The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > Custom Shop

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #166  
Old 11-20-2017, 04:44 PM
jmat jmat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 488
Default

Looking sharp bruce.

Out of curiosity, would you mind explaining what advantages you see of building from the top vs. the back?
__________________
Multiple guitars including a 1979 Fender that needs a neck re-set
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 11-20-2017, 05:24 PM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

Hard to say what the advantage is as I don't do it the other way over. The Spanish tradition to which I subscribe does it this way. My peone construction method could not work back down. Since the sides are perpendicular to the top, and not to the back, it seem logical to me to work off the top. I do not charge for my body wedge as it is quite easy to put the back on at a jaunty angle. Not so true if it has to be done before the box is otherwise assembled, or so I imagine. On the other hand, bevels might be easier back down for similar reasons. I will probably never do a bevel though, as I believe they are incompatible with my traditional/vintage guitar construction concept.
__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 11-20-2017, 08:10 PM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

Late Monday pics for you. I imagine I will close this box tomorrow morning.



__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 11-20-2017, 08:17 PM
LouieAtienza LouieAtienza is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 4,147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Sexauer View Post
Late Monday pics for you. I imagine I will close this box tomorrow morning.



Bruce, your tone bar configuration intrigues me. Could you enlighten me as to your theory behind it? Thanks...
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 11-20-2017, 11:55 PM
Kieran Kieran is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 46
Default

Hi Bruce, could you confirm that with your technique you are relying on the radius of the top/sides to ensure there is no gap between the fingerboard extension and the top when the neck is set.
Many thanks for the informative build thread.

Kieran
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 11-21-2017, 10:45 AM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran View Post
Hi Bruce, could you confirm that with your technique you are relying on the radius of the top/sides to ensure there is no gap between the fingerboard extension and the top when the neck is set.
Many thanks for the informative build thread.

Kieran
I have read this several times and do not understand the question. I do not see what the radius of the top has to do with any potential gap between the fingerboard extension and the top. The fingerboard is quite flexible, and the top curvatures are nominal.

At a recent NCAL meeting someone was talking about how "of course" all Luthiers flatten their UTB to receive the fingerboard no matter what else they do with their top radii. This was a surprise to me as I actually use more radius in my UTB than any other top brace. I have good reasons for this, but nothing to do with the fingerboard, which seems like an incidental factor, and certainly not a problem.

If there is a problem I am not seeing, please describe it further.
__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 11-21-2017, 10:50 AM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LouieAtienza View Post
Bruce, your tone bar configuration intrigues me. Could you enlighten me as to your theory behind it? Thanks...
2 inches less tone bar than Martin AND better free plate coverage at the same time; what's to understand?
__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 11-21-2017, 06:42 PM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

Closed Tom's box today:



__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 11-22-2017, 06:58 PM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

I'm feeling bad not posting in Tom's Happy T-day thread today, but isn't that tomorrow? I gave the dog a longer than typical walk (what a good dog!), but still expect to put in a solid 8+ hours! Of course I AM calling writing this working.

There are a few people liable to be watching this thread who are in my build queue, and who have not previously commissioned one of my guitars directly from me. I'd like to point out, for sake of reference, that this guitar, as well as the last two, all all examples of my base line guitar with small upgrades on two, and a small down grade on the other.

The first is the Mahogany 000, and it has a little less purfling than my standard package, mostly in the interest af making it more Schoenberg/Martin-like which was the customer's preference.

The second, Bob's SJ, has three upgrades, the Australian Blackwood, The high grade Adi top, and the Cutaway. The trim package in my standard. The rosette is atypical, but about the same time and materials.

This Pernambuco OM is my standard guitar throughout, plus Pernambuco. I upgraded the top to suit the upgraded wood, which I often do. My point is, when you look at my base price, these are examples of what you'd get.

I have half the binding on the OM, by the way:
__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 11-27-2017, 07:41 PM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

Today I started the neck on the P OM . . . but mainly I 1500 gritted the body on Vic's 000 and buffed it out:

There are those who discount a top with visible run out in it, but I am not among them. I am quite please with having located the most fiber aligned part of this top just below the bridge in the center of the belly. This is the last of the 50 Rivolta "E grade" tops (their best) Eric Schoenberg and I bought together in 2002, and therefore arguably the worst of the batch.







Trying to get the beautiful color of this Mahogany is challenging.

__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 11-27-2017, 11:51 PM
tadol tadol is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 2,713
Default

stopped by Bruces shop on Sunday, caught him slotting a fretboard - he has a very cool self-designed system that offers a very simple way to quickly slot a fingerboard at almost any scale length in just a few minutes. He had the template machined, and was selling them ot one point - I'll let him respond if he still has any for sale.

but heres 4 minutes of your life you wont get back - cute dog, though -

https://youtu.be/6JM3D-MyEn0
__________________
More than a few Santa Cruz, a few Sexauers, a Patterson, a Larrivee, and a Klepper!!
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 11-28-2017, 09:09 PM
Nort Nort is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: So. Ca.
Posts: 635
Default

Excellent Bruce, very fine slotting setup!

Tad, Thanks for the video, best 4 min. of my day so far
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 11-28-2017, 10:22 PM
Jamiejoon Jamiejoon is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tadol View Post
stopped by Bruces shop on Sunday, caught him slotting a fretboard - he has a very cool self-designed system that offers a very simple way to quickly slot a fingerboard at almost any scale length in just a few minutes. He had the template machined, and was selling them ot one point - I'll let him respond if he still has any for sale.

but heres 4 minutes of your life you wont get back - cute dog, though -

https://youtu.be/6JM3D-MyEn0
Very cool!
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 11-29-2017, 03:00 PM
redir redir is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Mountains of Virginia
Posts: 3,690
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
I have taken many clues from Bruce and his generous documentation he provides for us to follow. I also build off the top without a mold, I used to worry about getting the front and end block parallel to each other. In the last two instruments I found a simple solution to ensure that they are square and parallel. I cut a 2"X2" spruce stud to the inside dimensions between the blocks with a miter saw. I clamp it between the blocks and then glue and clamp the blocks down. When the glue is dry just unclamp and remove the 2"X2". It made gluing the blocks in a no brainer.
What a great idea. Thanks for sharing!
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 11-30-2017, 12:41 PM
Bruce Sexauer's Avatar
Bruce Sexauer Bruce Sexauer is offline
AGF Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Posts: 4,930
Default

I have the first coat of oil varnish on the OM I am making for Tom:







__________________
Bruce
http://www.sexauerluthier.com/
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > Custom Shop

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=