archtop/acoustic hybrid?

What're You Doing?
kencierp

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by kencierp »

OK so I am an inventor of sorts -- I do it for KMG and got paid to invent stuff for GMC and other companies. The thing is, the goal (change) was/is always defined -- what do I want to improve? Process? Quality? Appearance? So an archtop/acoustic hybrid guitar -- why? We are constructing musical instruments, what would make this configuration a better musical instrument? I doubt there is an answer for that question. Funny thing is I read at least two reviews of the Batson guitar and the comment was that it has an arch top sound quality -- so if that's what you what - get an arched top -- right?

My point would be that unless you have unlimited time and resources $$$ it might be better to construct a guitar/s using a proven design formula and hone in on craftsmanship and set-up to make it "outstanding" $.02
kencierp

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by kencierp »

Perhaps one of the most documented attempts at re-inventing the guitar - frustrating at the very least:

http://www.cumpiano.com/Home/Newsletter ... tter6.html
eungholee2

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by eungholee2 »

traditionalists vs kasha... too bad. great idea, but the bridge (at least in my opinion) looks ugly. However, I have to state that he was being innovative. The instruments we have now come from a long line of researchers who tried time and again until they got the sound that they thought was the best.

why shouldn't we? as a sidenote, has anyone here tried building a guitar with only a side hole? (no soundhole on top)
Ken Hundley
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:34 am
Location: Wilmette, IL

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by Ken Hundley »

Padauk OM, spruce top, laminated braces with spruce/wenge/spruce on top, and wenge/spruce/wenge on back. Sound port in cutaway.
Image
Guitar has a deep, rich bass, almost breathy, and excellent mids and clear highs, surprisingly rich for a small body. I felt the top could have been stiffer, somewhat floppy....maybe an adi top would hae been more crisp, but it was a joy to play, and the new owner hasn't put it down since christmas.
Image
Image
This next is a Curly Mango OM of the same design....
Image Image

I stripped the finish on this one, and repaired a couple cracks from that damn squirrel 2 years ago (damaged 4 guitars!) and have recently refinished this....EM6000 on the body, TRUoil neck. It is curing, and should be finished in 2 weeks.....buff and polish this weekend, assemble and string up byt Wed/THu next week, tweek for a week, then I'll post a sound file. Had a couple sound files of the Padauk one above, but one is corrupted and the other I cant find.
Ken Hundley
Nocturnal Guitars
http://www.nocturnalguitars.com

So, my big brother was playing guitar and I figured I'd try it too.
- Stevie Ray Vaughan
convict27
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: Okinawa, Japan

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by convict27 »

Ken, Those look phenomenal! Did you add any extra material for the soundport in the cutaway? I have a crack right in that area that I can not repair and I was thinking of adding a cutaway there like you did.
Blaine Conrey
ColestineGuitar
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by ColestineGuitar »

You know, I may be wrong here, but when I looked at the Batsons I thought the bridges were not floating. They seem to be glued down, but the strings do not go inside the body after they go over the saddle. Instead, the holes that are usually "vertical," leading into the body, are parallel to the top, allowing them to continue aft in a archtop-like fashion (envision a classical bridge). This is truly a new idea, and not just putting a floating bridge and tailpiece on a flattop. I hope to hear a Batson one day. Or at least see one, since they look so good!

I love to see this kind of innovation, but I am not convinced that it results in a better sounding guitar than tried-and-true configurations. Haven't heard any evidence of it so far, but I'm happy to listen!

-mark
Slowest builder on the forum. These things take time. Apparently.
Tony_in_NYC
Posts: 827
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:11 pm

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by Tony_in_NYC »

convict,
Normally when you add a port, you want to add a veneer inside the box as a reinforcement in that area. Some people might say it is not necessary and it might not be, but I have added a 1/16th veneer with the grain oriented at 90 degrees to the grain direction of the side. A little insurance against splits or cracks. In my opinion, its is an easy decision. Like putting a quarter in the parking meter even though you are only running into a store for 5 minutes. I always put that quarter in the meter. I would rather spend the 25 cents than get a parking ticket that could run me $125 here in New York City. So for the small amount of extra time it takes me to add the veneer, I have a little insurance that I will not get a crack at the port.
You can certainly add a port to the cut away section and I would most definitely add the veneer. For what it's worth, I have used maple veneer on each of the guitars I have ported. Why? Because it is what I had on hand. I would suspect any veneer would work well. Some might say that adding the veneer with the grain perpendicular to the side will give you the appearance of plywood, but with the 1/16th inch thickness, I can not see the grain orientation of the veneer and I feel that it is stronger in protecting against splits in the side if the grain is not oriented the same way.
Make cauls to fit the shape of the side you want to glue the veneer to so that you get good contact and a strong glue joint between the veneer and the side. On one guitar, I actually used a bag of rice against the veneer and then a board on top of the rice and clamped the whole thing together. I get a very good mating of the two pieces of wood that way. On my smaller ports, I used simple wooden cauls with clamps.
Do you have pics of the problem? Maybe you can start a new thread and suggest ways to either salvage the cutaway or fix it. Good luck either way!

Tony
tippie53
Posts: 7127
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:09 pm
Location: Hegins, Pa
Contact:

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by tippie53 »

Batson does attach the bridge , if they didn't they would fold over. They are an interesting design . I wonder what they did in the inside . Thanks for signing up Mark
John Hall
Blues Creek Guitars Inc
Authorized CF Martin Repair Center
president of Association of Stringed Instrument Artisans
http://www.bluescreekguitars.com
Ken Hundley
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:34 am
Location: Wilmette, IL

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by Ken Hundley »

Thanks, Blaine! I have had a lot of fun with the design, though it is still evolving. No real science behind it, but the results, so far, have been surprisingly good.

As far as the sound holes/ports....on the Mango, they are reinforced with a 2nd layer of side material the same thickness as the sides. I was owrried about how brittle the sides were when bending, so I made them thin. The Padauk was bent a little thicker, and seemed strong enough, so it does not have a lamination.
Ken Hundley
Nocturnal Guitars
http://www.nocturnalguitars.com

So, my big brother was playing guitar and I figured I'd try it too.
- Stevie Ray Vaughan
eungholee2

Re: archtop/acoustic hybrid?

Post by eungholee2 »

Batson has what they call a "lattice brace". Same consistency and stiffness across a surface. I'm suprised too that it didn't fold.

you can check out their innovations here:
http://batsonguitars.com/index.php/our- ... novations/
Image
Post Reply