#46
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
and a kraut: but back to the thread! Joost, the guitar look amazing! Love that Brazilian!
__________________
Eric Omega Braz MJ, 2011 Omega MJ Braz Baritone Ryan Cathedral ABW/Bosnian Build thread: 2011 Kostal Mod D Brazilian/German Build thread: 2019 Kostal MDW Brazilian/German Build thread:2019 Bigfoot Mod D |
#47
|
||||
|
||||
Designed a new guitar, follow the build. Alpine Spruce, Brazilian RW GF
Maybe the responses from fellow forum members like Ericssong and Gitarro are enough, but I do feel openness is always the best policy, so here is my take on this.
First off, i've been very open from the very first post about who inspired me, and below you will see a screenshot of my mood board when I started designing this. In the second picture, I have placed my design next to Matsuda and Casimi and I do feel that it is sufficiently different to all of them. Furthermore, not another thing is similar, the structural design, The bracing, the neck joint, everything else is completely different. In the final picture you can see how different my Rosette and inlay is to the Casimi while clearly an inspiration. I cannot help but think that if this is enough to cause issues, then how would these same people respond to Julius Borges, Collings, Bourgeois, Circa Guitars, Santa Cruz and many others who openly copy every single aspect of Martin guitars. When I made this design, I printed out a lot of pictures from my ‘inspiration’ folder, which included Waanders, Ryan, Somogyi, Matsuda and of course Casimi pictures and surrounded myself with them. I also printed out pictures of organic looking cars like the Porsche Mission E. For instance, my sound port design on my previous Waanders Nylon Project was inspired by Super Car side vents. When I designed the rosette/top inlay, I looked at both Casimi and some Michi Matsuda designs I’ve fallen in love with years ago, with lines that increased the apparent surface area and made it one with the lines of the guitar. Then, because the guitar will be as big as a Lowden O model, with a wide waist, I came up with the ‘side shading’ part of the top inlay, to suggest a smaller guitar than it actually was. I wanted to do my own take on it and expand it by making a top inlay that goes all the way to the right side of the guitar (to offset the bevel on the other end) as well as a large area left of the fretboard like some Matsuda lines you see in the mood board. The body shape started out as Febo’s Grand Auditorium 14-fret model and the measurements at the lower bout, waist and upper bout are those of a Lowden O-model (their largest guitar). This is also very different from Casimi who only make 12-fret models with much deeper cutaways with tighter curves than our Venetian cutaway and they have smaller body sizes. As for Kevin Ryan. I am good friends with him, I bought two of his guitars and asked his permission to use some of his features on my other project guitar (a Nylon Crossover) which he graciously gave me in writing. Kevin’s bevel is now so ubiquitous, used often without asking permission and I personally have not seen a website or builder yet that credits him, only Laskin or Manzer, who in all fairness came up with the idea, even though Kevin’s design is clearly what made it almost standard in high end guitars today. Kevin Ryan has been very generous towards me with his time and ideas and I would never use any of his stuff without his approval. Kevin really believes in the old school Luthier motto of paying it forward. Jim Olson and Bob Taylor really helped him when he got started and he openly used their designs (his Mission is almost exactly an Olson SJ), so he generously taught the people at Taylor Guitars how to make his bevel to return the favour, after Bob shared his knowledge on UV lacquers and CNC and laser machines. When people started copying his Acoustic Parallell Plate, he generously commented on it. His words: "So, it is great to see luthierie thriving and ideas bouncing around like this. This is good for the craft. And I trust this has been ok for me to try to help by posting my observations. If any luthier out there is interested, I would obviously be happy to help with more of the engineering behind the APP." He understands we’re all taking ideas from each other and making amalgamations of what we like of each idea. In the world of acoustic guitar, ‘there’s nothing new under the sun’. Ryan’s Acoustic Parallel plate was his take on the Nomex honey comb top and even then he wasn’t the first to use spruce instead. His open bracings had also been done before in a different way. That’s what I like about the world of Lutherie. Everyone is so generous with their time, designs and ideas. I talked extensively to Rick Turner about his flying buttresses and he helped me in any way he could. Same goes for Somogyi and Howard Klepper. It’s just a wonderful and generous community. Anyway. Here are my mood board and the comparison pictures and I hope that settles it.
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter Last edited by Joost Assink; 08-29-2016 at 09:35 AM. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for that post Joost, I think it cleared up all of my concerns wonderfully.
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
Designed a new guitar, follow the build. Alpine Spruce, Brazilian RW GF
I made some nice progress in frequency analysis for targets and tweaking. By using Spectro Frequency Analysis (FTT analysis) you can establish the main Air, Top and Back resonance of a guitar. Those need to be within a certain range for it to sound good. Also, this is how you can find wolf notes and fix them as well as generally getting the most out of any guitar. I played and measured 38 guitars and gave them my subjective impression and graded them on a scale of 1-100. Then I put the data through the analysis algorithm which identified the 'bad' basic resonances by colouring them red.
Funnily enough, as you can see in the screenshot, when I then sorted the guitars in order of their grade (high to low), it showed that the guitars I didn't like, going down the list had an increased number of drop outs in their three basic resonant frequencies. So, for my ears at least, the theory worked matching my subjective grading with the objective measurements. Fascinating stuff! It will give me good frequency targets and a way to tweak the guitars once they're done to fix any wolf notes and generally get them to their peak performance! Exciting!!!! BTW, in case you're wondering, the red cell scores show most frequencies were too high, which means too heavily built.
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter Last edited by Joost Assink; 08-30-2016 at 07:43 AM. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Lovely work Joost!
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
I can see myself spending way too much time looking over your data. Have a couple of questions though. What are the last four columns? Also you say 'had an increased number of drop outs in their three basic resonant frequencies' and the software identified the 'bad' basic resonances by colouring them red. Are you saying the resonances were the wrong frequencies or that the peaks at these frequencies were not as prominent? Great work, now once I understand it...
__________________
Fred |
#52
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Well the theory, which I tested, is that for a guitar to sound good, the three basic resonant frequencies need to be in a certain range, which depends on the model. For instance, for a medium sized steel string guitar, the main air frequency should be between 90 and 101 Hz. The main top frequency should be between 170-190 hz and the main back frequency should be between 214 and 240 Hz. If the main top frequency is above 190 hz, that means the top is heavier than it should be, same goes for a back that is above 240 Hz. Now there is more significance in these number, complicating the algorithm, because you also want to make sure the interval between the main Air and main top frequency is not exactly one octave because that will create negative coupling, draining energy. If you look at the intervals, it's usually a close call. For the interval between the top and the back, about 3 semitones is an ideal interval, for an active back design. Finally, none of these three frequencies should be on a scale note as this will create wolf notes. As you can see from the 170-190 hz range of a good main top frequency, that falls exactly within the range for an F(3)-F#(3)-G(3). Those are found on the 7-9 frets on your A string for instance. As many of you will have noticed, these are quite frequently problem notes. Same goes for the Main Air frequency, which coincides with the F(2)-F#(2)-G(2) ranges, which are found on frets 1-3 of your low E-string. To minimise that problem, you should tune the guitar to fall exactly halfway between the scale notes. So with those three main frequencies, we can: -tweak the size and weight of the top with bracing -tweak the size and weight of the back with bracing -tweak the weight of the bridge -fix wolf notes -get the optimal interval for the best coupling of main top and air frequencies -get the optimal interval for the best coupling of main top and back frequencies And all of this when the guitar is fully built (actually, it won't even work before) Hope this helped. And all credits go to Trevor Gore and Gerard Gilet for working all this out and making it understandable to a goof like me!
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Joost, I see that your work is based on the book by Trevor Gore. While the opinions of such luthiery gurus as Blazer and Henkes, Somogyi and Carruth are backed up by the fact that there are significant numbers of guitar buyers who have played and owned their guitars on forums like this, I have actually hardly ever seen a post by anyone who has actually owned a guitar made by Gore.
While the science sounds convincing, there is nothing like actually playing a guitar made according to these principles by the one who is teaching them to appreciate subjectively the qualities imparted by the application of those principles so taught. is there anyone who has played or owned a Gore guitar before and can describe the tone to their ears? |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Designed a new guitar, follow the build. Alpine Spruce, Brazilian RW GF
Quote:
Well, that is exactly why I wanted to test the theory for myself, and my subjective impressions coincided with his data, making me think there is some value to it, and exactly why I wanted to have quite a significant number of guitars played and measured before I accept it as fact. There are also many luthiers on some well-known luthier forums who praise the Gore Gilet books as one of the very best works in modern acoustic guitar. I was pointed toward these books by several others before I gave it the time of day really. To me that also counts for something. I also use many other books including Somogyi's as a reference. And of course our own experience and ideas. It's really an amalgamation. For instance, my top bracing design is really much more based on some advanced forward shifted x-bracing and not his falcate bracing design. Same goes for the neck joint and other parts that are quite different on his guitars then my design. It's really the theoretical understanding and modeling of the guitar that is so superior in his books, and many use this particular part of the theory I tested above for tweaking. Finally, even though I have never played a Trevor Gore guitar, I know many builders who have built entire guitars to his theories and blueprints and feel they are among the very best they have ever built. Many are also saying that it is these books have moved their understanding and building many years forward. Again, I am only using small parts, but I am excited about the implications.
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter Last edited by Joost Assink; 08-31-2016 at 08:17 AM. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
My understanding is that it was Grit Laskin who was involved in the bevel being used on Taylors. |
#56
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Well, this is what I was told almost a decade ago. I am very sure Bob Taylor sent his tech down to help install and get the CNC and laser machines running for Kevin, and it was my understanding that since the bevel used by Taylor and R. Taylor is clearly the Ryan bevel, Kevin help them there. But it's been so long ago, I cannot be sure who told me that last part. Doesn't matter though, because it is the principle behind the examples I mentioned that illustrate the sharing and giving nature of the Luthier community which is been well documented by others including Bob Taylor himself in his books and Kevin's articles.
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#58
|
||||
|
||||
Designed a new guitar, follow the build. Alpine Spruce, Brazilian RW GF
Would ya look at that!
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
What a great way to start the weekend. Still looking very crude, but now we can sand everything flat and smooth to accommodate the bevel and bindings and the purfling.
__________________
"Be the change you want to see in the world." My Youtube Page My Video Recordings My Audio Recordings My Sheetmusic My Twitter |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
It will be an extraordinary effort
|