Official Luthiers Forum!

I believe that sustain comes from using materials that are free from internal stresses and joining them in ways that do not create stresses. Unstressed materials have a good ringing sound when you knock on them or drop them. This applies to the wood and also the brass or steel going into the bridge. With a neck through body there is no stress at the "neck joint". A set neck that has to be jammed together or that has voids or glue gaps will increase stress. A bolt on neck will usually sound better if you get screws that are as long as possible (cut long ones down to size) and make sure the pilot holes are a size that allows the screws to go in with only a moderate amount of turning force. All the parts of the guitar should go together gently without being forced into shape by clamps or screws.
Tone quality is not a science and while we would all like to make a guitar that all our friends would lust after, in the end it is sad to have to admit that there are very few types of guitars that have a good character to the tone, and many that just sound kind of generic and bland.
The Les Paul and Strat formulas work and make versatile and expressive instruments. As luthiers and mad scientist we must be brutally honest with ourselves. Does my experiment really have more character in the tone than either of these ancient successes? Or do I just love it because it is mine and works and is beautiful, with a bland tone?
And why the heck do Gibson and Fender keep multiplying "improvements" that make so many of their Strat and LP models sound so generic? Did the engineers with ears all quit?

I am getting ready to start cutting wood for necks and had last minute thought. I was going to go with like 2-1/4" width neck thru, then it hit me that that if I direct mounted pickups to the body 2-1/4" would be to narrow and I could actually be direct connecting to glued on body sides not the true thru neck. Same goes for bridge. I think I am going to go 4" wide so pickups and bridge are truely direct mounted to the neck. Hope to post some photos once neck/necks are glued up.

Sounds like a good plan Tony.
Will the neck wood (in the body area) be one-piece or laminated?
DZ

_________________
wah
Wah-wah-wah-wah
Wah

Actually I ran into some issues and only made it slightly wider than the finished neck width. I glued up a total of five pieces, three pieces Osage with two Walnut stringers. I had thought about making the two outside pieces of Osage wide enough so the actual outside wood of the neck would take the pickup screws and bridge bolts.

This would have caused issues to long to go into here. I decided to make it as easy on myself as possible seeing this is a first build attempt. At least it's started!

Here is a photo of Osage and Walnut neckthru blank after cleaning up some. At least project is started now.


neck blank1 by coyotegod62, on Flickr

No...sustain really is regulated by the stability of the fulcrums. Stability limits the degree of energy dissipation. Air friction and string ductility account for some natural energy loss but those factors are the same on all guitars using the same gauge of strings. Any relative movement of the fulcrums will transmit energy out of the string....which is almost entirely lost (with electric guitars). This can be illustrated by considering various materials as substitutes for neck wood. Think about mahogany, then pine, then polystyrene, then balsa, and finally, styrrofoam. No matter how internally stable or stress free these materials are...common sense tells you that the sustain of a neck created with them will decrease as you build chronologically from this list. "Stiffness dictates sustain" but mechanics underlying that statement is the relative stability of the fulcrums.

One should note that neckthroughs are often constructed from laminated hardwoods that aren't typically used to make solid guitar necks. Perhaps neckthroughs have gained notoriety for sustaining not because the neck joint is eliminated...but because the necks are stiffer.

I believe stress in a neck wood will work to thwart overtones...as will density. If one could determine that two necks were identically stiff but one had internal stresses...they both would sustain the same but the neck without internal stress would exhibit a more musical tone.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

Zlurgh
Astute observations - that makes alot of sense to me.....
cheers
Charliewood

Sustain indicates that string energy is not leaking out of the system as vibrations. Important on both electric and acoustic guitars where you want the top to vibrate but not the sides. I would be concerned if I could feel my guitar neck vibrate.

A study was published in the GAL journal a few years ago that tested sustain of through, set and bolt on necks. Wood to wood contact of a bolt on neck and through necks were much better than set necks.

These kinds of published controlled scientific studies are easy to do and repeat and actually get us closer to an answer. Something endless internet debates will never do.
Cheers
Dom

Then why were all the first few years of Les Pauls painted gold?
They've even found LP's painted gold with beautiful tiger maple tops...

And I seem to remember a Guitar Player interview with Les way back in the Stone Age where he mentioned them adding the maple to brighten up the sound.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

They probably painted their first guitars because it's a lot easier to paint guitars than to give them clear coats. But I'm only saying it's possible that the maple facing is a manufacturing preference. I doubt I'm ever going to make two guitars to test the "brightness" theory. I did that once already with chambers and all I got out of that deal was an 11 lb. guitar.

Looking at Fenders there wasn't ANYTHING that wasn't done initially, design-wise, to minimize their manufacturing costs. For Gibson to compete with them, manufacturing costs had to be a MAJOR consideration, since their competitive models were set neck guitars made from more expensive, thicker woods.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

.....as mahogany gets dinged up if you even look at it wrong, maybe gibson got tired of guitar faces denting up before they even left the factory
just hot air/speculation of course

Oh?
All top-routing with a pickguard?

Leo didn't want to carve anything, ya know.
The guy was a genius with a screwdriver in his pocket who didn't play.
His stuff was the definition of simple to make, and lo-buck to boot.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Yeah...I used a double negative there...

Leo invented the ultimate cheap guitar is what I was trying to say.

No angle headstocks made for the smallest necessary hunk of maple for necks. Stamped out bridge parts. Alder body wood. Decal logos. And yes...top routing for wires and pre-assembled, pre-wired pickguards. You have to hand it to Fender though...he was the Henry Ford of guitars and put a LOT of decent quality guitars into a lot of hands that otherwise would not have had access to good instruments.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

Damnstraight.
And we all lived happily ever after.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince