Building the Ultimate Fingerstyle Guitar

WhistlingFish · #1 08-01-2010, 08:20 AM

With completion of my current crop of guitars in sight at last, I'm keen to give some thought to my next guitar-building project. I have some claro walnut and East Indian rosewood back and side sets as well as redwood, cedar, Sitka and Engelmann tops to choose from. It would seem there's a wealth of possibilities even in that small selection of materials.

I have some ideas of my own, but I'm keen to hear the views of our pro luthiers as to the design features and material qualities and combinations best suited to fingerstyle guitars. Are responsiveness and light weight the primary goals in building the ultimate fingerstyle instrument, or are there other equally important considerations?

I look forward to hearing your ideas.

WhistlingFish · #2 08-04-2010, 04:47 AM

What, NOBODY has an opinion?

To cut to the chase: I'm keen to hear the views of our pro luthiers as to the design features and material qualities or wood combinations best suited to fingerstyle guitars.

Thanks.

Ivob · #3 08-04-2010, 05:13 AM

light weight as a primary goal in fingerstyle guitar building? WHY??? i've been playing fingerstyle about 8 years and have had in my hands a few guitars and must say that when i'm about to buy a new guitar it will definitely be heavy. playing fingerstyle the guitar should be stable as much as possible and that's not easy to get with a lightweight guitar.

WhistlingFish · #4 08-04-2010, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivob

light weight as a primary goal in fingerstyle guitar building? WHY??? i've been playing fingerstyle about 8 years and have had in my hands a few guitars and must say that when i'm about to buy a new guitar it will definitely be heavy. playing fingerstyle the guitar should be stable as much as possible and that's not easy to get with a lightweight guitar.

Thanks - all opinions gratefully accepted. What exactly do you mean by "stable"?

Ivob · #5 08-04-2010, 03:06 PM

by stable i mean steady, when you play more aggressively you'll appreciate a heavier guitar which won't sway back and forth when you move your hands. believe me that a light guitar is not an advantage in certain styles of playing

Comfyfoot · #6 08-08-2010, 12:22 PM

I am certainly on the quest for the ultimate fingerstyle guitar, I have been playing as an amateur for 20 years, mostly fingerstyle, doesn't make me good at it, but I have been wanting the ultimate fingerstyle guitar for much of this time. I recently started building guitars, #1 is done, #2 will be done this week, both in pursuit of the ultimate fingerstyle guitar for me.

So here is my thinking on it:
Personally, small and light, with a tight waist, at some point, an arm and chest bevel rest would be nice, but I am not ready to tackle those features.
Nut width, 1 3/4-1 13/16, spacing at saddle, 2 1/4 - 2 5/16, with a compound radius FB, 12"-20", or pretty flat as it goes up the neck, on #2, I tried to keep the treble strings as flat as possible, only including the slight radius to keep the string paths straight. I look forward to trying it.

As a new builder, my development on this will focus on ergonomic, then tone. My ideas on tone lie somewhere in between an arch top and a flat top. I want articulate notes, not too much sustain, good projection, percussive bass(not boomy), and contained highs, I do not want it jingle jangly, some of the fingerstyle stuff I do can drone on the treble strings, and they can take over. Great dynamic range, good soft notes, good loud.

I really don't know what wood and bracing choices will get this sound, but I like the idea of a carved back and flat top, thinking the carved back will get me some of the projection and punchiness that I want, but really I just think the carved back is cool and I like carving them. Currently wood on these two is Engleman top, w/ port orford back and sides. Next guitar will either be all POC (port orford cedar), or walnut back and sides POC top. I have not tried all the top species, so I can't add to that conversation, but I think walnut with redwood or cedar would make a good guitar without run away treble.

Curious Ivob, weight is traditionally considered the enemy of a good acoustic, but I can understand stable, I know that my Blueridge dread is very unstable, the shallow waist and the too large for me lower bout make it wiggle and uncomfortable, I have to work to keep it in place, OTOH the smaller body, very light neck, and tight waist are a big improvement in comfort to me, much more stable. Have you played some O or OO size guitars?

lw216316 · #7 08-08-2010, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhistlingFish

What, NOBODY has an opinion?

To cut to the chase: I'm keen to hear the views of our pro luthiers as to the design features and material qualities or wood combinations best suited to fingerstyle guitars.

Thanks.

Perhaps you are asking a good question but
addressing it to a small audience.

I was ready to respond until I got to the part about it being for luthiers.

Maybe guitar PLAYERS know as much or more about what features
in a guitar make it a great guitar for a fingerstyle guitar.

It is certainly a bigger audience.

There is no one perfect answer- since personal preference comes into play-
but I'll toss out some of my ideas-
If you or others decide to toss them out that's ok too

How many frets to body ? 12 ! (perhaps with a cutaway )

what neck profile ? ( I prefer a low profile rather than mod-v )

how will be the neck be joined ? ( I prefer a dovetail )

with pick guard or without ? ( I prefer without )

slotted or unslotted pins ? ( I prefer unslotted )

what pin material ? ( I prefer bone )

what fretboard wood ? ( I prefer ebony )

what binding ? ( I prefer wood binding )

what head design ? ( I prefer a slot head )

what finish...gloss or satin ? ( I prefer satin )

what tuners ? - Waverly is my favorite.

what bridge type ? - pyramid

what nut width ? - should be wide 1 3/4 to 1 7/8 inch

what nut material ? - bone !

what saddle material ? bone !

What string spacing at the bridge ? - wide !

What scale length ? ..... Martin's 24.9 short scale is nice.

I think some of the preferences I listed improve the tone
but others may disagree - no desire to start a debate here

and the intended use-

will it be used for solo instrumentals at home ?
will it be used in a band in some way ?
will it be amplified or not ?

In general, I think the OO or OOO size is most popular

for a top wood -
A responsive spruce - for example Engleman ,
or cedar

for a back / side wood
up to the buyer and their preference
my preference is for rosewood.

Also a choice can be made for nylon or steel string.

No need to thank me for the ideas,
just build it and send it to me for testing.

- Larry

JohnM · #8 08-08-2010, 02:52 PM

Interesting topic. It fits in with a project I've been working on for 14 years! I've been trying to build just this. The "ultimate" fingerstyle guitar... whatever that means.

Main goals I've got in mind for the model:

Responsiveness; I want it to respond, with authority, to a light touch.

Playability; Neck shape that fits in the hand well (obviously different for different players) and action that is low enough o feel good, but not so low that it sacrifices tone/dynamic range.

Balance; I want even response from all aspects (low/mid/high) of the sound with good, but not over the top, overtone content.

Enveloping; I want the player to be immersed/engulfed with the tone

Projection; While not as important as up close tone I still want the guitar to project it's tone fairly well

There are other things of course, but these are main goals in mind. I've made 16 of these models, working on #17 right now. I'm getting exceedingly close to the tone in my head. It's a 15.5" lower bout guitar, 25.5 scale, this one has a cutaway, but that's just because I wanted to on this one, very lightly built....on the brink really. I hope this one turns out well, but if not then #18 here I come!

runamuck · #9 08-08-2010, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhistlingFish

I have some ideas of my own, but I'm keen to hear the views of our pro luthiers as to the design features and material qualities and combinations best suited to fingerstyle guitars.

Western Red Cedar or Port Orford Cedar with a Rosewood, Grenadillo or Maple, braced sensitively.

Jim McCarthy

JohnM · #10 08-08-2010, 04:54 PM

I forgot to add in about materials.

Neck: Honduran Mahogany.

Fretboard: Ebony, Brazilian, African Blackwood

Top: European Spruce

Back and sides: Brazilian, Madagascar, African Blackwood, Wenge

Bracewood: Adirondack

Brackett Instruments · #11 08-08-2010, 05:42 PM

The first thing I'm interested in, especially with a "fingerstyle" guitar is what tuning, or tunings? If the owner will use alternate tunings you need either a 25.5" scale, or multi-scale. If it will be standard tuning only, they you may go with a shorter scale. That makes it easier to span more frets for difficult fingerings. Body style/shape/size depends on scale length, and the players preference.
Out of the materials you've listed I'd go with Sitka (flat top) or Cedar (domed top, 28' radius or so) with Rosewood. Use "standard" materials so you can tell what you've done.

WhistlingFish · #12 08-09-2010, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lw216316

Perhaps you are asking a good question but
addressing it to a small audience.

I was ready to respond until I got to the part about it being for luthiers.

Maybe guitar PLAYERS know as much or more about what features
in a guitar make it a great guitar for a fingerstyle guitar.

It is certainly a bigger audience.
- Larry

Great response Larry. You're absolutely right of course; the views of players are just as valid as those of luthiers - perhaps even more so. I phrased the question badly.

Thanks for the responses everyone - some really useful points have been raised giving me plenty of food for thought.

lw216316 · #13 08-09-2010, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhistlingFish

Great response Larry. You're absolutely right of course; the views of players are just as valid as those of luthiers - perhaps even more so. I phrased the question badly.

Thanks for the responses everyone - some really useful points have been raised giving me plenty of food for thought.

...no problem, Pete...
Now, when can I expect delivery - to test your prototype for you

- Larry

WhistlingFish · #14 08-09-2010, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lw216316

...no problem, Pete...
Now, when can I expect delivery - to test your prototype for you

- Larry

Sorry Larry, I don't deliver. Pick-up only!

nobo · #15 08-11-2010, 06:39 AM

All good suggestions so far. My personal preference spec wise would be:

Nut: min 1 3/4, ideally more (up to 1 7/8) (my custom McIlroy is 46.5mm).

Neck: relatively low profile C/D (not V)

Multi-scale/fan fretted (say 25.2 to 26.4") - since I use low open tunings, particularly on the lower strings.

String spacing at bridge: wide - 60mm feels much better to me for fingerstyle

Ergonomics: arm and body bevel, Manzer wedge.

Build: for me, very light. I have a very light touch and find my lightest guitar (my 2003 McIlroy A25c) the most responsive. My 2010 A25c custom has a chunkier neck and wider nut/bridge spacing and is black walnut rather than claro, so it feels rather heavier and sturdier than the 2003 one (although both are lightly built).

Woods: personal preference, but I would say a cedar, redwood or a responsive sitka (e.g. Englemann or European) for the top. If you can't decide, redwood would seem like a good compromise! I think walnut sounds great for back/sides.