Official Luthiers Forum!

one of your intentions that no has not drawn comment is the use of hhg. it is difficult to use, and unless you have considerable experience with it i would not recommend it for your first build. stick to tb 1 or lmi white; you will enjoy the process a lot more.crazymanmichael38886.9886689815

[quote=Don't Wanna Be a Snasage Hesh]Billy my friend there is nothing to be scared of from me. [/quote]

   It's not you I'm afraid of Hesh! It's your graphics software!!
I just know I would never look good in women's swimwear! Oh, the Humanity!

_________________
Billy Dean Thomas
Covina, CA

"Multi famam, conscientiam, pauci verentur."
(Many fear their reputation, few their conscience)

[QUOTE=Hesh1956] Mattia then we both respectfully agree to disagree. No prob.

Had I taken the time and effort as you suggest starting with no knowledge what so ever about wood working, tools, guitar building, or wood. Let alone sourcing, pricing, quality, design, construction, plans, etc…….. to do it your way I would still be in a library somewhere. And knowing me I would have also most certainly lost all interest in guitar building….. But then this is me and I understand that.
[/QUOTE]

Fair enough, and you're right: both approaches have their merits. I just feel I have to point out the 'go from scratch' approach is certainly viable to aspiring guitar makers, because there are simply so many voices advocating kit building, and my experience shows me it's perfectly possible to do it without.

I had electrics to keep me busy while I pondered building from scratch, and the reading was necessary to wrap my head around what I wanted to do. Honestly, other than fret slotting and neck/headstock carving, an acoustic guitar is a very different beast to an electric, from the neck joint to the angle to the setup to slotting the bridge and setting intonation, etc. etc. Electric building helped but a tiny amount there. Just so you know. The first acoustic was very much a jump into the deep end. A satisfying jump, but a jump.

Either way, different strokes for different folks, many roads lead to Rome, yaddayaddayadda...

Hey everybody-

Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on what to use for my OM. I have decided on the bearclaw sitka top and a different EI rosewood set that also came from the Allied character grade sale.

The back and sides have one small pin knot in each plate that won't be noticable after finishing. It is very colorful forest grown wood and a steal at $20. I think I have about $38 invested in the top, back and sides, so they are inexpensive but still very nice.

Here they are-







Hopefully this guitar turns out well. I'm sure I'll be posting questions everyday once the build starts. It's nice to know that I have folks here that love to help.

Thanks again-

_________________
John Lewis
Wannabe builder owned by 2 crazy dachshunds

Howdy-

I forgot to mention that the top came from Ed Dicks at Acoustic Woods in Canada. I got my Cuban mahogany sets from him too. Anyway, he's a great guy to do business with.

Happy Building-

_________________
John Lewis
Wannabe builder owned by 2 crazy dachshunds

Speaking of scratch verses kit... It is entirely up to the individual. There is no right/wrong, good/bad approach. Me? I'm a scratch man all the way but that doesn't make it better! (or worse)

Learning curve? To each his own as we liberals like to say.

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust

[QUOTE=John Lewis] Howdy-

I forgot to mention that the top came from Ed Dicks at Acoustic Woods in Canada.
[/QUOTE]

Hehe. I was just about to post a note saying that that top looks like the twin (er, triplet?) to a couple of bearclaw tops I bought from Ed about two years ago.

I used one of the tops to build this guitar:



I gotta admit, it came out sounding very nice. But that bearclaw is some very stiff sitka. A year and a half after completing the guitar it is finally starting to sound really good.

Anyway, I mention this only because I would caution you against erring on the thick side for that top set unless you plan on stringing it up with heavy strings. I thicknessed the top set on that guitar to between .100" and .110" and it was still quite stiff. I even used a fairly light X-bracing pattern. Even so, light gauge strings are a bit on the light side for it, mediums drive the top much better.

Best,

Michael
Michael McBroom38887.9199768519

_________________
Live to Play, Play to Live

I have no building experience *yet,* however, I played a *wonderful* Langejans walnut/cedar a few years ago that I simply cannot get over the sound of. Without a doubt, one of the best sounding guitars I've heard.

[QUOTE=pharmboycu] I have no building experience *yet,* however, I played a *wonderful* Langejans walnut/cedar a few years ago that I simply cannot get over the sound of. Without a doubt, one of the best sounding guitars I've heard. [/QUOTE]

John, the biggest part of that guitar sounding sooooo good it the first part, Langejans. Del has been at this craft for about 35+/- years and about 1200 guitars later, that will render one nice guitar. I'm sure the walnut/cedar was nice too though .

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

John, good luck on the first build, it's funny to agree with everybody here with either kits or scratch but i like the way my bud Mike Spencer puts it, everyone has a road to follow, mine was different than most, takes me a bit more time than many but i like from scratch, this is how i learn best, the hard way and it helps develop the patience, oooh boy! you can believe me!

Serge