Klepper - SSD curly Oregon Claro - new sound clips added

[tadol]

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

Whatever Howard does "under the hood" is up to him. I've described what I like in a guitar (tone and volume) and what I want from this one. He'll make the decisions about how to get there.

Thats exactly the approach anyone should take with a good luthier -

[justonwo]

You are in good hands. I'm in Albany. You should take my Klepper for a spin one of these days.

Originally Posted by tadol

Thats exactly the approach anyone should take with a good luthier -

I think it depends on the goal. If I want an exact, within the confines of human ability, copy of a prewar Martin, Gibson, Larson, etc., then I think I'd be a lot more inclined to enquire about the details. For example, I know of more than one case where a person pay for such a "copy" only to find out critical details were changed because the builder thought his way was "better" than the prewar design. Whether it was or not really doesn't matter because the buyer didn't get what was promised.

In my case I feel very comfortable without Howard making those choices. Now, being the type of kid who had to know how the toy worked, I'll want to know all about the bracing, bridge plate, etc., when the guitar is finished. I want to see it work and know why it behaves the way it does. Just a character flaw I guess.

Originally Posted by justonwo

You are in good hands. I'm in Albany. You should take my Klepper for a spin one of these days.

Kentucky?

[justonwo]

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

I think it depends on the goal. If I want an exact, within the confines of human ability, copy of a prewar Martin, Gibson, Larson, etc., then I think I'd be a lot more inclined to enquire about the details. For example, I know of more than one case where a person pay for such a "copy" only to find out critical details were changed because the builder thought his way was "better" than the prewar design. Whether it was or not really doesn't matter because the buyer didn't get what was promised.

In my case I feel very comfortable without Howard making those choices. Now, being the type of kid who had to know how the toy worked, I'll want to know all about the bracing, bridge plate, etc., when the guitar is finished. I want to see it work and know why it behaves the way it does. Just a character flaw I guess.


Kentucky?

It's been a long time since I've been to Kentucky. I'm from WV. If I would, I could.

I thought it was too good to be true, but I was hoping when you said Albany, you were visiting the one close to me.

[murrmac123]

Great choice of builder, Todd. I am going to follow this thread with interest.

Being a numbers junkie, what I would like to know before the build starts is the specs ... scale length, nut width, string spacing at bridge, body length, body depth (at both ends) bout widths ... all that good stuff.

You might want to consider getting Howard to fit a JLD Bridge Doctor right from the git-go ... Breedlove style ... for maximum tone enhancement ...

Originally Posted by murrmac123

Great choice of builder, Todd. I am going to follow this thread with interest.

Being a numbers junkie, what I would like to know before the build starts is the specs ... scale length, nut width, string spacing at bridge, body length, body depth (at both ends) bout widths ... all that good stuff.

You might want to consider getting Howard to fit a JLD Bridge Doctor right from the git-go ... Breedlove style ... for maximum tone enhancement ...

There's one in every crowd!

Howard may be able to supply the body dimensions, or I can measure it after the build is complete. Of course you can expect bracing photos and all that. I guess these will be the first bracing photos of mine not taken after the guitar was built, sometimes decades after.

Long scale, nominal 25.4". Not sure exactly what scale length Howard uses for calculating fret spacing.

I'm seriously leaning toward 1 11/16" nut and 2 1/8" bridge. I have guitars in all sorts of configurations, but these days I mostly play vintage Martins. And due to me being a cheapskate, most of those are postwar narrow necks. I get along with that setup just fine. If that does turn out to be my choice, then my late 40's Martin necks will serve as the inspiration for neck depth and shape.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by murrmac123

Great choice of builder, Todd. I am going to follow this thread with interest.

Being a numbers junkie, what I would like to know before the build starts is the specs ... scale length, nut width, string spacing at bridge, body length, body depth (at both ends) bout widths ... all that good stuff.

You might want to consider getting Howard to fit a JLD Bridge Doctor right from the git-go ... Breedlove style ... for maximum tone enhancement ...

It's a good thing I understand your sense of humor, Murray.

All dimensions are nominal. I build without molds.

Body length 20"
depth at neck 3-3/4"
depth at tail 4-3/4"
lower bout 15"
waist 9-7/8"
upper bout 10-7/8"

[murrmac123]

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

I'm seriously leaning toward 1 11/16" nut and 2 1/8" bridge.

Could you see your way to making that string spacing 2 3/16", Todd ?

One of my (possibly irrational) convictions is that whatever the nut width is, the string spacing should be exactly 1/2" wider. I am aware that not all models of Martin guitars follow this "rule", but the ones I liked best did.

Originally Posted by murrmac123

Could you see your way to making that string spacing 2 3/16", Todd ?

Depends on how much you're willing to pony up for the privilege of helping me make decisions.

I chose 1 11/16" and 2 1/8", at least for the sake of discussion, because that was used nearly every 14 fret Martin from 1939 until the 1980's, and is still the default pairing for most 14 fret D's and 000's. It works for me, but I could be persuaded to do something different I guess.

[murrmac123]

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

Depends on how much you're willing to pony up for the privilege of helping me make decisions.

best I could do would be to compose an original Celtic style fingerstyle piece , put it up on Youtube and call it "Todd Yates SSD Build from Howard Klepper" ... in traditional longwinded and verbose style ala O'Carolan and Niel Gow ...

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

I chose 1 11/16" and 2 1/8", at least for the sake of discussion, because that was used nearly every 14 fret Martin from 1939 until the 1980's, and is still the default pairing for most 14 fret D's and 000's. It works for me, but I could be persuaded to do something different I guess.

I just always have felt that these guitars could have benefited from a fraction more string spacing, and also a fractionally greater width at the 12th fret (which equates to a slightly wider fretboard taper ).

[CoolerKing]

Congrats Todd! Looking forward to following along.

Originally Posted by matthewpartrick

Congrats Todd! Looking forward to following along.

I'm looking forward to it as well.

I can say this, so far Howard has been just delightful! This is a whole new thing for me, and I have had a lot of questions. Howard's been very helpful in explaining options, the pros and cons, and just generally guiding me through. We still have several decisions to make. I'm looking forward to that, and all the rest of the process.

[rmyAddison]

Todd,

Just a post to wish you luck, Howard has a great reputation.

I'm 67, and owned some pretty expensive Martins, actually a LOT of Martins, but never went the custom route, I will follow this with "interest"..........

[j. Kinnaird]

Very pretty wood. I'm looking forward to this build