Removed top finish. Thinning the top or not?

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

To the OP - I assume the rosette came off with the top finish removal. If you replaced the rosette, what did you use?

With the exception of some guitars like Martin’s early D15’s, which had rosette decals pasted onto their tops, most acoustic guitars have wooden marquetry rosettes made of bundled thin pieces of colored wood or rings of binding materials that are physically inlaid into the top. So while they ARE thin and light weight, they are three dimensional and designed to be sanded flush once they’ve been inlaid.

So unless the OP deliberately gouged out the original rosette, there shouldn’t have been any need to replace it.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

[joe white]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

To the OP - I assume the rosette came off with the top finish removal. If you replaced the rosette, what did you use?

? Unless the rosette was just a sticker on the spruce top, it would only be mildly affected by removing the finish.

Edit; Wade beat me to it.

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

With the exception of some guitars like Martin’s early D15’s, which had rosette decals pasted onto their tops, most acoustic guitars have wooden marquetry rosettes made of bundled thin pieces of colored wood or rings of binding materials that are physically inlaid into the top. So while they ARE thin and light weight, they are three dimensional and designed to be sanded flush once they’ve been inlaid.

So unless the OP deliberately gouged out the original rosette, there shouldn’t have been any need to replace it.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

Originally Posted by joe white

? Unless the rosette was just a sticker on the spruce top, it would only be mildly affected by removing the finish.

Edit; Wade beat me to it.

I think it's just a sticker under the finish, not inlaid. Here's how RK handles the rosette when it's inlaid - https://www.recordingking.com/rdg6 They call it out, and it looks like a nice rosette.

Here's how it's handled on my RP1-16C - https://www.recordingking.com/rp116c No mention of an inlaid rosette, and it looks like a sticker. The OP's model looks like mine - https://www.guitarcenter.com/Used/Re...SABEgLrdvD_BwE

These are "inexpensive" guitars, and the lower-end models appear to miss the "inlaid rosette" part of the line.

I like most of the things about my RP-1 C, but, for a fingerstyle guitar, it's a little quiet/inarticulate without some force, an issue I think would be improved by taking some of the poly off the top. I can always replace the sticker rosette, but I'm sure it'd never look right, so it'd be up to a pro, and likely a bill that exceeded the guitar's replacement cost.

[Eso612]

What a mess
I edited the original message so I hope it's clear that the work has been already done.

Thank you Wade and Joe for the explanation of the rosette. I wasn't able to explain that way in english.

@ChrisN
I think the rosette is not a sticker. I didn't have any problem sanding the finishing on the rosette and it is still there. I paid a lot of attention in that area but I am sure I removed all the finishing and the rosette is still ok.
I wouldn't do it on the headstock, because I am sure there is a sticker there and it will be ruined for sure.

@PeterZ
Thank you Peter for your support. I'm glad you got a good result too

@UncleJesse
I didn't know about this guy and this video. But he is right at the beginning when he says the the polyester finish on top was 1/2 inch thick and that it kills sound. Well, kill is not right, because the guitar is fine anyway. But now it's on a total other league.
It is a quite cheap guitar so when you build it you can imagine that it will receive a hard use in life. RK decided to overprotect it to give it a longer life. They sacrificed sound. It's not a bad thing, but it's not for everyone. I take care of my guitars, so I don't need that extra protection. I don't want to believe they did it for a total wrong project.

@DenverSteve
Let me see if I can explain. If you look at the video that UncleJesse suggested
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS3fp_DhzHk
you can see that the bridge is very big. I removed mass starting above the 6 holes going to the end of the bridge (the part near you, if you look at the guitar like it is in the video). And a little on both sides. I din't touch the part where there is the bone saddle. But I had to do a new saddle anyway because like I said the bridge was originally glued with too much glue (too thick but not everywhere, so in some point the bridge didn't touch the top wood) and at the end of the work the action was obviously too low.
Anyway I removed 15-20% of the mass of the bridge. No more than this. And the original shape remained the same.
By the way, I removed the finish, so even if I would have changed the total shape of the bridge it wouldn't be a problem at all. Any unfinished area wouldn't be left because we did a new finish. Why do you think it could be a problem?

Thanks once again everyone for support and suggestions
PS The work is not finished. Since I like the guitar so much, I decided to remove the finishing from the neck too. It is the same gloss polyester finish and I don't like it at all. I like satin finish on the neck. And I am considering replacing the tuning machine... but now we have to face Covid-19, I will do it in the future.

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by Eso612

@ChrisN
I think the rosette is not a sticker. I didn't have any problem sanding the finishing on the rosette and it is still there. I paid a lot of attention in that area but I am sure I removed all the finishing and the rosette is still ok.
I wouldn't do it on the headstock, because I am sure there is a sticker there and it will be ruined for sure.

Interesting info on the rosette.

Separately - how did you sand the finish off? Hand sand with a piece of sandpaper? Block wrapped in sandpaper? Electric hand sander (not belt, but the vibrating square one)? Other?

How did you insure not sanding into the wood in some places, while still removing the finish from the rest?

How do you intend to sand the neck?

You might find this video interesting:

[Eso612]

I used an electric hand sander (vibrating square one). A good one. And around the fingerboard I put sandpaper on a block and did the final passages by hand.

I use 40-80-120 sandpaper at the beginning. 400 when I was near to the wood. And 600 at the end. My luthier gave the final check and told me it was ok.
(I hope the number on the sandpaper are the same here and in U.S. 40 is very strong, 1000 is very soft, the one used on car body before painting it)
I think I didn't remove wood because I used a very soft sandpaper at the end. If I have removed something it would be irrelevant at all.

About the neck I am still not sure. I will try with electric machine at the beginning but I think I will go on by hand.

Thanks for the video. I will take a look later.

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by Eso612

I used an electric hand sander (vibrating square one). A good one. And around the fingerboard I put sandpaper on a block and did the final passages by hand.

I use 40-80-120 sandpaper at the beginning. 400 when I was near to the wood. And 600 at the end. My luthier gave the final check and told me it was ok.
(I hope the number on the sandpaper are the same here and in U.S. 40 is very strong, 1000 is very soft, the one used on car body before painting it)
I think I didn't remove wood because I used a very soft sandpaper at the end. If I have removed something it would be irrelevant at all.

About the neck I am still not sure. I will try with electric machine at the beginning but I think I will go on by hand.

Thanks for the video. I will take a look later.

Thanks for the helpful information - the sandpaper grades here appear the same.

The video highlights the sound difference between the pre- and post-removal of the poly. I liked the "removed" sound better.

[Eso612]

I watched the video. Yes, it gives an idea of what to expect.
It's not easy to judge the sound of one guitar on youtube, but mine has done a much greater improvement than this one. Maybe the bridge regleued helped a lot. And the one on the video still has a "cheap" sound after treatment, at least listened through the headphone.

[lar]

Nice experiment & it sounds like you had fun, with a reward at the end.

It would have been interesting for you to string it up an play it prior to applying the nitro.

I don't suppose you were able to measure the thickness of the original finish? For example, measure the top thickness at the soundhole before and after the finish was removed. And again after the nitro was applied.

[Eso612]

Yes it was funny working on that. On a cheap instrument you aren't that worried and it's interesting to experiment.

No it was not possible to play before applying the nitro because it was done before reglueing the bridge. The luthier told me that to get the better result in term of looking, it was better to take the shape of the bridge and cover the top. Then put the nitro. And then glue the bridge. And he was right, it is perfect like a new guitar.

No, I didn't take any measure. It wasn't necessary. The poly was like a very thick piece of plastic. Have you ever see Dana Bourgeois tapping the top? If you did that on the poly finish you didn't get any response. It was like the wood couldn't move at all. Now it is totally responsive. If you tap on different parts you hear the differences.
The thickness of the nitro can't be taken. We are talking about micron. There isn't virtually any difference with or without it in term of thickness. Nothing you can see on a factory guitar. To be clear, we put only 4 layer of "satin" finish. If you want to make it gloss, even if you use nitro, you have to do a lot of layers and so the thickness is much much more.

[redir]

Record King finishes are ridiculously thick but not 1/2 in

I have no doubt at all that your guitar sounds better after removing that finish. They also glue the bridge right to the finish too.

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by redir

Record King finishes are ridiculously thick but not 1/2 in

I have no doubt at all that your guitar sounds better after removing that finish. They also glue the bridge right to the finish too.

You build, so here's a question that occurred to me. RK does glue to the poly, but the OP's luthier also glued the bridge to his nitro finish to get a cleaner final look.

Is there a difference in gluing to nitro vs poly that suggests it's OK to glue to the nitro?

Or is it best to glue to the wood, then tape it off and finish around it?

[redir]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

You build, so here's a question that occurred to me. RK does glue to the poly, but the OP's luthier also glued the bridge to his nitro finish to get a cleaner final look.

Is there a difference in gluing to nitro vs poly that suggests it's OK to glue to the nitro?

Or is it best to glue to the wood, then tape it off and finish around it?

I missed that part in the dialog. No, it's not good to glue to nitro or any finish. Having said that however there are some very well accomplished luthiers that actually use CA to glue the bridge to UV cured poly finishes. IT seems to work quite well but it's not anything I would ever do.

For standard glues used in guitar making, Titebond, Fish, Hot hide, or AR glues, wood to wood contact is best.

[Eso612]

Originally Posted by redir

Record King finishes are ridiculously thick but not 1/2 in

I have no doubt at all that your guitar sounds better after removing that finish. They also glue the bridge right to the finish too.

Of course they are not really 1/2 inch, but it gives well the idea

About the bridge is not always so. I was expecting to find the finish under the bridge when I removed it, but no, in this case under the bridge the top was not finished. I was surprised too

[Eso612]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

You build, so here's a question that occurred to me. RK does glue to the poly, but the OP's luthier also glued the bridge to his nitro finish to get a cleaner final look.

Is there a difference in gluing to nitro vs poly that suggests it's OK to glue to the nitro?

Or is it best to glue to the wood, then tape it off and finish around it?

Maybe my english is not clear enough but I didn't mean my luthier glued the bridge over the nitro finish. At all.
I said he took the shape of the bridge to cover the part on the top where the bridge have to be placed. Then he put the new nitro finish (but not in the bridge area). And at the end he glued the bridge. In this way the work is very clean. Otherwise you see the junction between the bridge and the nitro.
I hope this way is more clear.