Official Luthiers Forum!

Hi

Please can i get your advice on this

Please dont tell me to chuck it though

Nightmare situation with the binding channel on the rear..it appears my chuck didnt hold the bit ..even though it was fully tightened

I nw have a partially cut back that has a section that is a depth of 6mm (perfect) then a long section at 7mm which i could of got away with as i wanted to taper/thin the outer of the rear anyway..but i now have a 9mm section around the upper bout

Dont know what to do next..the router chuck is ok now i think

Any help please

Heres some pics of my spoilt day

yikes, I feel for you. If you have an offcut from the sides you may be able to patch and the re-route the channel.

_________________
http://www.Harvestmoonguitars.com

Ditto what John said -- taper both ends of the patch at a shallow angle and it will blend pretty good.

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Thanks

Its going to be tricky ...will i have to bend the patch to match the curve of the side or can i do it another way

Yes -- you should shape the patch, pre-bend, than trim the repair area to match -- at least that's how I'd do it. There used to be repair experts participating perhaps they will chime in?

A narrow strip like that will bend easily, you can even use an electric curling iron.

Just curious how thick is the back on that project?

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

To make it easier on myself if I had a cut-off piece wide enough I think I would rout out the whole channel to the width of the widest section and glue in a piece of RW binding then re-cut the proper width. I believe you could make it next to invisible.

_________________
"I've been had again"
Tim Benware
Creedmoor, NC

I don't know what the aesthetic of the rest of the guitar is like, but you might be able to try something like this on the side (Simon Fay guitar). It would be easier than getting a perfect match for the grain. Probably wouldn't work well on a traditional style instrument though.
I love little details like this on guitars if they're tied into the overall style. Obviously you would have to make it not look like an afterthought.

_________________
"I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that I may learn how to do it."
Pablo Picasso

https://www.facebook.com/FenskeGuitars

Good idea ben .. didnt think about buying rw binding

Cable: What is the thickness of both your top and back.....??
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

I would be inclined to saw the back off and make the body slightly thinner (re-doing the lining if necessary)

I agree with everyone else. I think you can pre-bend an off cut from the side and graft it in. Judicious use of a little Rosewood dust and CA and I bet it will look surprisingly good.

Man that is a thick back!

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

Is it just me, or does the back look flat, no arch? That might explain the thickness.

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

Could always make it 9mm all around and have a thick binding.

_________________
久保
美智え

Maybe I'm not understanding buy why not go .09 all the way around and add a bwb or some contrasting additional binding strip or something interesting to fur the maple up. I would not try to use the same material as the sides. That way lies madness.

_________________
Michael F Smith
Goat Rock Ukulele
http://goatrockukulele.com

Tom
Back is 3.7mm not sure about top

Alex

No there is an arch..maybe not enough and probably way to thick.. my first scratch build so still learning (the hard way)
Was in the mind set of thinning it when its on.but realise now this is probably wrong.. but i dont want this thread to go of track about thickness as my main problem is this channel
Cheers

Like your thinking gru

Thanks peter ..getting good ideas coming in now

This one has binding/purling installed at 8mm by design (7mm of rosewood plus 1.5mm of W/B/W, then leveled). Looks fine.


(It's a tilt neck classical, if you were wondering)

Your back is definitely thick. Depending on how handy you are with planes/sanding blocks, I'd be thinning the back panel to 2.7mm at the edges, tapering it from about 70mm inboard of the periphery, blended with a good ROS. Then 8mm of binding/purfling will work fine.

_________________
Trevor Gore, Luthier. Australian hand made acoustic guitars, classical guitars; custom guitar design and build; guitar design instruction.

http://www.goreguitars.com.au

Trying to route that ledge in one pass may be the underlying cause of the error.

Thanks trevor

Im kind of leaning this way myself . First scratch build , so its not something you will ever sell . Since it will be a keeper , let your imagination go and get creative with it.

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

I'd definitely take off some of that back down to 2.5-2.2mm in the center and thinner yet at the edge. You can also make the side purfling BWB under the binding. The black next to the wood will hardly show. Deep binding looks amaturish.

Thanks haans

Will get the thickness down next then re measure and think about 2nd binding..
What thicknesses do you recommend for the front
Cheers

I did this on a guitar a couple of years ago (on purpose). Think it looks pretty good.