Top first or back first?

What're You Doing?
Darryl Young
Posts: 1668
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:44 pm
Location: Arkansas

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by Darryl Young »

I can't see why that wouldn't work Dave. Good suggestion.
Slacker......
deadedith

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by deadedith »

It has the advantage of being easy to try :-)
deadedith

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by deadedith »

Just as an aside, Tom Ribekke (sp?) thought it so important to be able to tweak the braces after the guitar was assembled that he invented and patented the tail block access panel --- which Charles Fox just happens to offer as an option on his $10,000 guitars. (Or are they more expensive now?)
So I think the advantage is real, but of course knowing what you are listening for in order to make intelligent adjustments is something that takes a lot of work.
Darryl Young
Posts: 1668
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:44 pm
Location: Arkansas

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by Darryl Young »

deadedith wrote: So I think the advantage is real, but of course knowing what you are listening for in order to make intelligent adjustments is something that takes a lot of work.
Trevor Gore sheds a lot of light on this very topic though it's based more on measurements than listening. Valuable information shared in his books (to me).
Last edited by Darryl Young on Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Slacker......
Ben-Had
Posts: 1405
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:14 pm
Location: Creedmoor, NC

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by Ben-Had »

deadedith wrote:but of course knowing what you are listening for in order to make intelligent adjustments is something that takes a lot of work.
And here in lies the key. I can't say with certainty I do. I only know every guitar I've made has gotten rave kudos from those who have played them and I don't think any have sounded exactly the same. To me a good sounding guitar is just that, a good sounding guitar albeit different than than the way many others sound. So I'm not going to worry about it much.
Tim Benware
Darryl Young
Posts: 1668
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:44 pm
Location: Arkansas

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by Darryl Young »

If it ain't broke......don't fix it!
Slacker......
deadedith

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by deadedith »

Ben-Had wrote: I only know every guitar I've made has gotten rave kudos
Man! If I could honestly say that, I would not change my methods either! I'm not there yet, though.

Cleaning up a little glue has not been a big enough deal for me to change to a back-first glue sequence; more challenging has been recognizing the individual quirks of each instrument and learning to control them as the build , and any method that gives me the opportunity to exert that control is a plus as far as I'm concerned.
Of course that is my 'point of view' and there is a world of other points-of-view and that makes the world go 'round. That, and supply-side economics. :-)
pete nardo
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: N. Salem, NY

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by pete nardo »

FYI, Wayne Henderson glues the back on first. See the book: Clapton's Guitar.
deadedith

Re: Top first or back first?

Post by deadedith »

Yep, I knew that. He also uses woods that I cannot even afford, which may have more effect on sound than glue clean up. :-)

The downside to top-first is - what?? A little glue clean up? Really? And that outweighs the fact that it gives much more access for final adjustments and tweaks that are impossible with the back-first?

I don't get it. But really folks, I'm not trying to do anything except share information, and not 'ex cathedra', just in the spirit of we're all in this together.

I try to check my ego in at the door. :-)
Post Reply