#4. palo rojo negra (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - Lutherie: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=22
- - - #4. palo rojo negra: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=211794



Message

El Polaco -> #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 28 2012 22:29:25)

In the throes of French polishing #4.

The padauk was hard to work but very easy to polish!

Question:
What do your guitars weigh?

My blancas are ending up at about 2lb. 2oz. With pegs(1kg) and this one. (attached photo) is right at 2lb 5oz
Just curious.

Thanks!



krichards -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 29 2012 7:31:27)

Including machine tuners and strings mine weigh in at around 1100/1200g for blancas and 1300/1400g for rosewood negras.

Yours are lighter but maybe you're not including tuners and strings?

I'm reluctant to make them too light because lightness equals fragility, so a little heavier seems best to me.



Anders Eliasson -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 29 2012 8:11:55)

quote:


I'm reluctant to make them too light because lightness equals fragility, so a little heavier seems best to me.


I totally agree and I add that blancas which are to light, tend to sound to hollow or empty for my ears. My guitars weigh more or less like Kevins



El Polaco -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 29 2012 13:14:17)

That is very good information!

So the added weight should go to the top and back/sides? Any particular ratio?
I think I could make my tops a little heavier. Especially with Engleman. It is pretty flexible compared with the 2 European tops I have waiting to start work on. It feels like the bracing could be a little heavier on the Engleman to help the stiffness a little maybe?

I guess this where the experience and paying close attention to the changes I make with each build comes into effect.

I am just rambling but I appreciate any advice on this particular subject which I feel is one of the most important areas of learning process...

Thanks again!



Andy Culpepper -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 29 2012 14:57:47)

I have about the same weights as krichards too. In my experience it can be a mistake to make a cypress back too thin, tone-wise. On my blancas I don't go as light as possible because I get a little more volume and tonal range with the back around 2.3 mm or so. Most rosewood/padauk I take down to 2.0-2.1. I have also been experimenting with slightly thicker fingerboards which adds a little weight. For tops there is not much maneuverability and they kind of have to be close to as light as possible. I also look for low density/stiff spruce.

Nice looking guitar there.



El Polaco -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 29 2012 21:41:50)

Thanks Andy and That's really good information On the back thicknesses!
So does that mean that mean that the sides are thinner than the back on your Blanca's? I guess I assumed they were the same for some reason.... Interesting.
I am adding a stiffer and stronger reinforcement piece under the top of the fingerboard between the heel and upper harmonic brace. It seems to add sustain.

It's is all very interesting I must say. My #1 and #3 are identical except for the bracing pattern and they are so completely different. #1 is Barbero and #3 is Reyes basically. #3 is light, raspy bright very flamenco while #1 has settled down to a more robust strong clean tone with bell like trebles that don't break down when played very hard. I play that one out and the lighter one at home.

Do you think that a thicker fingerboard adds something other than weight? Maybe sustain possible because of the added mass on the upper top?



estebanana -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 29 2012 23:53:23)

quote:

Do you think that a thicker fingerboard adds something other than weight? Maybe sustain possible because of the added mass on the upper top?


The wood of the neck probably has more to do with sustain, dense ebony could be as much a damping factor as a sustaining factor. The graft under the fingerboard does help with sustain.

Ultra light flamencos most often don't have the profound 'peso' that slightly heavier ones have. But between too heavy and too light is a fine line. I think it's better to build from heavy to light rather than light to heavy. If guitar is slightly to heavy it's more excusable than one that is too light. Although there always exceptions you know you find super light guitars that are monsters.



Andy Culpepper -> RE: #4. palo rojo negra (Sep. 30 2012 0:13:16)

quote:

Thanks Andy and That's really good information On the back thicknesses!
So does that mean that mean that the sides are thinner than the back on your Blanca's? I guess I assumed they were the same for some reason.... Interesting.
I am adding a stiffer and stronger reinforcement piece under the top of the fingerboard between the heel and upper harmonic brace. It seems to add sustain.


The sides on all my guitars are in the 1.8-2 mm range. Experimenting with different things above the soundhole is very interesting and the effect that things up there have on the sound is much less "solved" than in the lower bout IMO. (at least for me)
I really only tried the thicker fingerboard (7mm tapered to 6.5 mm) on one guitar, a blanca, and it was a monster. It had a little more sustain than most of my blancas and also more volume and sweetness. But the sample size is way too small [:)] I want to try it on a negra.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET