> I've built both harps and guitars and it seems less >important what the
back and sides are made of versus >how they are made;( ....within
reason....I wouldn't make >guitar sides of delrin or concrete!)
>I.e. that they are of the right thickness to resonate and still >be strong
enough to support to the soundboard seems the >real key.
>Chad
Chad, I second that emotion. Each wood contributes to the tone in one
way or another. But who can really say one is better than the other. Maple
makes great guitars and lutes, as does ebony or rosewood.
Lacote, thought so little of the effect of the back and sides that he
just used pine, with a veneer over it.
Fleta, actually made his own plywood from rosewood and spruce, for the
back, and sides, and used this on what he called his "international models",
to prevent cracking of the back.
Michael Thames
www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chad McAnally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "lute" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: Built-in action? Double frets
> Hi Tony,
> It's strange, I sent this to the list a few days ago and it suddenly
popped up. Maybe my server is acting up again.
>
> I'm not sure how old the idea of adding that extra gourd to the sitar neck
is but it probably came from much older Indian instruments such as the Rudra
Vina which has two resonators. My old Hemen sitar really did benefit from
that upper gourd, particularly in the Bass and in the overall "presence" of
tone, and it does make the instrument easier to balance.
>
> As to lutes and guitars, as Michael Thames put it earlier " I've always
told guitarist's that the neck can make or break an instrument." I would
definitely trust his experience on that matter. The barring is also
critically important, given that it not only contributes to the function of
the soundboard but greatly to it's stability.
>
> I've built both harps and guitars and it seems less important what the
back and sides are made of versus how they are made;( ....within reason....I
wouldn't make guitar sides of delrin or concrete!)
> I.e. that they are of the right thickness to resonate and still be strong
enough to support to the soundboard seems the real key.
>
> Chad
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tony Chalkley<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: lute<mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 4:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Built-in action? Double frets
>
>
> > So maybe as the fret and string have better purchase, the neck will
> > send that energy to the body? I'm tempted to think that one end
would
> > cancel out the other but on the other hand, the bridge would vibrate
up
> > and down (relative to the bridge) while the neck would forward and
back
> > (relative to the bridge).
>
> Dear Sean and Chad,
>
> I didn't take in the original message well enough to reply - I was
taught
> (in other words, I have no personal opinion on the matter), that the
> material and build of a guitar neck is far more important than those of
the
> back and ribs of the instrument, in terms of tone production.
>
> This would support what you are saying.
>
> As far as the upper gourd on a sitar is concerned, I have recently read
that
> it is a relatively recent affair and of little value - the upside of
this is
> that I have decided not to try and add one to mine - I couldn't sork out
how
> to do it easily.
>
> Yours,
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
>
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html<http://www.cs.dartmou
th.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html>
>
> --
>
