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 and Tom Blackshear 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.
|
|
All you LUTHIERS - neck angle and neck relief ?
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login | |
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14976
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to vachterm)
|
|
|
I am a player, not a maker, but I have played some guitars where the neck went back, as you describe, and also forward. When the neck is back, you get more "buzz" but at the expense of having to put the saddle higher. And of course if you want to a cleaner sound, even higher saddle is needed. For flamenco, I personally, and many other player I know, really don't like having the saddle high. The lower the better interms of right hand feeling (need a word for it other than action). So some guitars have the neck more forward, have a very low bridge and clean sound. Somewhere inbetween is perfect, because if the neck is forward, the bridge super low, but the action (over fingerboard) is too high, then you have problem. For this reason, I think that flamenco guitars might require more precision interms of set up than your normal classical guitar. Ricardo
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2007 17:49:27
|
|
Anders Eliasson
Posts: 5780
Joined: Oct. 18 2006
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to vachterm)
|
|
|
Wood is Wood and every piece react a bit different . Even though your solera is very stiff, there can be a slight difference in the final setup height. Factors can be: *a floppy solera, *sides that are not fitted to well to the neck and thus gives stress * poorly fitted back * to much clamping, roping or rubbering pressure when gluing the back Its important when assembling that everything goes together without stress. Its better to have a guitar that is not perfect in shape, but stress free than having a perfectly shaped guitar with a lot of stress built into it. The last affects setup and sound and many guitars are being forced into their final shape. In the end its all about experience and I had to shave more fingerboards in the start than I do now. I can normally nail it around the 7,5 - 8,5mm at the bridge with a 3mm 6th string over 12th fret. If it gets a bit higher than that, I slightly shave the fingerboard after it has been installed. This setup allows you to go down to 2,5mm stringheight at the 12th fret without going to low at the bridge. Players, who want a lower setup at 12th fret will need another neckangle. Closer to a classical. These super low setups can be discussed from now and untill forever. I´ve never met a flamenco with an aceptable buzz and a setup lower than 2,7 - 2,8mm. It does of course depend on playing style, but not even steelstrung guitsr with their much higher string tensión can go lower without excessive buzzing I´ve also met a few pro-played guitars with 3 - 3,5mm setups. That because the player wanted that because of better volumen and projection. I hope this helps.
_____________________________
Blog: http://news-from-the-workshop.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Oct. 21 2013 16:24:22
|
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14976
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to Anders Eliasson)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anders Eliasson Wood is Wood and every piece react a bit different . Even though your solera is very stiff, there can be a slight difference in the final setup height. Factors can be: *a floppy solera, *sides that are not fitted to well to the neck and thus gives stress * poorly fitted back * to much clamping, roping or rubbering pressure when gluing the back Its important when assembling that everything goes together without stress. Its better to have a guitar that is not perfect in shape, but stress free than having a perfectly shaped guitar with a lot of stress built into it. The last affects setup and sound and many guitars are being forced into their final shape. In the end its all about experience and I had to shave more fingerboards in the start than I do now. I can normally nail it around the 7,5 - 8,5mm at the bridge with a 3mm 6th string over 12th fret. If it gets a bit higher than that, I slightly shave the fingerboard after it has been installed. This setup allows you to go down to 2,5mm stringheight at the 12th fret without going to low at the bridge. Players, who want a lower setup at 12th fret will need another neckangle. Closer to a classical. These super low setups can be discussed from now and untill forever. I´ve never met a flamenco with an aceptable buzz and a setup lower than 2,7 - 2,8mm. It does of course depend on playing style, but not even steelstrung guitsr with their much higher string tensión can go lower without excessive buzzing I´ve also met a few pro-played guitars with 3 - 3,5mm setups. That because the player wanted that because of better volumen and projection. I hope this helps. Cool. So then an experienced luthier should be able to nail it within a millimeter every time. So it sounds. So I agree with your 7-8 mm target height. Not sure why not EVERY flamenco guitar builder shooting for that range.
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here: www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Oct. 21 2013 22:00:02
|
|
Anders Eliasson
Posts: 5780
Joined: Oct. 18 2006
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to aarongreen)
|
|
|
quote:
The 51 has a bit of a backbow and with the action it had when I got it, it definitely buzzes when pushed. Brune says thats intentional and I won't argue with him on that. When Dennis recorded it he felt it was too low and you can hear that in the videos. Before we went to the guitar festival where he played it in concert he asked me to make a slightly higher saddle for it, which I did and that took care of the buzzing for the most part. The action is still low, just not stratocaster low. It's more like 3.2 to 2.5 now if I remember correctly. Some guitars just buzz more than others, it really has to do with how the box vibrates IMO. The Barbero should buzz more, honestly. It's a pretty solid guitar, not lightly built at all. Interestingly enough I restored a phenomenal 1970 Reyes that is very similar, pretty solidly built... beefy even (still light weight though). Playing it is like driving a supercharged Bentley. The 1873 Vicente Arias guitar I currently have is yet another that should buzz way more than it does. Frank Wallace recorded that for me. It has an action that is flamenco low and frets that are more suggestions than actual frets, meaning they are lower than I ever thought possible and still do their job. Maybe it's force of habit with these old guitars.... So Aaron, your post really is weird. Do you really mean that that 51 Barbero should have back bow? If so, WHY? Absolutely NO stringed instrument with a neck Works well with backbow. It doesnt matter if they have frets or no. Please tell me why not arguing with Brune. Is he to "fine" to argue with. I argue with anyone saying crap. So why is the back bow intentional? Maybe the guitar just had a refret one day with some frets with a thicker tang than the original and so the neck bended back. That has happened to many a fine guitar or maybe the neck backboved because of humidity change. You say that it Works with a bit of buzzing with a 3,2mm setup. Have you ever thought about if the guitar was fixed, meaning having a slight relief a new frets, you could most probably lower the action 0,5mm at the 12th fret and get the same amount of buzzing and at the same time a more even buzzing all over the fret board. I hope this is not one of these ideas that because a guitars was once owned by a famous player and later inspected by a famous inspector, then nothing can be discussed. Because thats really a nobrain attitude. If someone wants to keep the instrument "original", then its their problem. But who on earth knows how this guitar was setup when it left Marcello Barberos workshop in 1951 and maybe good old Barbero is turning around in his grave, crying: "fix that guitar as soon as posible"
_____________________________
Blog: http://news-from-the-workshop.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Oct. 22 2013 8:37:25
|
|
aarongreen
Posts: 367
Joined: Jan. 16 2004
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to Anders Eliasson)
|
|
|
quote:
So Aaron, your post really is weird. Do you really mean that that 51 Barbero should have back bow? If so, WHY? Absolutely NO stringed instrument with a neck Works well with backbow. It doesnt matter if they have frets or no. Please tell me why not arguing with Brune. Is he to "fine" to argue with. I argue with anyone saying crap. So why is the back bow intentional? Maybe the guitar just had a refret one day with some frets with a thicker tang than the original and so the neck bended back. That has happened to many a fine guitar or maybe the neck backboved because of humidity change. You say that it Works with a bit of buzzing with a 3,2mm setup. Have you ever thought about if the guitar was fixed, meaning having a slight relief a new frets, you could most probably lower the action 0,5mm at the 12th fret and get the same amount of buzzing and at the same time a more even buzzing all over the fret board. I hope this is not one of these ideas that because a guitars was once owned by a famous player and later inspected by a famous inspector, then nothing can be discussed. Because thats really a nobrain attitude. If someone wants to keep the instrument "original", then its their problem. But who on earth knows how this guitar was setup when it left Marcello Barberos workshop in 1951 and maybe good old Barbero is turning around in his grave, crying: "fix that guitar as soon as posible" Whoa settle down there Anders, you need to relax. First of all, the guitar plays great, second of all the degree of backbow is very slight and third of all it does not impede the guitar from being a very viable and excellent guitar. I am sure Barbero is not rolling in his grave. I trust you are not implying that my feelings on this guitar, having lived with it for a few years is based solely on other people's assessments or who owned it. That would be just a tad insulting and completely off base. I've worked on many valuable and historically important guitars and I do what is needed to make it a viable musical instrument, often that means taking the very long way around a problem due to it's value but at the end of the day, I am confident in my own assessment of what comes through my shop What I wrote was Brune says the back bow was intentional and I won't argue with _that_. One can intend to do anything, whether or not you think it's a good idea. He is basing this partially on conversations he had with Reyes, if I remember correctly and then of course his own 40 something years of experience with these guitars. You want to argue with him whether or not it's a good idea, ok fine, but you need to be clear that that is not what he said either...He just said it was intentional. And for the record, the action on the guitar when I got it is lower than I do on my own blancas, which generally have almost no relief these days. I don't agree that relief is always a good idea, in fact I use less than I used to and my guitars now buzz less and are easier to play. As I also said, some guitars just buzz more than others and some guitarists buzz more than others. Besides that set up is incredibly personal I find. Sabicas never buzzed according to Dennis. He said it was one of the most incredible aspects of his touch, he could play anything and make it sing. According to his tech, Hendrix was the same way with his rig and uncontrollable feedback, no one could play his guitar through his rig and get anything but feedback but Jimi could control it just fine and it was set up as he required it to be.
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Oct. 22 2013 12:25:32
|
|
Anders Eliasson
Posts: 5780
Joined: Oct. 18 2006
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to aarongreen)
|
|
|
quote:
Whoa settle down there Anders, you need to relax. First of all, the guitar plays great, second of all the degree of backbow is very slight and third of all it does not impede the guitar from being a very viable and excellent guitar. I am sure Barbero is not rolling in his grave. I trust you are not implying that my feelings on this guitar, having lived with it for a few years is based solely on other people's assessments or who owned it. That would be just a tad insulting and completely off base. I've worked on many valuable and historically important guitars and I do what is needed to make it a viable musical instrument, often that means taking the very long way around a problem due to it's value but at the end of the day, I am confident in my own assessment of what comes through my shop What I wrote was Brune says the back bow was intentional and I won't argue with _that_. One can intend to do anything, whether or not you think it's a good idea. He is basing this partially on conversations he had with Reyes, if I remember correctly and then of course his own 40 something years of experience with these guitars. You want to argue with him whether or not it's a good idea, ok fine, but you need to be clear that that is not what he said either...He just said it was intentional. And for the record, the action on the guitar when I got it is lower than I do on my own blancas, which generally have almost no relief these days. I don't agree that relief is always a good idea, in fact I use less than I used to and my guitars now buzz less and are easier to play. As I also said, some guitars just buzz more than others and some guitarists buzz more than others. Besides that set up is incredibly personal I find. Sabicas never buzzed according to Dennis. He said it was one of the most incredible aspects of his touch, he could play anything and make it sing. According to his tech, Hendrix was the same way with his rig and uncontrollable feedback, no one could play his guitar through his rig and get anything but feedback but Jimi could control it just fine and it was set up as he required it to be. Dont worry Aaron I´m perfectly relaxed. And I also agree that flamenco guitars work best with a neck with very Little relief. Almost straight. BUT backbow, NEVER. Not even o,25mm It totally goes against the fysics of a strings vibration. I also understand that what you refer to as value is economical value and not the value as the tool a guitar is. I know that when some things gets prices which are out of proportion to the value of their original purpose, in this case a thing (guitar) used to make art (music), then people start treating them with a very different attitude than if it was just a "normal" guitar and it starts getting very "dangerous" changing whatever Little "problem" it might have because you might loose economical value. Its just like if you buy a classic car and change the brakes to some better ones, then you "ruin" the car. Kind of absurd, but well, thats the way our absurd Little world funcions. So 3 questions: 1)Do you believe that this guitar would be a better instrument if it did not have any back bow? Dont think about its historical value. Just think thing, guitar. 2)Do you believe any other guitar would benefit from having backbow in the neck? 3) would you build a guitar with backbow yourself? What you write about Sabicas sound is totally against what I hear from his recordings. Sabicas buzzes A LOT on his recordings. Its so much that it becomes a part of his sound. I cant imagine Sabicas without this buzzing that is always present. Another thing is that he could make the guitar sing (as you say) and buzz at the same time. Very few can do that and I trust its what you call his touch.
_____________________________
Blog: http://news-from-the-workshop.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Oct. 22 2013 14:09:55
|
|
aarongreen
Posts: 367
Joined: Jan. 16 2004
|
RE: All you LUTHIERS - neck angle an... (in reply to vachterm)
|
|
|
Hi All Anders, 1) I do whatever I must do to make the guitar realize it's potential as a musical tool, regardless of it's value. Where value comes in is how exactly I go about doing that. However if there is no problem in how the guitar plays, then why alter it? A slight raising of the action, which I would have done with just about any guitar esp, considering how Dennis plays...is much easier than pulling frets and planing the board. We (Karl Franks) and I have done some rather extensive and invasive restorations on such guitars as Hauser I, Bouchet, Fleta, Santos, Barbero, Friederich on down the line. I mean completely disassemble the guitar, often being able to save and reuse the purflings, bindings and fingerboards....we go to extreme lengths to make sure our work is not what you see when you see the guitar. In one case (1890 Ramirez) we had to rebrace the top entirely. Because it was horribly warped. So my attitude is you do what you must esp when we are often undoing what others have done, poorly. Just so you know, if the Barbero had an issue that manifested in the real world as a real issue, I would have dealt with it. Your other two questions are not germane to_ this_ discussion. Once again, we are discussing Brune's assertion that this was intentional to give a certain kind of raspy attack (he called it rajo, if I remember correctly). That was the whole point of the comment. If he backs that up by referring to something that Manuel Reyes said, someone who knew Barbero.... then I am not going to argue with him because I don't have any way of disproving that. Whether or not it's a "good idea" or "correct" is another matter. However you must consider the fact that how people play and their taste etc never stay the same. Therefore it's not entirely fair to judge outside of the context of the players of the day. How's that? Charlie, You should have told me sooner that you are not infallible, I am just about done with a beautiful carved pedestal I was going to stick you on. For the sake of full disclosure, I was going to have you stuffed first. Oh well, I guess I'll have to find another. Hi Ruphus Too much relief can be a real problem as when you get to up to the 7th or so fret position now you have the upward slope of the relief to deal with. One way around that is to taper off the base side of the fingerboard from the 12th fret down to the sound hole, so that it is not in the same plane. Also too much relief can make the guitar harder to play as now you have to push the string down further in the middle positions. On my guitars my ideal is a tiny bit of relief on the base side, none on the treble, the bass side tapers off at the 12th, so it dips down if you will and a perfectly level fret height on the treble side all the way up to the 19th or 20th fret. There's another answer for you Anders. A
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Oct. 22 2013 19:51:18
|
|
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
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.09375 secs.
|