Foro Flamenco
Posts Since Last Visit | Advanced Search | Home | Register | Login

Today's Posts | Inbox | Profile | Our Rules | Contact Admin | Log Out



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 and Philip John Lee who went ahead of us too soon.
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.





Bogdanovich´s method for flamenco guitars   You are logged in as Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >>Discussions >>Lutherie >> Page: [1]
Login
Message<< Newer Topic  Older Topic >>
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

Bogdanovich´s method for flamenco g... 

Hello foroflamenco!
My Name is Jonas. Nice to meet you...

I just read Bogdanovich´s book about classical guitar making and I think about to give his method a try for a flamenco guitar. What I try to figure out now is what are the important changes to end up with a flamenco guitar and not with a classical one.

Are you familliar with his method?

I think the most important thing will be a smaller distance between the strings and the top at the bridge. To get that right I think I will have to change the design of the Solera. Bogdanivich uses a positive Neck angle (2,5 mm at the Top of the Solera). That looks ok to me. Do you agree? I think to compensate the Neck angle and the dome of the top (25' radius) the lower bout of the guitar is tilted 4mm. Do you think it would be enough just to get rid of these 4mm? Or would it be better to increase the Neck angle a bit more? What else would you change to make it sound flamenco?

Thanks to all!

Jonas



Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px

Attachment (1)
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 5 2019 20:41:00
 
JasonM

Posts: 941
Joined: Dec. 8 2005
From: Baltimore

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Welcome to the foro.

I don’t know Bagdonovich’s book but why not follow a plan for an actual flamenco guitar? I’m building my first guitar and chose the Reyes plan from the Guild of American Luthiers. However, I did modify the geometry of the setup to suit my liking. You can use this formula to figure out the theoretical geometry. And it’s important to understand how this relationship works:

SH = FB + FH + (A * 2) - (N + D)

SH = string height at the bridge
FB = fretboard thickness
FH = fret height
A = string height at 12th fret
N = amount of neck deflection at the nut ie 2mm
D = dome

Typical SH for flamenco is 7mm. Action might be 3mm for bass E string. From what I’ve learned from the great builders on the forum
Here, I doubt anyone uses more than 2.5mm neck deflection or 3mm dome. Remember that you can also ramp the fretboard. For my build I went with a 2.5mm neck deflection, 1.5mm dome, and 6mm fretboard. Now that the guitar is assembled I’m finding I need to ramp the fretboard by about a mm.


About the Bagdonovich Solera. I don’t know how much experience you have but if this is your first build I would avoid it. I was advised to do the same on here for my first build and it’s sound advice. I would use a traditional Solera like that in Roy Courtnals book or one that is dished out in the lower bout. This is what most flamenco builders seem to use anyway.

Having the right string heights and geometry is probably THE most important aspect of a flamenco guitar. So whatever you decide make sure you have the best chance of getting it correct.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 6 2019 14:32:55
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Thank you Jason!
That helps a lot... it makes totally sense to keep that calculation in mind when making decisions that affekt the string action.
My plan was to use the Bogdanovich book as a guide through the whole construction process, but change things wherever it seems right to me. So some information from those plans from the Guild of Americas Luthiers could be interesting. Why did you choose the Reyes plan over the others? Did you compare them? And how detailed are these plans?

It seems to me that beside string action and wood selection another key faktor for a flamenco sound is the thickness of the top, back and sides. Do you agree? With a fast responsive sound in my mind it seems logic to me that at least the top must be thinner in a way to produce that fast attack? Maybe only thinner at some points? or overall? Must that be compensated by thicker braces somehow?

Bracing generally seems to be a bit mystical to me. Obviously the pattern of the braces used in flamencas are not generally different from the ones in classical guitars. One thing that I noticed when I compared the bracings of some of my own guitars is that the braces of the flamencas often are a bit thicker directly under the bridge. Is that a known technique for flamenco sound? Are there other differences between classical and flamenco bracings in general?

Thank you! Good night!
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 6 2019 21:02:48
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Sorry!
Maybe that were too many questions at once ;-) ?

Have a sunny day everyone!
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 8 2019 11:54:46
 
JasonM

Posts: 941
Joined: Dec. 8 2005
From: Baltimore

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

No that’s ok I had a lot of questions too before I started (still do), but all the stuff to learn is what makes it interesting. I’m only equipped to give you a few answers though.

Plans from the Guild of A. Luthiers are pretty nice. Most start from the Barbero or Santos plan and many flamencos are just derivatives of these. I chose the Reyes plan because I was looking for a little more modern sound and Tom Blackshear from this forum drafted the plan. It was either this or the Barbero. There is lots of info in the archives on these plans. The Reyes plan is very good and has all the info except for top doming. I have a thread about this when I started my build.

As far as top thickness and bracing goes this is where there are no clear answers or definite rules from what I’ve gathered.other members know a lot more than I. But I think in general flamenco blancas are lighter weight than classicals. Most use a traditional 5 or 7 fan brace system, Spanish cedar necks and lighter bridges, and this helps to decrease sustain.

I’ve seen many rules for flamenco guitars broken. For example, keeping certain top thickness profiles or only using certain linings in an effort to loose sound. These things don’t seem to guarantee anything. The most important aspect is the system as a whole and the builders experience in knowing what works for him. And wood ofcourse.

old school flamenco guitars did have very thin tops and thin back and sides. But this doesn’t seem to mean that a guitar will sound flamenco. Condes/Esteso can have thicker tops. I recently played a guitar by a Luthier that copied an older Conde. The top was 2.8mm around the bridge! And it sounded great. Who knows if it was intentional or not. The thicker brace under the bridge, I assume you mean bridge patch? Seems to be more common with flamenco guitars to increase stiffness under the bridge but again, it isn’t always the case.

It’s been said before that a lot of what makes a flamenco guitar sound flamenco is the player.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 8 2019 17:25:44
 
Richard Jernigan

Posts: 2610
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to JasonM

quote:

ORIGINAL: JasonM
It’s been said before that a lot of what makes a flamenco guitar sound flamenco is the player.


My spruce/Indian '73 Romanillos, played with flamenco technique, sounds great picado, but rasgueados are better on my two flamenca blancas--drier and more percussive.

The Romanillos is "modeled on" a 1950 Hauser. Mario Escudero recorded a whole flamenco album on a Hauser classical, and said, "There are no flamenco guitars and classical guitars, only good guitars and bad guitars."

I don't necessarily agree with Escudero, but he obviously knew a lot more about the subject than I do.

RNJ
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 8 2019 19:12:45
 
JasonM

Posts: 941
Joined: Dec. 8 2005
From: Baltimore

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to Richard Jernigan

In the Making Master Guitars book, The Hernandez y Aguado guitar looks like it would make a fine flamenco. 2mm top, back, and sides, 5 strut fan brace and two closing struts, and a bridge patch.

I also agree with you about classical guitars being used for flamenco. Not dry enough for my taste
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 9 2019 2:33:34
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to JasonM

quote:

Plans from the Guild of A. Luthiers are pretty nice. Most start from the Barbero or Santos plan and many flamencos are just derivatives of these. I chose the Reyes plan because I was looking for a little more modern sound and Tom Blackshear from this forum drafted the plan. It was either this or the Barbero. There is lots of info in the archives on these plans. The Reyes plan is very good and has all the info except for top doming. I have a thread about this when I started my build.

Interesting! Are these plans just a drawing of the geometrys of the guitar? Or are they also a guide for the building process?

quote:

As far as top thickness and bracing goes this is where there are no clear answers or definite rules from what I’ve gathered.other members know a lot more than I. But I think in general flamenco blancas are lighter weight than classicals. Most use a traditional 5 or 7 fan brace system, Spanish cedar necks and lighter bridges, and this helps to decrease sustain.

Maybe it´s more about to get the right ratio between top thickness and stiffness of the bracing more that the actual pattern or shape of the sticks...

quote:

The thicker brace under the bridge, I assume you mean bridge patch? Seems to be more common with flamenco guitars to increase stiffness under the bridge but again, it isn’t always the case.

No I mean the shape of the bracing sticks itself. They are more thick under the bridge

quote:

It’s been said before that a lot of what makes a flamenco guitar sound flamenco is the player.

Totally true! Of course only because we know that, we can start talking about things like bracings ot thickness ;-)
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 10 2019 8:46:08
 
JasonM

Posts: 941
Joined: Dec. 8 2005
From: Baltimore

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Plans are just measurements not an actual guide. So you could use the Bagdonovich and other sources for a guide. Of course like I mentioned, because of the different Solera he uses his approach to the assembly stage will also be different but there is a lot of overlap elsewhere I’m sure. You can also use Pablo Requena’s videos on YouTube for assembly with a more traditional Solera
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 10 2019 15:26:31
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Im just collecting some tools that I will need. Bogdanovich uses seven different plains (block plane, shoulder plane, smoothing plane, shooting plane, compass plane, spokeshave and several cabinet scrapers). I´m not able to buy all of these in good quality if I also want to buy wood for this project ;-)

My idea is to buy one good block plane and then try to handle all important tasks with only this. Do you think it´s possible?

Other questions:

Which tool do you recommend to dish out the dome in the solera? Bogdanovich uses his compass plane but is it also possible with a chisel or any other inexpensive tool? I mean to end up with a good result...

Which tool for shaping the backside of the Neck? Don´t want to buy a spoeshave only for that... files, chisels?

Thank you! And happy easter!
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 16 2019 11:26:12
 
Echi

 

Posts: 589
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

An angle grinder with variable speed or a powerful orbital sander. The plywood will show you if you are doing it right.
Alternatively you can shape yourself a piece of wood with the same shape of the top doming, stick some sandpaper on it and go by hand.
A couple of Quiangsheng block planes (low and regular angle) a Veritas miniature plane (or a cheap one you can find on the bay) a couple of scalpers and a homemade circle cutter can do almost everything.
To join the plates you my need a longer plane. In the meantime you can work with a block of wood and sandpaper.
I bought a cheap Anant plane and took some time to rectify the sole but now it works well.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 16 2019 13:40:16
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Thank you Echi!
What difference makes the cutting angle of a block plain?
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 16 2019 17:48:57
 
JasonM

Posts: 941
Joined: Dec. 8 2005
From: Baltimore

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Hey Mango,

Don’t overwhelm yourself with all the tools. You don’t need all that stuff Bagdonovich has.

I’d recommend buying tools you might need or want as you go through each step of the process. Get yourself a block plane and maybe number 5 jack. You can get used Stanley planes on eBay or flea markets. A low angle plane is nice to have to reduce tear out in figured wood. I started with a cheap, used block plane and later upgraded to a Lee Neilsen. I’d recommend a hand router as you can do a lot with it.

Decide on a plan, get a Spanish cedar neck blank and a head plate, and just start!
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 16 2019 21:18:05
 
mango

Posts: 13
Joined: Apr. 2 2019
 

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to JasonM

Thank you Jason! That was the answer I was hoping for :-)
So for the first block plane you would also recommend one with a low angle if possible?
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 16 2019 22:53:22
 
JasonM

Posts: 941
Joined: Dec. 8 2005
From: Baltimore

RE: Bogdanovich´s method for flamen... (in reply to mango

Low angle block plane is preferable. And a long low angle plane for plate thicknessing and jointing. Or like Echi said you can use a long flat sanding block.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Apr. 17 2019 19:30:34
Page:   [1]
All Forums >>Discussions >>Lutherie >> Page: [1]
Jump to:

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.