Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva, Tom Blackshear and Sean O'Brien who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
Posts: 4685
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
3 Different ways to adjust neck angle?
So I when I searched, I saw lots of threads in the past related to neck angle, etc. and went through some, and since Ricardo also mentioned it in the "Pulsacion" thread and I was learning about this anyways, I thought I make a fresh thread and ask some questions.
What would be interesting for me is to know which of the 3 concepts you luthiers use to determine neck angle for flamenco and why and what are the advantages/disadvantages? And if there are other methods, which methods?
Here in this video from Boaz Elkayam in which 3 are mentioned, which is basically (1) Right from the start in assembly with Solera/Tabla fixed slightly raised neck angle shown at around 05:00, in which he says it works for him always to get 7mm or 8mm at bridge area (2) "the board"?! shown at around 09:15 , (3) around 10:40 to just basically shave fingerboard
Posts: 16102
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: 3 Different ways to adjust neck ... (in reply to Arash)
As discussed in the past, several luthiers on here admitted that it can be hit or miss with the Solera, and you have to make tons of guitars to get it exact and you might use method 1 and 3 both to get it exact. Meaning your goal was 8mm but then you assemble things shift around a bit, or the strings pull it not as extremely as you had hoped etc, and the result is a ballpark of 7-9mm as the guy said (I recommend and measure from string 6 not 1 so perhaps I am after a lower action than the one he claimed was 8mm that looked tall to me from the bass side). Cigarette should not be able to roll freely under there. A Pencil or pen works too.
I experienced this argument with a local luthier who had built many classicals and was starting his first ever flamenco, and we discussed this issue and I challenged him about his. He said the guys here on foro were wrong and that he could hit precisely the number he wanted (he claimed his would be 8mm with no buzzing). A year later he finally finished and soon as I picked it up and looked at it I was like, "well what happened dude?", the bridge was way above 8, maybe 10mm I would guess, but the strings were buzzing everywhere. He even examined closely my goldilocks negra 7mm zero buzzing, easy clean playing, and bragged he could do that easy in the Solera. So HIs guitar I would have to raise that bone another 1-2 mm to stop that type of buzzing. He looked at me and shrugged his shoulders (his best at admitting the Foro guys were correct, estebanana etc., you can aim for it but only with experience are you gonna achieve the goldilocks perfect Conde thing). You can go back and read Estebanana comments and several others on here in the archives.
The other issue is neck RELIEF, which affects the buzzing mainly. There was an argument long ago about deliberate relief design for equal buzzing on EVERY fret made by Brune I believe regarding either a Barbero or Reyes or both maybe, that was challenged, but in the end the point is you need to counter the bowing of the neck with some backbowing counter balance. This can be done via method 3 shaving the ebony board and refretting etc, if it is off and the guitar is either too buzzy or not buzzing enough despite the low bridge. This issue is obviously part of the umbrella of "the action" as well, but I defer to the luthiers about it.
Last, I will say my friend builds and hits the goldilocks zone set up for flamenco using the DOVE TAIL method, not the Solera, so you build the box and closed and it has a slot for the neck joint to slide and lock into place. He is very consistent so it seems like a good alternative to Spanish Solera, also I remember Brune using this, and perhaps Mariano Conde uses it hence I observed him sanding a closed box?? (doubtful, but if people know of dovetail condes I am all ears).
RE: 3 Different ways to adjust neck ... (in reply to Ricardo)
Dovetails. Guitar makers often take a stand on this hill, but really there's nothing to argue about. A dovetailed neck joint is a totally valid way to make a guitar.
There's advantages, too. You can make the box and neck separately and finish them while apart then assemble for a lovely clean appearance. It's a pain in the butt French polishing the angles between the heel or sides of the fingerboard, it takes time and practice to figure out how to get that right. Setting the neck angles is accomplished in a different way, that's all. The method is not without its own drawbacks so, for the builder, I think the two schools kind of balance out. Both have their good and bad points.
I've only done three guitars with dovetails. I needed more practice when I moved away from them as I was still struggling with thinking spatially while setting the neck but that was only due to a lack of experience. A couple or a few more guitars and I would have had the jigs sorted out and my sensibilities honed and I think it would have been just fine. So, for me, I have no dog in that fight either way. No maker I've ever talked to who'd put a stake in the ground about either method has been able to convince me their way was superior. They're both valid, in my opinion.
Also, that there are so many methods out there to build a guitar, in itself, points to the imperfect nature of the craft. If any one method was clearly superior to the others then it would probably be the only method in use. The bottom line is, wood moves. Either way, the maker has to plan on some level of variation. People can do as they want to try to eliminate or reduce the margins but at some point it comes down to philosophy and is just a matter of what a person wants to build.
RE: 3 Different ways to adjust neck ... (in reply to Ricardo)
Right. It's probably better to make the distinction as being separate neck or neck-off construction versus integral neck construction. Dovetail is just one way to do neck off. It all really just comes down to builder's preference, in my opinion.
Posts: 4685
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: 3 Different ways to adjust neck ... (in reply to Ricardo)
Thanks Ricardo and Rob. There are lots of older threads related to neck angle, relief, etc. I will be slowly going through them. Have to admit that at that time I wasn't really that much interested in luthiery at all to be honest. But that changed.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
that looked tall to me from the bass side. Cigarette should not be able to roll freely under there.
Yes it looks high. Also I think he measured to top of 1st string, not under the string. These Cigarette filters in the foto below which are exactly 8mm don't fit below Bass E on my Sanchis and is squeezed in. But also my Bone is pretty low. But this is pretty much perfect for me and comfortable.
The fingerboard is definately shaved and gets thinner on higher frets on my Sanchis towards the soundhole.
quote:
and perhaps Mariano Conde uses it hence I observed him sanding a closed box?? (doubtful, but if people know of dovetail condes I am all ears).
Don't you think that many Condes (at least the cheaper ones, Atocha, etc.) actually might all be built with the "dovetail" method as it is probably more "factory" suitable method with seperate neck I assume?
The Brune video was interesting.
He also mentions here that he uses around +2mm neck angle for an estimate target of around 8 to 9mm.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread