You still need to glue in supports for the inserts and the door
Gluing in the supports, carefully
This one will fit the door.
Now you can rout for the door itself.
Almost done. now rerout the opening for your arm.
Drilling for the cap screws.
All done, almost.
Voicing Through the Access Panel
Voicing through the access panel; don’t weld the hood shut
It is important to remember, even in this time of internet gurus, ubiquitous lutherie schools, and unlimited access to information, that voicing is not only a personal matter, but one fraught with vagaries. In other words, your mileage may vary. I often find that my initial intent changes as I get started and rethink the process as the results start coming in. Don’t get fooled by a few good results, nor thwarted by a few failed attempts. This is another work in progress. The title of this workshop refers to an idea that hit me once I started using the access panel, developed not by me but by Abe Wechter (with Richard Schneider). Many well-known luthiers design their guitars and then build them, under what I think is a false assumption that they will automatically be all they can be. Certainly good design is the beginning; but is it the end? One wouldn’t design a car and then weld the hood shut. It is almost certain to need some adjustments to run its best. The variability of wood, climate, mood, and taste leave me wanting the option of revoicing the instrument after it has been played in a bit. The Access Panel presents us with a wonderful opportunity to play the guitar immediately and continuously while we make both sweeping and infinitesimal changes to the instrument. I have done as little as remove approximately 2 grams of bracing and had dramatic results. Conversely, I’ve also removed entire braces, redesigning on the fly, all with the guitar strung, if slightly detuned to lessen the tension on the top. I’ve even had the unexpected result of making what felt like a big change, only to hear no change at all. While it is difficult to remember a tone for weeks or months or years, it is within our power to remember a tone for five or fifteen minutes as we make small adjustments and listen along the way. The access panel can be designed into the guitar from the start; clearly this is the best approach. However, as you see from the photos above, the panel can be added later and still offer the benefit of allowing revoicing or rebracing to either correct a problem or simply enhance an already good guitar. This retrofit can be done in about two hours, start to finish, with no refinishing. From there, any voicing in which you wish to engage can be done in minutes. Think “checking the oil,” not “doing a valve job.” Or, if more major tonal alterations are in order, you could use the analogy of changing the injectors, or hot-rodding the compression. I have, I’m embarrassed to admit, reclaimed an otherwise unmusical experiment. The guitar looked great, played great, felt great; however, it sounded like a wounded goose, with a midrange that honked—not pleasant or musically useful. With witnesses, a very good classical player, in attendance testing and giving me feedback, I was able to completely alter the voice of the guitar to a very good sounding, very musically satisfying instrument, all in less than one hour. On another occasion a customer who was happy with their instrument, but with some minor reservations, asked me to do some revoicing. In about 45 minutes of playing and tweaking, and the removal of quite a bit of brace material and the addition of one brace, the guitar blossomed into a warmer, more responsive instrument. Keep in mind, it already sounded good; afterwards it sounded great. It is unusual to be in a position of adding material. Usually we are only able to remove material, either from the braces or the top. With the access panel we can completely remove and replace braces if we wish. We can regraduate the top, via the interior surface, thinning the perimeter if we wish, or stiffening it via extra bracing. One danger is the temptation to leave the voicing for after completion, rather than being sensitive to the instrument along the way. This is akin to “Fixing it in the mix,” always a mistake, even when it is possible. However, knowing that we can fix it frees us to more boldly experiment, to take risks as designers, to work more closely to the edge. For me, this alone makes it worth having the access panel. It is very important to remember that one can only adjust an existing thing. Hence, understanding, or at least attempting to understand, the effects of brace placement and design is useful. If the guitar contains unpleasant harmonics, the length or height of braces can be adjusted to alter the inherent harmonic content of an area. If the top feels too constrained, loosening it can be done in a manner consistent with the tone toward which we are working, rather than in a random and purely subtractive manner. I hope this information encourages you to take a few more risks, to attempt to build toward the tone in your head, knowing that if you are not immediately successful you will not be stuck with a pile of kindling. If you find this helpful, please let Abe Wechter know you appreciate the generous gift he has given to the lutherie community. If you see him, buy him dinner or at least a good beer. If you do not find this useful, remember: Abe Wechter; I’m just the messenger.
Multi-Scale Fretboards and Fingerboards
Multiple Scale Fingerboards and Fretboards
A multi-scale fingerboard or fretboard is nothing more than a fingerboard or fretboard that uses one scale length for the low string and a different, usually shorter, scale for the highest string. Connect the dots and you have a multiple scale board. That’s it. This is not rocket science. In an issue of American Lutherie Mike Doolin showed a method for doing a Multiscale fretboard. Here is some more info about this topic on which I’m often asked questions. Think 3 fret guitar! You can adjust whether the “fan” is evenly distributed, more at the nut end, or more at the bridge end. Imagine a normal nut; all the “not-straightness” is now at the bridge. With a normal saddle all the variation is at the nut end. Again, lay out the fret scales where you want them and connect the dots. The potential advantage is that one can obtain the power, especially in the bass, of a long scale, along with the sweetness and lack of twang of the shorter scale. Think Martin D-28, versus Gibson J-45. This is an oversimplification, but not by much. The Martin has more power; the Gibson is sweeter. Or, think long scale bass vs short scale bass. I find that basses gain a great deal from the Multiscale board, fretted or fretless. The first instrument I was involved with that had a Multiscale fretboard was an instrument invented by John Starrett called a Starrboard. In 1977, John asked for my help during his development stage of this instrument, and we have been close friends ever since. He is now a PhD in Math. (Figures!) John came up with his tapping instrument that employs a matrix of halftones, fretted horizontally with strings spaced vertically. Because it is a matrix, all scales are played with the same fingerings and you can trill as many notes as you’ve got fingers. Each not can be played in multiple places allowing melodies to be played right through chords. Imagine that! Because of the large range of notes from low B below E on a bass, to high b four octaves above, however, he needed a way to have a long scale for the low B, but a shorter scale for the high b. We simply layed out the two scales we thought would work and connected the dots. Voila! We were surely not the first to do this. The concept of the Multiscale fingerboard goes back to at least 1900, when the first patent for such a fingerboard was filed by E. A. Edgren. (Patent #652-353, E. A. Edgren) In his 1900 patent Edgren describes in his claims: “… a musical instrument the combination with a sounding body or box, of the following instrumentalities, to wit: a neck approximately in the form of a double convex in cross section... …”a plurality of frets secured to said neck, said frets being positioned at an angle one to the other so that the first and last frets incline in opposite directions... “...it will be noted that the bottom flange of the head C runs at an angle so that one side of the neck B will be longer than the side opposite. The frets diverge, running from the center outward, so that the lower frets extend slightly in a direction opposite to the upper frets.” In 1989 Ralph Novak patented an arrangement of frets he calls “fanned frets,” denoting, “"a series of straight frets aligned in a non-parallel pattern," and "each of said frets extending along a straight line" and "with said plurality of strings substantially converging to a point." Novak also has a copyright on the use of the term “fanned frets.” He charges a nominal licensing fee and I believe he will perform the slotting of a “fanned fret fingerboard” for an additional separate fee. If you are interested in trying this out, but worried about your accuracy, you might contact him. (Patent #4,852,450, Novak) Keep in mind that there are patents involved here. I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. If you are interested in pursuing the use of “fanned frets,” or “multi-scale” instruments, or building one of these really cool Starrboards, please either consult a patent attorney, or learn enough to comfortably feel secure that you are not violating anyone’s patent. If you are employing any patented ideas you must contact the patent holder and, if their patent is still in force, arrange to legally use their ideas. If this includes paying a fee, pay the fee. If not, no problem. When in doubt, check things out. Remember, patents are difficult and expensive to defend. If you plan to use a patented idea, it is your responsibility to obtain permission. In all cases, it is the right thing to do. Many patent holders, like Abe Wechter, who invented and patented the access panel, do not charge for the use of their ideas. Their patents are to ensure that they will never be prevented from using their own ideas and to lay claim to original ideas. I like looking up patents to see who invented what. Abe has generously given the benefit of the access panel to the lutherie community. I send him a token royalty because he is such a nice guy and I gain so much from his idea. Charles Fox donated the design of his famous “Fox Bender” to the lutherie community many, many years ago. I suspect some guitarmakers would have never gotten past the bending of sides without it. So Charles is either at fault for the surplus of luthiers, or to be praised for his generosity, making your work so much easier. I think it would be nice for everyone who uses the Fox Bender to send Charles a few bucks. Don’t you?
The information about the above patents and other related patents is available from the USPTO at their website: www.uspto.gov
If you have really good ideas, and don’t want to lose credit for them, publish them. Share the wealth. As Neils Bohr said (or someone really smart), “If I have seen a great distance it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants.” Many a great luthier has my footprints on his or her coat.
Fleishman Instruments 1533 Welter Ct. Sebastopol, CA 95472 USA guitars@sbcglobal.net 707-823-3537
