The lowdown on the hoedown that's goin' down in sound town

[ed_zeppelin]

I'll break this up into two categories: acoustic and electric.
 
For years I followed developments in Kasha radial bracing, since reading about a guitar that Steve Klein made for Joni Mitchell. (1979?) The article - and especially the detailed photos - didn't make it to the internet, so there are only grainy shots here and there.
 


 
 
That's Steve's interpretation of Kasha's theories, in particular the flying scalloped brace on the treble side (one end is attached to the tailblock), which is usually any number of short braces placed in a radiating pattern around the bridge. (Here's Richard Schneider's interpretation. Dig the nifty flying brace arching OVER the bass bar):
 


 
 
Steve inlaid an absolutely accurate, detailed star map on the fingerboard, made from precious metals and gems, and pasted an astronomical photo of that section of sky (and instructions for locating it) off to one side of the guitar, so you can hold it up and (with a flashlight) compare the inlays with the real thing.  
 
The edge of the photo is faintly visible through the soundhole, in this awful photo.
 


 
 
The headstock plaque (of pre-ban ivory that Steve got from John D'Angelico) is in reference to Joni's album Don Juan's Reckless Daughter, her most experimental Jazz album, featuring Jaco and all the members of Weather Report, a forty piece orchestra (and a bunch of Guatamalan Insanity Pepper sessions, I imagine).  
 
http://youtu.be/Mdfk17EKGa0
 


 
 
I wrote an article about guitar history and modern luthiers for a magazine, and in the process I interviewed Steve Klein. Joni's guitar happened to be there for service (I honestly don't know what that entailed) but I got to play it, along with twenty or so of the instruments he had laying around. (More on that later.)
 
Here's an interesting tidbit you won't find anywhere else: his mother was a librarian, and Steve was an only child. Every day when he got home from school, there was a note on the fridge  from his mother listing chores, shopping lists etc., with the items grouped by {brackets}.
 
Steve really likes {brackets}. See how many you can spot.
 


 
 
Here is a brilliant article about Kasha bracing (and its failings) by William Cumpiano, author of Guitarmaking: Tradition and Technology, one of the best books (and schools) about wood and wire:
 
http://dolcecano.blogspot.com/2011_04_01_archive.html#8591961888773614586
 
More recently, Cumpiano captured my sentiments (underwhelmed) about Kasha-braced guitars;  
 
---------------------------------------------------------
 
I'm not an advocate of the Kasha system, so I'm not the best source of detailed information on it. Michael Kasha has been extolling the system's virtues for over a decade, and through a handful of zealous advocates has been trying to mainstream the system. It just hasn't caught on. ...
 
... He's gotten a lot of enthusiastic press and lot of earnest and proselyte followers, but it just has not caught on. The ear is the final arbiter, and it apparently just does not meet up to that final test. Let alone that it is far, far more complex than standard systems without the obvious increment in sound quality that would justify it.
 
Now if you're interested in a radical cutting edge system, take a look at the lattice bracing system, as introduced by the Australian luthier GREG SMALLMAN. [see below]
 
Now there's a noticeable and dramatic improvement in power with only a modest increment in complexity. I'm experimenting now with transferring the system to steel string tensions. Stay tuned. As for Kasha, I don't know: if you're impressed, follow it to where it will take you. But I am not.
 
---------------------------------------------------------
 
Please take a moment to watch this video of the legendary English classical guitarist John Williams visiting with Greg Smallman (mentioned by Cumpiano, above) at his shop in Australia.  
 
As Williams mentions, he had been playing a Smallman guitar for about a decade at that point with no idea why it sounded so incredible. The brief shot of Smallman's lattice system in this video is the lone explanation I could find anywhere.
 
http://youtu.be/tCtalGJcP8A
 
A similar idea that's arisen lately is what are called double tops or hollow tops. Made by compositing ultra-thin wood soundboards with a honeycomb lattice made of a fireproof material called Nomex. (Firefighters wear protective outerwear made of Nomex.)
 


 
 
Here is the Luthier's Mercantile page about Nomex, with two excellent, brief videos about its use.
 
http://www.lmii.com/products/mostly-wood/tops-tonewood/nomex
 
William Cumpiano has some definite opinions. Here's one of my favorites:  
 
http://dolcecano.blogspot.com/2010_01_01_archive.html#8741215902571577177
 
I'd like for this to be the start of a conversation about innovations in acoustic instruments, so everybody pile in. You never know where the next great idea will come from.
 
 
 
Next up: Larry Fishman has reinvented pickups. Wait 'till you see THIS.

[lbpesq]

Forest:
 
Are you familiar with Al Beardsell's instruments?
 
Bill, tgo

[bigredbass]

Forrest, since you got to hang with SK for a while, did he mention or do you know the cause of his animus with Bob Taylor regarding that acoustic  bass guitar they partnered on years ago?  It got  to the point that Klein was advertising on his then-website to 'build one for you the RIGHT way'.
 
Actually, there's a 'green guitar' possibility that would sell like hotcakes:  Instead of Kasha bracing, you could use several of the Kashi food products (tastes like wood, should behave like it), could partner with them on the advertising.  I'm pretty sure that advertising 'No Mex' as a feature is probably politically incorrect !
 
Joey

[ed_zeppelin]

I wasn't familiar with Beardsall, but I can't thank you enough for turning me on to him. I'm blown away. He's one of the best luthiers ever.
 
http://tinyurl.com/od7ea8t
 
... what fits the eye fits the hand, what fits the hand, fits the ear. The musician requires the smoothest path to expression, and as a tool of that expression, the instrument should not fight that. This is what I sometime refer to as ?transparent interface??how ideas become sounds with the least possible effort or discomfort.  
 
To that end I have incorporated a number of ergonomic elements?the armrest bevel on the lower bout ...
 


 
 
the way the cutaway moves into the heel, and the neck shaft that is asymmetrical to make it more comfortable for the hand... .
 
--------------------------------------------------
 
I love some of his innovations, particularly the sliding baffle on the side-mounted sound holes. I've never seen that before.
 
You ever had one of those moments that changes everything? I had one of those at NAMM in Nashville. I don't know if you've ever been to a NAMM show, but the cacophony is deafening. I walked in the door and through all that racket I could clearly hear an acoustic guitar. I started walking toward the sound and it just got clearer and louder. It turned out to be an exact copy of Django Reinhardt's guitar - unamplified!
 
I became really interested in Mario Maccaferri's extraordinary designs. In particular, the unique petite bouche (small mouth or small oval soundhole) models favored by Django. His rhythm guitarists almost always used D-hole guitar, as did Django himself on occasion.
 
Note the soundhole on the Beardsall (the teeth are a cool touch). I can save you a bit of time and confusion by explaining that Maccaferri made a guitar and took it to Selmer (who were like the General Motors of wind instruments at the time). Selmer agreed to make the guitars, and for about a year or two, they followed Maccaferri's designs (the dude was like the Tesla of acoustics, too)
 


 
 
Then they cheerfully fired him when Django Reinhardt became all the rage and Selmer started doing all kinds of things to the guitars. So in France they're known as Selmer guitars but everywhere else, they're Maccaferri guitars.
 
Maccaferri's ideas included an internal resonator ...
 


 
 
...  and a slightly bent top (rather than a carved archtop, he used a conventional soundboard gently steamed and bent over ladder bracing so that the bridge and soundhole were about a quarter inch above the rim) and an extremely thin, long bridge.
 
The weird thing is that the small mouth ones are MUCH louder than the ones with the big D-hole. I think the internal resonator must have been like the Virzi Tone Producer Lloyd Loar originally installed in the Gibson Master instruments.
 
http://www.maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/259792-virzi-tone-producer-1924-violin/
 


 
 
Those have become some of the most valuable instruments on earth (especially F5 mandolins), but at some point they were taken apart to remove the Virzi Tone Producer, despite the fact that by most accounts they sounded terrific.
 
Look, if I wind up buying a Beardsall guitar, I'm blaming you. I think that's what it comes down to.

[ed_zeppelin]

>>>Forrest, [its one R, like a bunch of trees] since you got to hang with SK for a while, did he mention or do you know the cause of his animus with Bob Taylor regarding that acoustic bass guitar they partnered on years ago? ...>>>>Actually, there's a 'green guitar' possibility that would sell like hotcakes: Instead of Kasha bracing, you could use several of the Kashi food products (tastes like wood, should behave like it), could partner with them on the advertising. I'm pretty sure that advertising 'No Mex' as a feature is probably politically incorrect !

[elwoodblue]

When confronted, Kellogg's issued this statement; The FDA has chosen not to regulate the term 'natural.
Well that's just GRRRRRrrrrreeeat !
 
Some really amazing instruments brought up, thanks Forest and Bill.
 
Kaz Krawczak...
I wish there was more explanation of Kaz' designs,maybe I just need to dig more-
 


 
(from here )
 
 
 
...and this for fun-


 
http://microfest.org/genesis-of-an-eroica/

[lbpesq]

A few years ago, following the Alembic Gathering, Henry Kaiser invited Jonathan Levine and I back to his house to check out his collection.  He had two Beardsells, of which I had never heard of at the time.  Jonathan and I played them and were both blown away.  I scoured eBay for six months and one actually turned up in Florida.   I jumped on it.  I don't have have the sliding baffle, but I do have two side ports.  It's the only acoustic I've played that sounds as good or even better with light strings.  Both my 20 year old Taylor 810 and my '53 D-28 sound much better with mediums.  This renders the Beardsell the easiest playing acoustic I've owned.  It has replaced the '53 Martin as my number one player.
 
Bill, tgo

[jalevinemd]

They were amazing guitars!

[bigredbass]

Old wood . . . . now.
 
http://www.yamaha.com/about_yamaha/research/are/?from=global_search
 
Joey

[ed_zeppelin]

For a third day, I've stared at that Kaz whatsisface guitar and tried to figure out what's what on the diagram and compare it to the picture, but that guitar looks like the ugliest baby I've ever seen.  
 


 
 
An ugly baby in Geiger eyewear. It kinda freaks me out a little, to be honest.
 
My reason for posting, though, is to point out something from my previous post because it's so important. (Let's face it, with the way I write it's more like plucking a particularly comely turd from a septic tank.)  
 
Its worth noting because it's the wave of the future. The first major change in acoustical PROPERTIES (>>As Williams mentions, he had been playing a Smallman guitar for about a decade at that point with no idea why it sounded so incredible.

[bigredbass]

Since we have the wonderful luxury of having not one but TWO guitar repair guys in the neighborhood now, what do you you two think about PLEK ?
 
Joey

[bigredbass]

Since we have the wonderful luxury of having not one but TWO guitar repair guys in the neighborhood now, what do you you two think about PLEK ?
 
Joey

[lbpesq]

Before we hear from the pros, I'll jump in as an amatuer tech, (I do most of my own repairs, and all my set ups), and from personal experience, to thoroughly endorse PLEK, at least for electric guitars.  I have a few guitars that were PLEKed at Gary Brawer's shop in San Francisco.  They play wonderfully.
 
Bill, tgo

[ed_zeppelin]

I knew nothing about PLEK, so I've been doing a lot of research. Overall, I'm very impressed by its precision and adaptability, but it has some issues.
 
There are only 16 PLEK machines in North America, a quarter of them in California. I can't find the cost of the machines (there are two, the PLEK Pro and the PLEK station) but when I checked the websites of the companies that had PLEK machines (and printed their rates), the lowest price I found was $225 for a basic setup and $500 for setup and new nut.
 
The other aspect that's important to know is that hundreds of shops use Dan Erlewine's Neck Jig Workstation
 
http://www.stewmac.com/Luthier_Tools/Types_of_Tools/Jigs_and_Fixtures/Erlewine_Neck_Jig_Workstation.html
 
 
 
Which basically does a lot of the same stuff: namely, it locks the neck and body in the same position as when it's under tension from strings. Granted, it's low-tech (the PLEK Pro uses an auto-CAD system to do the actual refinements, where the Erlewine jig just gives the repairman a stable platform to work on), but it doesn't add much to the cost of regular setups, if at all.
 
Plus, like I said, there are hundreds of them around. Dan even sold the plans to make your own jig, for 15 or 20 years. (Hell, he GAVE them to me at an ASIA symposium.) according to PLEK, Dan endorses them, which gives you an idea of the difference between the approaches.
 
Technology always follows the same path: at first it's rare and expensive, then as it becomes more ubiquitous, manufacturing costs come down and the market improves - or it dies a horrible Atari/Steinberger/Trace-Elliot death of a thousand cuts - but if it catches on, costs to the consumer comes down.
 
Overall, I think PLEK sounds like it'll make your guitar as close to perfection as ... um ... MACHINE-ly possible. I'm enthusiastic about it, and really hope it catches on. However, the exchange rate with Germany (and the implication; if you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it) leads me to suspect that PLEK machines are astronomically expensive, therefore shops have to pass the expense on to consumers.

[ed_zeppelin]

Maybe somebody can help me out with this, because it's implied by its glaring omission: I don't see how the PLEK handles compound radius. A HUGE part of working on other people's instruments is understanding each one's affinity for flat or compound radius (sorry, I just can't use radii, or the thumping of my Okie ancestors whirling like camshafts in their graves would sound like a drum solo by a Tourette's sufferer on orange sunshine):
 
Knowing the difference in a cylinder and a cone, is what it comes down to. And I don't think PLEK does. That's why I'm asking for help to ascertain that aspect.
 
Every player, style of music and most of all: whatever's on the body side of the neck joint, influences the degrees between the two shapes; cylinder or cone. The degree to which the repairman can influence one toward the other is also very limited.
 
Here's the kicker: most players aren't aware of it, and at some point just go; I don't know why, but this [insert instrument] plays weird.  
 
Please don't take this as condescension, because I have so much to learn but I thought I'd tell you how a repairman looks at it and where the science and art meet. It's rudimentary stuff, so please bear with me if you already know it.
 
We look at it as a grid. I hold the instrument toward a good light source and sight down from the bridge to the headstock from the end, and as you gently dip the headstock up and down, the frets and the string plane form a grid.
 
I look at it like a sailboat, with the neck as the mast and the bridge as the deck. Except instead of being supported by guy wires all around, they're all on one side (the strings). The only things countering that force is the truss rod, the rigidity of the neck wood (hence the popularity of maple, especially 1950-60s Teles, because they also made dandy weapons in bar fights) and the design of the neck. Cylinder or cone, or both.
 
By holding the neck at just the right angle, you make all the frets line up into one mass, and as you slowly lower it the frets spread out. I don't look at the frets themselves as I do this, because flaws show up far more easily by looking at the SPACES between frets (the eye is always drawn towards light colors, something I learned from an easy 'A' art appreciation class that was actually useful).
 
The art and science meet when you compare the two planes: the one made by the strings and the one made by the grid. That's when I put my CSI cap on (figuratively, of course. I can't stand that silly show) - because it's somebody else's guitar, rule #1 - and figure out as much as I can about the player, and what they want.  
 
Is there a lot of fret wear in first position? (House of the Rising Sun fret wear, I call it.) Is the fret wear even? Virtuosos tear up the tracks between about the 9th to 20th frets, 5th to 14th on acoustics, which is why there's so much bloodshed over the bolt-on vs. neck-thru arguments. Is there pick wear on the rose? (For acoustic. We tend to assume every electric player uses a pick.)
 
And that's where the art is: combining those factors into how you align the string plane to the grid. Figuring how much fight a player needs (or the limitations of cheap instruments), how deep to cut the slots in the nut (gawd, I love me some zero frets) and how much cone you might need on a cylinder (most easily seen by the differences between a flat-as-a-board classical fingerboard and Santana's Paul Reed Smith cone compound radius, setup to such insane tolerances that NASA scientists were brought in to measure it.
 
I want to be clear; I'm not saying the PLEK can't handle compound radius, just that they don't say they CAN.
 
Cletus says; yeah, but can a PLEK do THIS?