Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused).
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
I imagined that the Eurail pass (which is only available to tourists) would be a subsidised thing designed to encourage people like me to visit and spend money on meals and hotels and stuff. But no - you can buy the equivalent Interrail pass (sold only to European citizens) for the same price.
Go figure.
https://youtu.be/n_toW8yVF_Q
Have a great trip.
Phil
Ps I understand the Fylde waiting list to be 2- 3 years whereas Brook is usually 9 months or so but things could have changed.
After re-watching that I went wandering around on You-tube and found an even better video which you modestly didn't mention.
Unlike the majority of viewers, the rosewood Torridge would be my third choice (I've gone off the rosewood sound in recent years) and my favourite - by a narrow margin because they are both lovely - is the Lyn.
Lovely playing, by the way.
Almost sent me to sleep - compliment
Sorry, I was unclear @PCT57 By "both" I meant the Lyn and the Lamorna.
Phil
As for the Brooks, yes very good stuff, all three different even though two of them were notionally the same (Lamornas in Englemann Spruce and rosewood).
I had several specific questions to answer for myself at Project Music. Not sure that I am any the wiser now. In fact I have even less idea of what I'm going to order on Monday than I did before. But it was great fun!
Today we float around Devon visiting national parks if it will only stop raining. Monday, off to Brook.
It was a great fingerstyle guitar and well suited to the what I was learning - classic fingerstyle ragtime. It was a guitar that really opened up, too. Some years after buying it and moving to a more humid climate, I became struck by how good it was sounding. I'd never thought it was a spectacular guitar, but then I did.
I live in the US now, but if I were in the UK, I wouldn't even look at US guitars. Britain has so many great builders whose stuff you can't get over here, so I would capitalize on that. Around ten years ago I was in Forsyth's and they had a wonderful OM in Sitka and maple built by Scottish Jimmy Moon. To this day, I regret not buying it and bringing it back to the US.
I'm not much of a hand at typing on my ancient little laptop but briefly, I've ordered a Lyn.
Lyn (roughly 00 size)
European Spruce top (I picked one with a lovely hint of ripple in it)
3-piece back, walnut and Yew in the centre, walnut sides.
5-piece laminated walnut, yew and Sycamore neck (or European Maple if they prefer)
Bog Oak fretboard, bridge & headstock veneer
Gotoh tuners
Box briidge pins
45.5mm nut
650mm scale
12.5 fret neck-body join
Simon & Andy were a bit set back by the notion of a join not on an exact fret but came around to seeing the logic of it. They thought it would look as though they'd made a mistake, but I knew what I wanted.
A real pleasure to deal with them.
Now the waiting starts!
I'm curious - what's the thinking behind the 12.5 fret join?
I wanted the tonal benefit of a 12-fret bridge placement but I find 12 fretters just a little too tight. Even an extra 10mm would make all the difference.
Meanwhile, the Lyn is a short scale instrument (630mm or Gibson scale) and I very much prefer long scale. So by putting a 650mm neck on a standard Lyn, we get the best off all worlds. Only Simon reckons he's going to go cross-eyed building it with the join in the wrong place. .
As for the all-British plan, now that I've met European Spruce trees in person (over in Croatia where there is a lovely one growing right in front of my brother-in-law's house - not to mention others all over Austria and Slovenia), I am only too happy to have a bit of one in my British (part-European) guitar. Such a good-looking tree.
The waiting won't worry me. Think of it as nine more months of staying happily married.
Actually, they are willing to do that and happily offered to do so. They seemed to think that was all in a day's work
However my scheme does not require any alteration of significance other than making the "wrong" neck. The body stays exactly the same. Same mould, same bracing, same bridge placement. It just promises to do their heads in when they get to mating the dovetail up.
Notwithstanding, well done @Tannin ... I'm sure you'll have many years of enjoyment from your bespoke design.
One day I might just flog a few guitars and order a custom-made guitar ... but not yet.
My YouTube Channel
The yew in the neck was an interesting big. As mentioned a page or two earlier I wanted some yew to go with the bog oak fretboard. When I mentioned yew for the neck Simon immediately said "yes" but that it would need to be laminated with something. I'm not entirely sure why that is (I didn't want to waste their entire day with a zillion different questions) but one factor is that it would be difficult to find a bit that was long and thick and straight enough and I also got the impression that it wasn't structurally suitable on its own.
Anyway, laminated with walnut (which they do like as a neck timber) it will be fine, and with the light-coloured pinstripes of pale timber separating the darker yew and walnut laminations, it will look great. (I left it up to them whether to use Sycamore or European Maple for the pinstripes, depending on what bits they have handy at the time.) It will be my one and only laminated neck, by the way.
Given the finalised spec for the neck, it was an obvious step to echo it with the back and side materials - walnut, with yew up the centre, and maple or Sycamore trim.
It wound up being quite a long way away from the guitar(s) I had in mind in the first place, but that's fine. I reckon it will be a beauty.
A laminated neck is generally regarded as a high-end feature. It costs more to manufacture, and is (in theory) more stable. And of course it looks great. There is no effect worth mentioning on the sound quality. At its simplest, you take one bit of timber and split it up the middle. Then you reverse one of the pieces and glue them back together. Because the two parts are reversed with respect to one another, and tendency to bow (say) to the left from one part is exactly opposed by the other part which (of course) wants to bow right. Result: a very stable neck.
(You do exactly the same thing for all sorts of woodworking tasks. I'm no luthier but I can build a house no worries, and it is a standard technique to laminate key corner studs. Suppose you are making a house frame out of 4 x 2 pine studs. Pine tends to be crappy stuff at the best of times, prone to warping, twisting and bowing, but it's good enough for a house frame. Now you get to a corner or a door post. It obviously needs to be stronger than the 4 x 2 wall studs. Do you use heavier timber instead? Say an 8 x 6? No! Not only is that expensive, it is also prone to warping and twisting unless it's a very good bit of timber. Much better - and standard practice for any builder - is to use three bits of 4 x 2, nailed together in such a way that the warps and twists are opposed and want to even themselves out. Cheaper, plenty strong enough, and lasts forever without warping. This is effectively a laminate.)
So laminated necks are a high-end feature. Some builders never use anything else. On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to make a high-quality neck which won't warp or twist out of a single piece of timber just so long as you select a good, straight bit and season it properly.
So in the end, it's just a matter of taste and the builder's preference.
The best laminated necks (not necessarily the best lasting and certainly not the best sounding, just the best looking) use something like 5 pieces. My Brook is an example: it will be walnut on either side with yew running up the middle, and on either side of the yew a pair of thin maple or Sycamore strips like a pinstripe. Presumably that will add a bit to the cost, but probably not a great deal and it will look beautiful, especially as it will match the back.
Laminated backs, on the other hand, tend to produce a fairly OK sound so long as the top is half decent and are quite consistent. Think of them as being like tinned soup: they are never, ever going to earn a Michelin Star from anyone but at least they'll all be pretty much the same as each other and you (the guitar manufacturer) can churn out thousands and thousands of them without worrying too much about matching your construction to your timber. None of them (probably) will be truly awful, and none of them will be particularly good. Tinned soup.
Laminated sides are different. The sides have no real impact on the sound of the guitar, they are really just a way to hold the top and the back apart. You could make them out of anything. Quite a few high-end boutique makers (the people making guitars in the £8000 price bracket) use laminated sides because they are easier to bend, have no impact on the sound quality, and can be made as thick as you like, which helps add weight to the body. (Tops should pretty much always be light and backs mostly should be reasonably light (depending on the design) but heavy sides are often a very good thing. Some builders add weights to sides (glued onto the inside) as part of the process of fine-tuning the tone of a fine instrument.)
My YouTube Channel