All, I use the solid form for several reasons:
1) While it is a greater work load to build - fact is it is sculpture, plain and simple AND you are not sculpting the body but the air within the body - the solid mold can be used many times. I've my original mould from my first lute under Bob in 1985 and I still build lutes on it. 2) I use push-pins to pressure the ribs into place for gluing on the form http://robdorsey.com/building.htm - just everyday map type push pins. These at the edge of the rib plus over-straps to provide down tension keeps the body true to the form. 3) After each rib dries I run the thin butter knife - yes, one of the self-made tools any luthier needs, a large table knife which one has thinned to .2mm or so and which has therefore become quite flexible - under the joint the full length of the form, breaking it loose. Therefore, when the last rib is on and dry, removing the block screws allow you to "pop" the completed bowl off of the form easily, more or less. There are many ways to skin a cat and they're all valid so long as you wind up with a skinned cat. Best, Rob Dorsey http://RobDorsey.com -----Original Message----- From: Din Ghani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 6:48 AM To: 'Jon Murphy' Cc: 'Rob Dorsey'; 'Troy Wheeler'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [LUTE-BUILDER] Re: Lute - Baroque Guitar Jon, I splashed out on the Lundberg book fairly late - after the bowl was finished. As you say, it is a useful cross-reference, and informed the rest of the build. However, I think one should take great care if any cross-fertilization happens - it is not always possible to mix and match different parts of the process. David warns of this in one specific, critical area - the way the neck is fitted to the body to achieve the correct action height. I fell foul of this in a less critical area - while carving the (Gerle) rose I misinterpreted David's instructions as I had just read Lundberg's description of his process, and made larger cuts than I should have in certain areas. Luckily the result was still "good enough", and possibly added to the "liveliness" of the carving! Similarly, regarding the mould (as it is called here in the UK :)), I'm not sure that the difference between the toastrack type and the solid form is as major as the difference in the processes involved in bending, shaping and fitting the ribs. Lundberg's method involves trimming and fitting the edges in situ, and cutting the bevel by eye using a rebate plane and a file. David's uses a planing desk to cut the bevelled edges on a pre-bent rib. Not having tried the Lundberg method, I can't comment on which is easier or better, but like everything else, it's a matter of practice - the later joints will probably come out better than the earlier ones! Yes, it was scary at first, and getting the joins right while having the rib flat all along the mould was quite a challenge - it takes a while to work out where to adjust next. I know you've already cut and thicknessed the ribs - hope you've got enough spare, and that you aren't too bothered about figure matching - having a margin for making mistakes and starting again is very important! One thing to watch for though, if you do carry on with the toastrack, is to check that the corners of the facets on each slice do line up properly. I was too impatient in building my mould and ended up with some misalignments which made the subsequent rib-fitting even more trying. Possibly this might be less of a problem with a solid mould? By the way, the planing desk also doubled as a jointing plane for the soundboard, just by adding a fence! The other bit of advice is - make sure the mould is well waxed! I don't think I put on enough (or it might have something to do with the fact that many of the ribs had been on the mould for four years!) as I had the classic problem of the bowl not wanting to come off the mould! This might be another advantage of the toastrack style of mould - I ended up breaking and removing the slices of the rack from inside (relatively easy with the MDF construction) until I was able to lift the bowl. I wasn't too dismayed at having to destroy the mould, given the misalignments I mentioned earlier - in any case my next project is going to be a vihuela! I've wondered since whether Lundberg's instruction to break loose any surplus glue under the last rib to be glued, just before gluring the next one, would have helped to avoid this happening... There's plenty to learn, from any source - you'll find out what works for you only when you start doing it! There'll be plenty of mistakes and mishaps along the way, but it is amazing what you can get away with - looking at my finished lute it would take a knowledgeable eye to spot my "deliberate mistakes" - and there were many... Best wishes Din > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Murphy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 03 December 2007 05:50 > To: Rob Dorsey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Troy Wheeler'; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [LUTE-BUILDER] Re: Lute - Baroque Guitar > > Rob, > > I envy you your 5 years of study with Bob Lundberg, and have no > quarrel with his methods to the extent that they are represented in > his book. I'm glad to have the book on my shelves as a cross reference > and backup to David van Edwards' > course. I don't regret the "dual expenditure" in having both, although > I probably would have gotten Bob's book later - after my first > completed lute from David's CD. > > You make a good point, start cutting wood. David's CD is far more a > step by step instructional than Bob's book - perhaps it is that aspect > that makes it easier to break through that first block of getting > started. On the other hand Bob's book (I just pulled it from my > shelves and glanced through it) is a bit more general, what you call > an intellectual approach. > > An example - the mold (mould, form). David makes a "skeletal" > mold from MDF - and provides full scale templates for it. Bob builds > up his form from layers of wood (almost as in the transition from the > ancient "masada" type Egyptian tomb to the smoother pyramid) which he > then shaves with a draw knife. > David's method is initially easier - but my next mold will be done > Bob's way. In part because I love using a draw knife, and in part > because one of my concerns is fittting the belly segments over the > "skeletal" ribs of David's mold - and that may be my delay in > restarting. There is a great deal more effort involved in matching the > skeletal mold ribs than it would appear in the instructional - it took > me months, and I won't be sure I have it right until I actually make > the belly. In fact, come to think of it, I may consider canning the > mold I made from David's instructional and making one with Bob's > method (using David's templates). Not to knock David's method, I'm > sure his skills at shaping the belly over the skeleton mold give him > consistant and excellent results - but perhaps the fully carved form > that Bob uses might instill more confidence in a beginner. The final > shape of the form will be the final shape of the belly, whereas with > the skeleton it will involve some extra skills in the wood bending > process. > > Sorry for the bit of stream of consciousness, and the picking out of > one detail, but it emphasizes that there is "more than one way to skin > a cat" > (and luckily my cat, Lucky, isn't watching me type this - she doesn't > like that analogy). I thank Troy for bringing this up, and Rob and Din > for mentioning the "competing" > instructionals. I am ashamed of myself for chickening out, but I think > this will get me back on track - and particularly as I'll now compare > the two approaches at each step and make my own decisions. I like the > thought of redoing my mold, I think I'll be more comfortable with a > solid one. > > Best, Jon > > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
