Practice build woods

[Sadie-f]

Originally Posted by Fathand

I haven't built a lot of acoustic guitars but people have been very impressed by the sound of the ones I have. I am a hobbyist so am on a budget. I have resawn all my back and side sets from rough sawn lumber except one of my current builds of an EIR set that was left in my basement 40 years ago.

I do not do anything like tuning sound surfaces, yet. I am very happy wiith my tone and volume so far. I do not know about damping woods. I thin backs and sides to typical dimensions and use the wobble test on tops. I have used A grade tops or less to date, typically $20 or less.

In a way, I am in the "practice" mode like you are thinking of. I do not build with the intention of selling but have.

As far as economical woods go, Sapele, Black Walnut and Cherry are readily available , quarter sawn, in good wood stores with black walnut typically the highest price of those 3. African mahogany is cheaper but not usually marketed as quarters sawn. Padauk is also economical. In Canada, all these woods are typically less than $10 per board foot, except the walnut. A 5 ft. X 8" x 1.5" = 5 board ft. and will yield 3 back side sets plus 1 or 2 neck blanks and some extra bits for end blocks, etc. So $50 gets you a lot of "practice" building.

The black walnut is probably the easiest to work and bend, to my ear sounds better than maple and may be the best looking. The cherry may be the easiest to finish as it is closed grain.

I did purchase some Osage Orange very economically locally and built my best sounding guitar https://www.flickr.com/photos/194462...77720296630125 with it but other posters are correct when they tell you it is not easy to work with, I may not use it again.

If we are discussing builds to gain experience, I suggest you go easy on the ornamentation, simple inlay, rosettes, binding and purfling. Trying to build a "pre war" or other replica can chase you down an expensive rabbit hole finding the exact materials rather than what is readily available. I recently ordered a pre war style back strip at $30 with shipping from Australia for example.

Another suggestion is to build smaller instruments, flat top mandolins, ukuleles or smaller than dreadnought guitars. 5 or 7 inch wide wood is easier to find than 8" and parlor size tops are often less money or better quality for the same. You will learn the same skills and do less sanding.

Titebond Original all the way ++

Sorry for the long winded post, Good luck with your journey.

Sorry for the late reply & sincere thanks for your "long winded" thoughts :-).

I don't know how true it is, I've read the rosette serves a structural purpose, that in mind, I absolutely had the simplest ornamentation in mind .. binding because it protects end grain, and rosette as noted above.

[Fathand]

Originally Posted by Sadie-f

Sorry for the late reply & sincere thanks for your "long winded" thoughts :-).

I don't know how true it is, I've read the rosette serves a structural purpose, that in mind, I absolutely had the simplest ornamentation in mind .. binding because it protects end grain, and rosette as noted above.

The rosette helps prevent wood splitting around the sound hole. I don't know of any other structural advantages. 1 or 2 rings of 1/16" or 1.5mm purfling will accomplish that and look reasonably attractive.

It may actually be easier to build with a single layer of binding than none, as your top and back to side joints no longer have to be cosmetically perfect. My current mahogany top build has binding for that reason.

[Sadie-f]

Originally Posted by Fathand

The rosette helps prevent wood splitting around the sound hole. I don't know of any other structural advantages. 1 or 2 rings of 1/16" or 1.5mm purfling will accomplish that and look reasonably attractive.

It may actually be easier to build with a single layer of binding than none, as your top and back to side joints no longer have to be cosmetically perfect. My current mahogany top build has binding for that reason.

Structurally, that part of the body is under compression, and wood is not a great material for compression loads (trees pre-load the outer rings in tension to limit compressive loads on the leeward side of the structure in wind loading). That would be the impetus behind splitting along the grain.

Agreed on the binding as an expedient in the joint cosmetics. That joint needs to be structural, and achieving optimal structure and cosmetics at the same time aren't necessarily compatible objectives.

[Bruce Sexauer]

"Wobble" test is news to me. But I suspect it is not far off of what i have been doing for at least 25 years, which is to thin the plates until they will no longer produce a clear fundamental tap tone, and become what I call "Floofy", which just means too floppy to make a clear tone. I then brace them back into integrity and shave the braces back to where the tap tone is as full as possible and has has lost its tightness. I suspect this is too subtle to be taught with words, and may not be for everyone, but it sure works for me.

[Sadie-f]

Originally Posted by Bruce Sexauer

thin the plates until they will no longer produce a clear fundamental tap tone, and become what I call "Floofy", which just means too floppy to make a clear tone. I then brace them back into integrity and shave the braces back to where the tap tone is as full as possible and has has lost its tightness. I suspect this is too subtle to be taught with words, and may not be for everyone, but it sure works for me.

How that sounds to me is you've adjusted the fundamental (tap note) below the range of human auditory response. Hard to quantify at that, though I think some microphones will run down below 20 Hz.

It's too late (early) for me to think through more than that just now :-)

[phavriluk]

I like the flow of the conversation to prioritize the soundboard. My opinion is that the back/sides are along for the ride, especially for a learning builder. No flames please, we've all heard them all ad nauseam. And I think they have little to no relevance to someone developing a luthier's eye.

About 'practice' b/s sets: I've bought what I could afford from a couple of dedicated luthiers' wood vendors and I've been very pleased (RC Tonewoods, A. Hix). All the tops I've used have come from Alaska Specialty Woods. So far I haven't spent anything close to three hundred bucks on materials - - - finish and hardware included - - for any one guitar. Lots of learning and shop time for very little cash.

[phavriluk]

The 'wobble test': When a soundboard held by a corner and gets shaken and sounds like a piece aluminum getting the same treatment, it's time to stop thinning. And for OP this will be easy if the thickness sander can take the whole joined soundboard.

[Bruce Sexauer]

Originally Posted by Sadie-f

How that sounds to me is you've adjusted the fundamental (tap note) below the range of human auditory response. Hard to quantify at that, though I think some microphones will run down below 20 Hz.

It's too late (early) for me to think through more than that just now :-)

I would say that I am thinning the plates (both top and back, actually) to where they don’t have enough integrity to have any pitch at all, and flutter instead of ringing.

Phavriluk’s recent description of “wobble” does indeed sound like “floofy”.

[Fathand]

Originally Posted by phavriluk

The 'wobble test': When a soundboard held by a corner and gets shaken and sounds like a piece aluminum getting the same treatment, it's time to stop thinning. And for OP this will be easy if the thickness sander can take the whole joined soundboard.

I do it a little different, I lightly hold both sides of the soundboard as I saw in a Robbie O'Brien video. I am sure both methods can work. I cut the top close to the final width first.
One of the things I like about the wobble test is that it will adjust itself to the size of guitar you are building. That, and it requires no equipment and little skill.

[Sadie-f]

Originally Posted by phavriluk

I like the flow of the conversation to prioritize the soundboard. My opinion is that the back/sides are along for the ride, especially for a learning builder. No flames please, we've all heard them all ad nauseam. And I think they have little to no relevance to someone developing a luthier's eye.

About 'practice' b/s sets: I've bought what I could afford from a couple of dedicated luthiers' wood vendors and I've been very pleased (RC Tonewoods, A. Hix). All the tops I've used have come from Alaska Specialty Woods. So far I haven't spent anything close to three hundred bucks on materials - - - finish and hardware included - - for any one guitar. Lots of learning and shop time for very little cash.

Alaska Specialty is on my list, and one option seems to be to spend most of the material budget on a nice top, get b&s from reclaimed or local wood supplier. Another way I can imagine is find some reclaimable qs pine for the top. That feels doable for pine, I don't think I could manage that in cedar.

I appreciate all the feedback, almost as much as I'm excited to get started on this!

[phavriluk]

Soundboards are sold graded ONLY BY APPEARANCE. We pay for pretty. Can't hear 'pretty'. That 'nice top' may no doubt be a pretty top, but we're making guitars, not coffee tables. That pretty top might be a complete dud acoustically.

[Sadie-f]

Originally Posted by phavriluk

Soundboards are sold graded ONLY BY APPEARANCE. We pay for pretty. Can't hear 'pretty'. That 'nice top' may no doubt be a pretty top, but we're making guitars, not coffee tables. That pretty top might be a complete dud acoustically.

Which is why pretty tops from whatever vendor isn't plan A :-).

[RHayes]

Practice making some tops and backs with acquired wood. Do you have resawing and sanding equipment? Rosette and sound hole router? A guitar plan?

[Sadie-f]

Originally Posted by RHayes

Practice making some tops and backs with acquired wood. Do you have resawing and sanding equipment? Rosette and sound hole router? A guitar plan?

That's pretty much the plan. Yes, I've got access to a large and well maintained band saw, an oscillating drum sander that will come in handy, multiple choices of belt sanders. I'll probably use a cnc router for the sound hole & rosette work. I plan to plane and scrape for thicknessing. I'll have to build my own bending setup, and likely a gluing frame.

OM / OOO size is the plan.

[phavriluk]

A thickness sander makes short and accurate work of sanding to desired thickness all the tonewood, top, back, and sides. Scraping and planing is unnecessary work with ambiguous results compared to what comes out of a thickness sander. From the sound of OP's description of the wood shop that can be used, there's one in there somewhere.