Edwinson Performance C/F, V. 3.0, Show 'n Tell

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by mikealpine

Steve, so sorry I've been out of touch of late, but stopped in today, and am so glad I did! This guitar is stunning, innovative and amazing in so many ways!! I know the lead-up to the move has been a tough journey, but I know you'll be wildly successful and happy. This a great start to a new chapter. Looking forward to all of the great things you'll be telling us as everything progresses!!

Hi, Mike! I think of you so often, since we struck up a friendship, and I am really looking forward to the next chapter in this saga, wherein I get to build you a beautiful new guitar with some very special Macassar Ebony (or, something else...?) It's been quite a journey, often fraught with obstacles, to get to this point, but good things are happening, and I'm SO GLAD you're part of it. Be well, and prosper, Brother!

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by J.R. Rogers

What a stunner! I can't say enough about how good this thing looks. Congratulations to the new owner! As a fellow owner of a few Edwinson guitars I'm sure this one sounds great also.

JR

Hey, J. R.! Let's write some more history together. One of these days, I'm going to take a long road trip, and one of my most eagerly anticipated stops will be visiting you and Holly in your new home. Rocky Mountain High!

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by Zandit75

Yet another beautiful guitar!!
I absolutely love your open headstock design, as well as your inspiration from Cassimi. I'm doing a semi scratch build myself, and I plan to do my own take on this design.
I've already completed one demo version to see how the string directions go, and ensure there is no entanglement of the strings. You really need to look at the design from an engineer's viewpoint!
In regards to the tuners, have you considered using locking tuners like those used in electric guitar builds?
Your method for re-stringing sounds very simplified, but using locking tuners would simplify it even more I believe. Or, have you already looked at this, and discarded the idea for some reason?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.

You're absolutely right, you really need to approach these designs from an engineering standpoint. There are a lot of form = function things to consider. When I set out to design the Omega headstock, the first thing I did was draw up a couple of 100% scale drawings to see how the string trajectory works. I settled on a headstock angle of eight degrees, same as I use for my Pogoda style slot-head. (My standard solid headstock has a back-angle of thirteen degrees.) That gives you an optimum break angle of the strings from nut to tuner posts to ensure full contact and string down-pressure on the nut.

And the headstock taper is important too. You notice how the tuner posts are aimed slightly downhill, so the strings need to be firmly anchored so they won't slip off the posts... Well, the taper that I came up with actually has the effect of locking those string winds tightly on the posts, aided and abetted by that downward angle! Instead of being less secure, the strings are actually MORE secure on the posts! And I think this will prevent slippage and de-tuning as well.



After I drew everything out, I made a set of routing templates, and then made a mock-up headstock with a chunk of Aromatic Cedar to test tuner fit, and measure the actual, 3-D string trajectories. Everything worked! Eureka!

To be honest, I had not even thought of using locking tuners. My favorite go-to tuners, Gotoh 510 Mini's, work brilliantly with this design. In fact, any good quality tuner designed for solid headstocks will work. Including locking ones.

I would NOT use tuners designed for slotted headstocks, though, because the posts are straight, not lathe-cut bobbin shapes- and it's that solid-headstock tuner post shape that makes this design work.

I don't really think that locking tuners would add anything to the stability of the strings, or help with tuning accuracy. The way the strings lock into place with the tuner post angle, and the pull of the strings, I've found that this headstock design is about as accurate and stable as it gets. And you have dozens of tuners available. On my next one, I'm going to use some Schaller Grand Tune open gear tuners. Those machines are so sexy... Wooo.

I hope you'll share your new open headstock design with us Forum-ites, when you have it done. I'm curious to see your process.
And like I mentioned, I want to make a video about these open headstocks. They really are easy and quick to string up, so if you really like the slot-head or the open design, don't be intimidated by the notion that string changes are a pain. That's a myth.

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by David Wren

Impressive is the word that comes to mind. Wow ... love it!

Hi, David! What's REALLY impressive, and inspiring, and basically a great celebration of the spirit of the creative impulse in us humans is your Group of Seven project. Seven of the greatest luthiers to EVER grace this planet, creating an homage to some of the greatest visual artists... I am speechless with awe at what you guys are doing. Brilliant, and moving! Thanks for sharing the story so lavishly in your current thread. Can't wait for the BIG REVEAL!

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by Jamiejoon

Wow, this is a knockout. LOVE what you are doing. Good luck on your quest for IT. I hope to own an Edwinson soon.

Thanks, Jamie. I hope you own an Edwinson soon too. In the new workshop, I will be taking my game up a notch or two. I'd love to build you one!

[CoolerKing]

I really dig your aesthetic and hope to play one of your guitars someday!

[theEdwinson]

Okay, now I have something else to tell about this guitar. It's what might be properly be called a "glitch", or a "defect"... A thing that I SHOULD have seen coming, before I was fully committed to the build. Now, with 20/20 hindsight...
I'm sure everyone out there who builds guitars, either as an avocation or a career, KNOWS that there will ALWAYS be issues popping up in builds, and you never stop learning that, in the million-and-one details that go into making a guitar, there will almost always be something popping up that will require some re-thinking and work-arounds. I think you have to make every possible mistake at least twice, before the Craft Wisdom finally imprints into your autonomic functioning. It's just the nature of the craft, especially when you're using wood, a natural, organic material with a bewildering plethora of individual characteristics.

I selected the top (soundboard) for this guitar from my stash of European Spruce top sets. After carefully tapping, flexing, and palpating a bunch of tops. this one German Spruce (Picea Abies) set stood out for the clarity and focus of the tap tone. It had the right stiffness, both ways, and it looked immaculate in its raw form.
It was sold to me by a tonewood dealer on ebay, as a "Mastergrade German Spruce" top. So I picked it for this build.
It looks pretty nice, huh? Not perfect and flawless, not a true Mastergrade- that word is bandied around way too much by this one seller- but it's pretty darn nice. I would have called it a AAA grade for looks, and a Mastergrade for the tone.



...So, I built the guitar, and recall how thrilled I was with the SOUND of the closed box. I knew this one was going to have that Holy Grail tone.
After it was fully built and ready for finish, I shot the first coat of sealer on it; and suddenly, out of nowhere, up pops this discoloration, like a stain, or some pitch residue, just southwest of the sound hole. The finish really brought it out, whereas it was pretty much indiscernible while still "in the white".
Also, there appeared some darker mineral streaks on a few of the winter lines. Nothing major; but suddenly, this soundboard was showing some cosmetic "flaws" that made it NOT Mastergrade- at least cosmetically.

See it here? It becomes more visible at some reflective angles, and less so at others.



Well, I was pretty crestfallen when I saw this pop up under finish. So I sanded back down to bare wood, to see if I could somehow erase the discoloration. I tried applying some oxalic acid (wood bleach), but nothing changed. I could not sand it out- to even try would have infringed on the integrity of the top.

So I decided to just let it be what it was and finish the guitar.

I even started feeling fairly sanguine about it. Especially after delving deeply into Howard Klepper's fascinating "Wabi-Sabi" thread. If you haven't seen this thread, you really should. It's a major philosophical treatise/forum debate on the Nature of Craft, and the Nature-derived materials we use to create ART with. Often, these materials have anomalies, or "character"... or what some people might call defects, or faults.

But the Wabi-sabi concept teaches us that these anomalies should not be avoided, or scorned; but rather, CELEBRATED for the uniqueness and individual character they impart.

I was also somewhat comforted by the notion that a guitar is a tool, not a painting on a wall; and as such, it's going to acquire some nicks, dings, dents, and other "character marks" over its life, that simply won't matter in time.
Just think about Willy Nelson's good old, totally beat-to-hell Martin N-20 guitar, his most faithful of all lifetime companions. Check it out HERE, if you're not familiar with the reference.

With that in mind, this cosmetic "defect" didn't bother me much. I told my client about it, in full disclosure, and he decided to buy it anyway. That story remains to be told...

But after over 100 guitars I've built, I just learned something new. That is, from now on I will apply a shellac sealer to every joined top, before I commit to moving forward with it. I want to see in advance if there are going to be any hidden anomalies, that will be revealed by the finishing process.

I do think that Wabi-sabi should be celebrated... But still, when you knock yourself out trying to make a guitar that pleases the eyes as much as the ears and hands, why not go into it with eyes wide open!
And honestly, for many people, this "glitch" would be a deal-breaker.

I also remember years ago, visiting the Dusty Strings Music Shop in Seattle. They had a Froggy Bottom 000 with an Adirondack Spruce top that had a very strange looking and quite obvious whorl in the grain- like an outlier from a knot. It would have definitely qualified as a "defect"- especially on a $13,000 guitar! I was puzzled as to why this top had made the cut and become a guitar- until I played it for a couple minutes.
You know what? When you strummed a simple, basic G chord on that thing, what you heard was the very voice of GOD.
Michael Millard, builder of those Froggy masterpieces, knows quality when he sees it.
Lesson learned...? We'll see. I may need to make this mistake at least once more before it germinates in my soft, mushy, human brain.

[Zandit75]

Originally Posted by theEdwinson

You're absolutely right, you really need to approach these designs from an engineering standpoint. There are a lot of form = function things to consider. When I set out to design the Omega headstock, the first thing I did was draw up a couple of 100% scale drawings to see how the string trajectory works. I settled on a headstock angle of eight degrees, same as I use for my Pogoda style slot-head. (My standard solid headstock has a back-angle of thirteen degrees.) That gives you an optimum break angle of the strings from nut to tuner posts to ensure full contact and string down-pressure on the nut.

And the headstock taper is important too. You notice how the tuner posts are aimed slightly downhill, so the strings need to be firmly anchored so they won't slip off the posts... Well, the taper that I came up with actually has the effect of locking those string winds tightly on the posts, aided and abetted by that downward angle! Instead of being less secure, the strings are actually MORE secure on the posts! And I think this will prevent slippage and de-tuning as well.

After I drew everything out, I made a set of routing templates, and then made a mock-up headstock with a chunk of Aromatic Cedar to test tuner fit, and measure the actual, 3-D string trajectories. Everything worked! Eureka!

To be honest, I had not even thought of using locking tuners. My favorite go-to tuners, Gotoh 510 Mini's, work brilliantly with this design. In fact, any good quality tuner designed for solid headstocks will work. Including locking ones.

I would NOT use tuners designed for slotted headstocks, though, because the posts are straight, not lathe-cut bobbin shapes- and it's that solid-headstock tuner post shape that makes this design work.

I don't really think that locking tuners would add anything to the stability of the strings, or help with tuning accuracy. The way the strings lock into place with the tuner post angle, and the pull of the strings, I've found that this headstock design is about as accurate and stable as it gets. And you have dozens of tuners available. On my next one, I'm going to use some Schaller Grand Tune open gear tuners. Those machines are so sexy... Wooo.

I hope you'll share your new open headstock design with us Forum-ites, when you have it done. I'm curious to see your process.
And like I mentioned, I want to make a video about these open headstocks. They really are easy and quick to string up, so if you really like the slot-head or the open design, don't be intimidated by the notion that string changes are a pain. That's a myth.

Thanks for the insight into your build, most appreciated. I promise not to ask for trade secrets!!

You may not be very keen to see my process! Certainly not after you see the hack job I did on the sample. I'm lacking in a lot of tools, but I'm still hoping for a good result.

I have cheated though. Due to my current lack of tools I have purchased a finished neck from Ebay that would normally fit an electric guitar like a Les Paul. I have added some thickness to the headstock to allow the tuners to fit properly by laminating some veneers top an bottom, and I currently have about 20mm in thickness. Does this sound thick enough to you? Can I ask what thickness your Omega headstock is?

Thanks again.

[Jamiejoon]

I would be thrilled to have an Edwinson. I just love where you are taking your designs. Love the new headstock. I definitely want one of those. In addition to the great beauty of your guitars, and your reputation for quality of tone, you seem very kind. That matters to me. I wish you great success.

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by Zandit75

Thanks for the insight into your build, most appreciated. I promise not to ask for trade secrets!!

You may not be very keen to see my process! Certainly not after you see the hack job I did on the sample. I'm lacking in a lot of tools, but I'm still hoping for a good result.

I have cheated though. Due to my current lack of tools I have purchased a finished neck from Ebay that would normally fit an electric guitar like a Les Paul. I have added some thickness to the headstock to allow the tuners to fit properly by laminating some veneers top an bottom, and I currently have about 20mm in thickness. Does this sound thick enough to you? Can I ask what thickness your Omega headstock is?

Thanks again.

It is really helpful to have the tuners you plan to use on hand when you are working up your prototype. That way, you can test-fit them and make sure everything is going to work. You have to consider the footprint of your chosen tuners, and the screw holes you will need to drill to hold the tuners in place.
I think the Omega headstock is built to 3/4" thick. That works great for the Gotoh 510 mini tuners. However, that could change, depending on other types/brands of tuners I may use in the future.

Adding front and back veneers to your prefab headstock sounds like a good idea. You are adding to the structural strength, while also customizing it!

By the way, it's okay to ask for trade secrets. One thing you'll find with *most* luthiers is, they tend to be very generous with their Craft Wisdom. Just ask politely, and say thanks. You can get the keys to the kingdom if you're a nice guy!

[theEdwinson]

Originally Posted by Jamiejoon

I would be thrilled to have an Edwinson. I just love where you are taking your designs. Love the new headstock. I definitely want one of those. In addition to the great beauty of your guitars, and your reputation for quality of tone, you seem very kind. That matters to me. I wish you great success.

Thank you, Jamie.
It matters to me too, that the people I work with, live with, and do business with, are decent and kind people. And I've never found so many of those kind of people as in the acoustic guitar community. That is so important, especially in current times.

[Zandit75]

Originally Posted by theEdwinson

It is really helpful to have the tuners you plan to use on hand when you are working up your prototype. That way, you can test-fit them and make sure everything is going to work. You have to consider the footprint of your chosen tuners, and the screw holes you will need to drill to hold the tuners in place.
I think the Omega headstock is built to 3/4" thick. That works great for the Gotoh 510 mini tuners. However, that could change, depending on other types/brands of tuners I may use in the future.

Adding front and back veneers to your prefab headstock sounds like a good idea. You are adding to the structural strength, while also customizing it!

By the way, it's okay to ask for trade secrets. One thing you'll find with *most* luthiers is, they tend to be very generous with their Craft Wisdom. Just ask politely, and say thanks. You can get the keys to the kingdom if you're a nice guy!

Thanks again mate, and what you say is certainly true, if you're polite, and give thanks to those who have assisted you, then it helps so much in the long run.
I have a new set of locking tuners coming to me, the cheapies I got from eBay had two of them fully seized, luckily it was only $18 wasted. That's what I get for taking the cheap road. I have a new set due to arrive today, so hopefully they are going to be the same size.
Sounds like my headstock will be right on the money thickness wise. 3/4"= Approx 19mm. I'm at 20mm, so it shouldn't look too much out of whack.
Thanks again!!
I've started a thread here in the Custom section(http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...d.php?t=468162) where I've asked a question about saddle placement, I'll be using that for my build thread.

[SJ VanSandt]

It's funny: that beauty mark is visible in most of your earlier pictures, but I never noted it until you drew it to our attention. I guess I just don't think of natural irregularities as flaws. I don't think it detracts from the beauty of your work one whit. Somewhere in that wonderful wabi-sabi thread the practice of some pueblo potters of always leaving a gap in a circle was mentioned: they apparently believed that a closed circle did not let spirit in. Perfection is not only not possible, it's not desirable.

[Fast Jimmy]

Very nice Steve....I should have waited and got one of these instead.

Just kidding, I love my Edwinson as is....BUT, I may have to get on your build schedule for one of these.

Jim Gager

[Steve Kinnaird]

Very nice, Steve, and some stellar photography to boot.
Btw--what woods did you use in the rosette? (Forgive if you've already stated that.)

Steve