Topwood options for EIR back/sides.

[ClaptonWannabe2]

Plodding along with first build. Ended up buying a back and sides on the bay for a decent price. Sides are better than the ones I’ve already thicknesses and shaped. I want to build a dread. My current build is OOO. Why are other prominent and or successful pairings for EIR? Cedar? Redwood?

Remember, I am a newb so outlandishly priced Woods need not apply, and they’d be wasted with my novice ability.

[printer2]

Every type of top wood has been used with EIR, they all work depending what you are trying to achieve.

[Glen H]

For a first build I would recommend Sitka spruce. Tons of it around, economical and more durable for dents, dings, tooling marks a first build will get.

[Alan Carruth]

What Glen said.

[ClaptonWannabe2]

Originally Posted by Alan Carruth

What Glen said.

My first build is already underway. It is EIR and spruce top.

I have another EIR back and sides. Wondered what another good top would be for a steel dread?

[John Arnold]

Red spruce. It's not expensive if you buy cosmetically challenged tops directly from the cutter.

[John R]

^ Hampton bros on ebay may have some colored lower cost red spruce. RC tonewoods is another but I have only bought a few sitka from allied at very fair prices AA is still $35 I think.

[ClaptonWannabe2]

Everybody keeps going back to spruce. So I am gathering that spruce is the only topwood used for a steel string dread? Unless you are going all mahogany like a D15m?

All other topwood options are mainly for classical?

Not getting testy or anything, just honestly asking those on here withmuch more experience.

[John Arnold]

Redwood, cedar, Douglas fir, hemlock, and pine are all options that have been used with varying degrees of success. It all depends on the building style, the style of the player, and the desired result. I guess a pertinent question would be, 'What do you want?' Power, finesse, warmth, clarity? Is there a particular guitar you wish to emulate? Favorite artist?
Spruce was recommended because it has a good track record. I have mainly used Engelmann (1980's to 1990) and red spruce (1990 and later). I have done one redwood top, and it was just OK. Early on, I also tried a 10-piece paw-paw top and four-piece Ponderosa pine cut from a shelving board. All have been acceptable guitars, but after 29 years of using red spruce, I cannot see me using anything else now. It gives me what I want.....clarity, power, tone.

[Alan Carruth]

There are reasons why spruce is the default wood for tops. It has a good combination of surface hardness, toughness, and density.

The Young's modulus in bending along the grain for all soft woods tends to vary in the same way with density: a piece of WRC and Red spruce with the same density will have close to the same Young's modulus. This is what determines the stiffness at a given thickness. Lower density wood has a lower Young's modulus, but if you leave it thicker it can be just as stiff, and the top will actually weigh a bit less. That helps with 'responsiveness', but hurts 'headroom'.

Pine and WRC tend to have low surface hardness, they dent easily.

WRC, redwood, and Douglas fir, tend to split; they're less suitable for bracing for that reason IMO, but, more to the point for a top, the bridge can peel up more easily. A larger footprint bridge helps, particularly if you make it wider from front to back.

[ClaptonWannabe2]

Thanks for the replies guys. I was looking into Alaskan yellow cedar. I see all your points though.

Remember who you are talking to here. LOL. I just glued up my first end block tonight. I just wanted to try something different for the dread I want to try next, but sounds like it may be a foolish endeavor. Especially for a full dread.

I would like to try a classical as well. Tell the wife that I am saving money because I wouldn't be "buying" a classical. I know from reading on here that a classical is the one to get crazy with topwoods.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by ClaptonWannabe2

I would like to try a classical as well. Tell the wife that I am saving money because I wouldn't be "buying" a classical.

Making one's own guitar to save money is like buying a boat to save money on fish.

I know from reading on here that a classical is the one to get crazy with topwoods.

I'm not sure where, or why, you are getting that impression. Classical guitarists tend to be just as conservative, if not more conservative, than steel string players. Top woods, such as mahogany, Koa or maple, common on steel string guitars are an extreme rarity in classical guitar making, hence wood choices for classical guitars tend to be more restrictive, rather than less, for steel string guitars.

[John Arnold]

Classical guitars only have about 60% of the string tension of a steel string. Less tension favors lighter weight topwoods like western red cedar, redwood or Engelmann, while steel string guitars can function well with the denser topwoods, particularly Sitka or red spruce.
Knowing density and stiffness will serve you well, and not just for the soundboard. Back, sides, neck, bracing....all of them are affected by wood properties to varying degrees. While many builders concentrate on density specs, I tend to pay more attention to stiffness.....especially on the tops and the necks.

[Alan Carruth]

In softwoods density is a pretty useful indicator of stiffness along the grain at a given thickness. If you have the ability to vary the top thickness you can use a low density top and leave it thicker to get the stiffness you need. Since the relationship between density and Young's modulus (which determines stiffness at a given thickness) is linear in this range, and stiffness goes as the cube of the thickness all else equal, using a low density top and leaving it thick tends to give a lighter weight top. This helps maximize 'responsiveness', but works against 'headroom' all else equal. Classical makers tend to use low density tops for that reason.

WRC tends to have lower density than most of the spruces on average, and that's one reason classical makers use it. It also has much lower peel strength that spruce in my experience, so bridges are more likely to come up unless you can make them bigger. Finally, it's got lower surface hardness than most spruce, so it dents easily with a pick. These are all reasons why WRC is less popular on steel strings. It works well, if you use it right and take care of it, particularly for 'fingerstyle' players, who like the 'warm' sound and responsiveness.

'Tone wood' is graded on appearance, but that doesn't always tell you much about how well it will work on a guitar. If you measure the properties of the wood you get you'll find that there's a lot of variation within any species, and a lot of overlap between species. Being able to measure this stuff can be a big help.

[phavriluk]

I urge OP to concentrate on building neatly and accurately and don't overbuild. Just about none of us early builders is going to wind up with tonal characteristics 'predicted' by species characteristics circulated as some kind of gospel. Lots more influence on 'tone' is the product of the building of the instrument, not what it's made of. Lots of highly experienced luthiers have spent years following that trail of bread crumbs. OP can wind up with a sweet-sounding-and-playing guitar that offers great satisfaction. Focus on that level.