service life rather than serviceability. I have worked for many people who travel the globe doing missionary type work in the rain forests of South America and poor Tropical islands and they take their guitars with them. I also have my brother who lives in a house that gets tidal flooding in the first floor at least twice a year( tide laps his door sill monthly) and he keeps guitars on his schooner for the long sails out to the ocean to dredge. In these type environments where instruments are subjected to cycles of rather extreme humidity changes guitars finished after the necks are attached suffer fewer problems with neck joints in general. Fewer cracked heels, less loose joints and in the end a bit more Stability against folding up toward needing a reset.

Why is that? My theory is that the finish seals the joint so it cannot react as quickly to RH swings. When RH changes, wood moves. Every cycle that occurs the block and the neck both expand and contract. Even though they may be the same species ( but are not always...) the two pieces behave independently. That is woods nature. This independent movement works on the glue line by creating stress risers and moments. Every time the RH cycles this stressing and compressing happens. Add to this a glue that is more friendly to take apart like HHG which in itself is hygroscpoic.... And now in the right environment we have created the ideal conditions for a neck to work it's way loose. Now think about the fact it only takes 1/4 degree rotation to raise the action almost 1/16" at the 12th fret.....

So here we planned for a service 20 years out and made our instrument susceptible to premature failure in certain conditions. While the repairman in me see the point of easy repairs... The builder in me insists that products be the absolute best they can be. If people want mediocre they can by that all day at guitar center..... So I build the best instrument possible and plan for a long service life without need for repair.
Author:  Woodie G [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
A least some of what passes for wisdom on servicability will be highly dependent on how a repair person's techniques, skill set, and materials usage has developed over time...taking us back to the current thread on disagreements between luthiers. While I suppose I could subscribe to the notion that if repair people were just a bit more woke, they would get my specific serviceability arguments, but a) there are genuine disagreements between repair techs that stem from both background and experience, and b) I would be using 'woke' in a non-ironic, non-sarcastic way - never cool, and always a sign of someone worthy of the reader's ire.

A few of these debatable 'serviceability heuristics' follow:

- Rearward-leaning/angled saddles (we've used them, but see too many well-fitted saddles that work well to suggest vertical saddles are somehow 'bad design')

- AR or PVA adhesives for anything structural, but particularly for constantly stressed bridge joints (there are at least a few shops claiming to specialize in repairing bridge cold-creep issues on very high-end, poly-finished acoustics, but many repair people still use Titebond as a primary adhesive, and -unlike me - see it as a viable luthiery adhesive)

- Slotted pins versus ramped & slotted bridges w/ solid pins (while most repair people we know won't debate the advantages, you'll get a robust discussion on some sites from members claiming to be current or former techs)

I think the list could be lengthened - dovetail versus bolt-on versus so-called double tenon, poly versus lacquer, and even stainless versus nickel-silver. There might even be some repair person somewhere that would advocate for Mr. Somogyi's neck joint as a particularly serviceable, rational solution...please do not laugh - it could happen.

While I agree with the notion that there are things that should be avoided by any sane builder (e.g., crowding the saddle slot against the front of the bridge/crowding the pin line against the saddle or against the back edge of the bridge), there would appear to be a lengthy list of design features, techniques, or material uses that see knowledgeable advocates argue both for and against. I would hate to see those debatable topics become litmus tests for luthiery goodness, or - worse yet - see the site progress in the direction of some fora which handle these discussions as 'settled science' so not debatable. ;)
Author:  Clay S. [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Historically guitars were (and still are) not made to be taken apart. Unlike violin family instruments the sound box is constructed in such a way that removing either the back or front plate is a major undertaking fraught with the danger of destroying the delicate elements located at the perimeter. The neck joint, rather than being a shallow set mortice sitting on the end block which a few drops of hot water can loosen Is traditionally a sliding tapered dovetail buried under a fingerboard which itself is glued over top of the joint and onto the soundboard, or worse - with an integral end block. Many of the repair operations do cause unavoidable damage to the finish.
I think guitars were designed for ease of construction rather than ease of repairability, with the understanding that they had a limited lifespan. Until relatively recently old guitars did not command much money, and were often deemed economically unrepairable. They still don't bring prices near what an old Cremona violin will fetch.
Considering all the pitfalls involved in guitar repair, finishing the neck separate from the body is a minor consideration for guitar factories. They will do it if it fits the manufacturing process.
Bob Taylor has probably done more for serviceability of acoustic guitars than anyone in recent history, but Martin still finds a ready market for it's "Authentic" series.

P.S. Brian - your brother might consider a neck similar to the old Stauffer "clock key" adjustable neck design. On the travel guitars I build the neck angle can be adjusted by turning a cap head screw located in the heel with an allen wrench. It allows the action to be dialed in to the player's requirements.
Author:  jfmckenna [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
The Ferrari F355 requires annual maintenance of replacing the timing belt and you have to remove the engine to do it. But hey if ya can afford a Ferrari then it doesn't matter much.

One of the first guitar making books I got was the one written by David Russel Young and he used to epoxy the neck with a butt joint right to the head block. I can't quote it exactly but in regards to serviceability of the neck he referred to it as 'tinker toy philosophy.' I never did agree with that but found it amusing.
Author:  doncaparker [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
While there can be debates about whether Hesh is right about everything, the average builder would still benefit from knowing what Hesh thinks, since he knows a lot about repairs. Having a resource ("Hesh on Guitar Building") would be a pretty handy item. Searching through the OLF for snippets of wisdom can be difficult and time-consuming. I would pay some money to have easier access to that knowledge in a single volume.
Author:  Woodie G [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Certainly Mr. Breakstone on repair - the last serious treatment on the subject is a little long in the tooth and repair techniques and materials seem to move along at a brisker pace than core building methods.

For building wisdom, I’d love to see a couple of builders that have a number of successful, generally well regarded instruments out in the wild talk about their first fifty versus their most recent 50, or simply the evolution of their concerns over the course of a few hundred builds. I have waited in vain for Mr. Proulx’s occasionally mentioned book to drop, and after spending time with one of his former students, Mr. Greven’s methods laid out in detail would be of interest. I sometimes wish that my favorite builders were also writers, as Mr. Flammang’s instruments seem to be both wonderful to play and quite serviceable...I am enamored of his ‘copper top’ series...if there was ever a reason for lacquering a Lutz top with a translucent pumpkin copper metallic finish, it is Mr. Flammang’s wide-waisted jumbos.

Which brings me to the utility of print versus more interactive media...I’d rather pay for online access and frequently updated multimedia content than a door stop of a book, while others likely prefer something that can be laid out flat on a bench and read as the work progresses. I believe mono-media treatments are a dying form, and certainly in my professional life, online references are simply better practice, but I’d love to be surprised by something truly stunning AND useful.
Author:  Bryan Bear [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
A book (digital or otherwise would be nice). I'd settle for a list of serviceability issues (born from construction methods) that repair people hate and a bit about why. I like when I read about a technique that creates a problem down the line. Often it is an issue I never wold have thought of. You know know what you don't know.
Author:  DanKirkland [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
So here's something to consider.

Like Brian H said we don't want to fudge on quality. As a repair focused luthier my goal is to make a repair that will last upwards of 20-30 years (that's the goal anyway).

So perhaps we could pursue a balance. We build them the absolute best we can, but we use methods that CAN be undone should it have to be worked on. But are not designed to be undone from the very start.

Hide glue/titebond I is one of those things that makes a guitar very servicable. I recall a conversation with a gentlemen (not a luthier) who was building a Weissenborn style guitar. He was telling me about his construction methods and he mentioned he was using Titebond III for everything. Asking him why he stated "Well it's going to be shipped to Hawaii, I don't want it to come apart in the humidity there". His logic was fine but he ended up making a guitar that was going to be significantly more frustrating to work on when it needs work.

Something more recent. I've been having a small deluge of Gibson acoustics from 2012-2017 coming into the shop with playability issues. Almost every single one of them has had a slipped heel thereby causing it to need a neck reset when it is far under 10 years old. This is unacceptable in my book. Gibson will warranty them but they are an absolute nightmare to deal with on the warranty service department. They use traditional construction methods but they are using them very poorly.

I bring up those two stories to show that it's not solely poor construction or poor material choices that can make a guitar difficult to service. Sometimes it can be both.

So my vote would be to build the best that you can but always consider "can this be fixed if it breaks?". Or better yet, ask a repair guy if he's dealt with a guitar with construction methods similar or like what you're doing. Sometimes getting a second set of eyes on what you're doing can help you see something you missed or could benefit from changing.
Author:  Hesh [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
doncaparker wrote:
Hesh—

Have you ever considered writing a stand-alone guide to guitar building, from the perspective of the repair professional? It doesn’t have to be (shouldn’t be, really) a step by step guide. It could be a comprehensive look at the various methods used to build a guitar, with commentary on how each one affects the serviceability of the instrument. It could be a list of the repair person’s favorite, and least favorite, building methods, along with explanations of why some are good and some are bad.

I would pay real money for something like that.


Thanks Don. Short answer is no I don't have the level of knowledge that I believe would be required to do that. There are many others such as my business partner Dave Collins, Frank Ford, Dan Erlywine who are much more experienced than I am and besides I have to work for a living and don't have time to be a writer..... laughing6-hehe beehive :D I'll skip the English major jokes...

Seriously though the students that we've had in our classes got a healthy dose of "don't do it this way because" and "even though so and so on the Internet said to do it this way they are an a-hole and we say don't do it that way..." Then we show them why. Nice work when you have a captive audience and the one we are dissing is not there to defend themselves...

Really seriously though we are respectful with most all industry pros most of the time. What you see from me here is a little different at times.

I do try to give folks here some big picture advice (for free) they just have to realize that this is what I'm doing.

For example the single greatest reason why both builders and repair folks may fail in the marketplace is trying to be all things to all people and unbridled ego. I know, I know that's two reasons and it is indeed. Find something you do exceptionally well and then stay close to home doing that.

Thanks for asking though. I worked on four guitars and completed them by noon today. Everything went great and I had a great day. I love what I do now.
Author:  Hesh [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
DanKirkland wrote:
So here's something to consider.

Like Brian H said we don't want to fudge on quality. As a repair focused luthier my goal is to make a repair that will last upwards of 20-30 years (that's the goal anyway).

So perhaps we could pursue a balance. We build them the absolute best we can, but we use methods that CAN be undone should it have to be worked on. But are not designed to be undone from the very start.

Hide glue/titebond I is one of those things that makes a guitar very servicable. I recall a conversation with a gentlemen (not a luthier) who was building a Weissenborn style guitar. He was telling me about his construction methods and he mentioned he was using Titebond III for everything. Asking him why he stated "Well it's going to be shipped to Hawaii, I don't want it to come apart in the humidity there". His logic was fine but he ended up making a guitar that was going to be significantly more frustrating to work on when it needs work.

Something more recent. I've been having a small deluge of Gibson acoustics from 2012-2017 coming into the shop with playability issues. Almost every single one of them has had a slipped heel thereby causing it to need a neck reset when it is far under 10 years old. This is unacceptable in my book. Gibson will warranty them but they are an absolute nightmare to deal with on the warranty service department. They use traditional construction methods but they are using them very poorly.

I bring up those two stories to show that it's not solely poor construction or poor material choices that can make a guitar difficult to service. Sometimes it can be both.

So my vote would be to build the best that you can but always consider "can this be fixed if it breaks?". Or better yet, ask a repair guy if he's dealt with a guitar with construction methods similar or like what you're doing. Sometimes getting a second set of eyes on what you're doing can help you see something you missed or could benefit from changing.


Great post!

G*bson sucks. We have several g*bson clients with less than two year old guitars that every time it rains they need a truss rod adjustment.... Season wood much Henry????
Author:  Hesh [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Woodie G wrote:
Certainly Mr. Breakstone on repair - the last serious treatment on the subject is a little long in the tooth and repair techniques and materials seem to move along at a brisker pace than core building methods.

For building wisdom, I’d love to see a couple of builders that have a number of successful, generally well regarded instruments out in the wild talk about their first fifty versus their most recent 50, or simply the evolution of their concerns over the course of a few hundred builds. I have waited in vain for Mr. Proulx’s occasionally mentioned book to drop, and after spending time with one of his former students, Mr. Greven’s methods laid out in detail would be of interest. I sometimes wish that my favorite builders were also writers, as Mr. Flammang’s instruments seem to be both wonderful to play and quite serviceable...I am enamored of his ‘copper top’ series...if there was ever a reason for lacquering a Lutz top with a translucent pumpkin copper metallic finish, it is Mr. Flammang’s wide-waisted jumbos.

Which brings me to the utility of print versus more interactive media...I’d rather pay for online access and frequently updated multimedia content than a door stop of a book, while others likely prefer something that can be laid out flat on a bench and read as the work progresses. I believe mono-media treatments are a dying form, and certainly in my professional life, online references are simply better practice, but I’d love to be surprised by something truly stunning AND useful.


Completely agree Woodie. My concern is that this may be a dying art and craft. I keep demographic info on our clients and our largest client base are 55 to dead males. The folks who play the least guitar are 25 and under.... That's not a good trend.

Then when you can purchase a Chinese Recording King that with a pup, good set-up, some talent produce 90% of the entertainment value at a gig for a grand total of $650 who needs more guitar... That's not a good trend either.

But no one ever accused me of being very bright when I personally went way out of my way and walked away from a high paying career to depend on the disposable income of musicians..... :) :D :lol:

Oh well there is a lot to be said for loving what we do.
Author:  Joe Beaver [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
I wasn't going to respond here but what the heck? We are all friends, right?

The term 'Serviceability' is used here frequently. The implied definition seems to align with the computer industry usage of 'make an item serviceable so we repair people can fix it. But.... the rest of the world still thinks it means 'make a product so I can use it a long time without repair'.

Herein lies the problem. It is no surprise repair people like the new definition, and most builders prefer the second when it is achievable. (Sometimes you know of a better way to build a guitar but you don't because of cost, equipment, work space or knowledge issues.)

Take finish for example. I still use nitro. Repair guys love me (well, ok, maybe not), but if I could I would use one of the newer urethane finishes. They are practically indestructible, aren't prone to checking, don't need a pick guard, the shine doesn't fade, and can be applied very thin. These finishes are very serviceable (old definition). But they are very Un-serviceable, new definition.

Too the case in point. I have built a fair number of guitars in dry Southern California that were shipped to the Southeast with its high humidity. Among other things I use CF in the braces, use a mortise and tenor neck joint and spray a light coat of rattle can urethane to the inside (which is then dulled with a Scotch Pad. Those things helped to mitigate the effects of taking the guitar from a dry, air conditioned environment to a porch or other outside area. Now I hardly see cracked wood or braces popping off. If I was to go with a urethane exterior coat I believe the occurrence would be even rarer.
And as for installing pickups, I have only done a couple but I did try the double stick tape they supply on wood that had been 1/2 sprayed with urethane. then sanded once cured, with the bare wood also sanded. I couldn't tell the difference in holding ability. But, double stick tape varies and it may not work on urethane with some.

So have I disregarded serviceability? No, I do what I do for serviceability. (The kind of Serviceability an owner understands)
Author:  Woodie G [ Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Four recent issues of note with custom guitars:

- Failed saddle slot on three year old custom guitar...far too close to the front of the bridge and a poor neck set (and no support from builder to resolve)

- Bridge cold creep on two very, very expensive custom guitars...one of the most prolific and experienced builders in the US (thick glue line...Titebond to compound the problem...builder completely refinishing the guitars at significantly reduced cost to owner)

- Bridge too thin for neck set; neck reset at customer request made the problem worse...now less than 0.060" saddle left...returned to builder, who may or may not have addressed the issue

One of the builders is still making the same mistake (judging from his current stock on his web site), and refuses to acknowledge that the issue is a design flaw...no change in behavior because nothing has been learned. The famous builder with the bridge issues understands the issue, corrects it for free where the instrument is in warranty, and discounts the repair for those that are not...and more importantly, is using a revised method for gluing bridge to top. No knowledge on whether the final luthier ever figured out how to control his neck geometry.

All three were likely convinced they were producing a 'servicable' instrument prior to encountering what were fairly significant flaws in their methods.
Author:  gregorio [ Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Hesh wrote:
doncaparker wrote:
Hesh—

Have you ever considered writing a stand-alone guide to guitar building, from the perspective of the repair professional? It doesn’t have to be (shouldn’t be, really) a step by step guide. It could be a comprehensive look at the various methods used to build a guitar, with commentary on how each one affects the serviceability of the instrument. It could be a list of the repair person’s favorite, and least favorite, building methods, along with explanations of why some are good and some are bad.

I would pay real money for something like that.


Thanks Don. Short answer is no I don't have the level of knowledge that I believe would be required to do that. There are many others such as my business partner Dave Collins, Frank Ford, Dan Erlywine who are much more experienced than I am and besides I have to work for a living and don't have time to be a writer..... laughing6-hehe beehive :D I'll skip the English major jokes...

Seriously though the students that we've had in our classes got a healthy dose of "don't do it this way because" and "even though so and so on the Internet said to do it this way they are an a-hole and we say don't do it that way..." Then we show them why. Nice work when you have a captive audience and the one we are dissing is not there to defend themselves...

Really seriously though we are respectful with most all industry pros most of the time. What you see from me here is a little different at times.

I do try to give folks here some big picture advice (for free) they just have to realize that this is what I'm doing.

For example the single greatest reason why both builders and repair folks may fail in the marketplace is trying to be all things to all people and unbridled ego. I know, I know that's two reasons and it is indeed. Find something you do exceptionally well and then stay close to home doing that.

Thanks for asking though. I worked on four guitars and completed them by noon today. Everything went great and I had a great day. I love what I do now.


WRONGOOOOOO!

You do have a high level of knowledge and are gracious enough to share.
If we waited for the person with "the most knowledge" to write, we may not get any information at all.
Not to mention, you obviously enjoy writing; ever seen your posts? ; )

For real, my Hesh bookmarks folder is getting out of control. hah!

There is never a bad time to remind someone that you appreciate what they do.
Thanks Hesh.

gregor
Author:  jfmckenna [ Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
I would read Hesh's book if for anything, the humor.
Author:  Tai Fu [ Tue Jul 02, 2019 11:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Just a question...

Does electric guitars ever need neck resets? I mean the solid body is generally strong enough to tension a suspension bridge cable...

Unless someone left the Les Paul in a hot car and the glue came loose...
Author:  Chris Pile [ Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Quote:
Does electric guitars ever need neck resets?


Yes, but not as often. Oftentimes - it's easier to deal with by adjusting or changing hardware on the body. But, yes - once in awhile.
Author:  Tai Fu [ Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Why Serviceability Matters
Also, I think bolt on necks are the ultimate in serviceability. Especially if you can get it so it does not need to be glued in. But there is not a small number of guitar players out there who thinks bolts do not belong on an acoustic guitar and would dismiss any such guitars outright.

Even if Martins use bolts in all their guitars.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/