On 3/7/2017 3:43 AM, Timothy Motz wrote:
I have read that the modern classical guitar evolved in response to the needs 
of flamenco players, who needed a sturdy instrument with a lot of volume and a 
strong fundamental tone to accompany dancers. That would tend to push away from 
light construction towards thicker soundboards and more heavily braced joins.

I'm not sure about the push towards thicker soundboards? I thought early guitars/vihuelas had quite thick soundboards but only a couple of bars whereas lute-type instruments had far thinner soundboards but with complicated bracing.

It's not just (post 1800 or more) guitars that have kerfing, tentallones and heavy bracing. I've seen bandurrias, ukes, timples and no doubt others built that way also.



Stuart

Timothy Allen Motz
2736 Algonquin
Toledo, Ohio 43606
419-699-0145
timothy.m...@gmail.com
timothymotz.biz

On Mar 6, 2017, at 10:31 PM, Mark Day <lautenmac...@gmail.com> wrote:

   Maybe someone more versed in guitar history can enlighten.
   The only thing I can say from my own observation is, in musical
   instrument construction in general, a lot of weight is placed on
   tradition. If someone famous or highly regarded plays an instrument by
   a certain maker, or made of particular materials, then everybody has to
   have one! So every violinist wants a Strad or a copy of a Strad. So it
   goes with guitars. I'm only guessing, but some maker must have decided
   to add wood lining to the joints between the side ribs and the top and
   back - perhaps he made a good part of his living repairing instruments
   as many luthiers today do. The tone would have changed somewhat and the
   customer must have liked it and eventually the technique spread.

   On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 3:23 PM, WALSH STUART <[1]s.wa...@ntlworld.com>
   wrote:

     On 3/6/2017 3:50 PM, Mark Day wrote:

         I should add that rag paper or cloth was used for reinforcement
     of
         joints on the backs of all of these early stringed instruments
     in lieu
         of wood.

     Thanks. I'd forgotten about the use of cloth for reinforcement of
     the backs.
     It would seem, then, that many flat-backed, plucked instruments,
     including folk instruments, after about 1800 have a lot more
     internal wood for joining back and soundboard to the sides than in
     earlier times. I wonder what caused the change?
     Stuart

         On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Mark Day
     <[1][2]lautenmac...@gmail.com>
         wrote:
              I can't remember exactly where I read it, but I suspect it
     was
           either
              in     David Van Edwards "Build your own Renaissance Lute"
     CD
           course, or
              "Historical Lute Construction" by Robert Lundberg, that the
     lack
           of
              lining between the soundboard and ribs is to keep the top
     as
           light and
              flexible as possible, and to make it easier to remove the
     top in
           the
              future for repair.
               In fact the overall construction philosophy of lutes,
     vihuelas,
           viols,
                Renaissance and Baroque guitars, seems to be light. As
     far as
           the
              backs are concerned, I suppose it was also in keeping with
     the
           light
              philosophy and if these instruments didn't suffer
     catastrophic
           failure
              due to inadequate glue surface between the back and sides
     under
           normal
              use, then linings aren't really needed. Modern guitars are
     built
           much
              more heavily than their ancestors.
              On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:20 PM, WALSH STUART
           <[1][2][3]s.wa...@ntlworld.com>
              wrote:
                This is a very basic question and I may have got things
           confused!
                Whenever I see constructional details of flat-backed
     plucked
                instruments after about 1800 or so they all seem to use
     either
           solid
                linings, or kerfing or tentallones to join the top and
     the back
           to
                the sides. This is true (I think) of all guitars,
     flat-backed
                mandolins, ukuleles bandurrias, timples... etc....they
     all use
           extra
                wood attached to the insides of the ribs.
                But at least some earlier (flat-backed, plucked)
     instruments
           don't.
                Have I got that right? If so, why do     (some) earlier
           instruments
                just have soundboard and backs glued to the sides?
                Grateful for any insights
                Stuart
                ---
                This email has been checked for viruses by Avast
     antivirus
           software.
                [2][3][4]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
                To get on or off this list see list information at
                [3][4][5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/
     index.html
              --
              Mark Day
              [4][5][6]www.markday.me
              --
           References
              1. mailto:[6][7]s.wa...@ntlworld.com
              2. [7][8]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
              3. [8][9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu
     /~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
              4. [9][10]http://neowalla.smugmug.com/
         --
         Mark Day
         [10][11]www.markday.me
         --
     References
         1. mailto:[12]lautenmac...@gmail.com
         2. mailto:[13]s.wa...@ntlworld.com
         3. [14]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
         4. [15]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
         5. [16]http://www.markday.me/
         6. mailto:[17]s.wa...@ntlworld.com
         7. [18]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
         8. [19]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
         9. [20]http://neowalla.smugmug.com/
        10. [21]http://neowalla.smugmug.com/

     ---
     This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
     [22]https://www.avast.com/antivirus

   --
   Mark Day
   [23]www.markday.me

   --

References

   1. mailto:s.wa...@ntlworld.com
   2. mailto:lautenmac...@gmail.com
   3. mailto:s.wa...@ntlworld.com
   4. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
   5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   6. http://www.markday.me/
   7. mailto:s.wa...@ntlworld.com
   8. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
   9. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  10. http://neowalla.smugmug.com/
  11. http://www.markday.me/
  12. mailto:lautenmac...@gmail.com
  13. mailto:s.wa...@ntlworld.com
  14. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  15. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  16. http://www.markday.me/
  17. mailto:s.wa...@ntlworld.com
  18. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  19. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  20. http://neowalla.smugmug.com/
  21. http://neowalla.smugmug.com/
  22. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  23. http://neowalla.smugmug.com/



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


Reply via email to