Gustav Glassl rehabilitation

[Hammertone]

Gustav Glassl was one of the important archtop builders in West Germany, during the post-war years. He was trained by Franz Hirsch, and ghost-built a lot of high-end carved archtops for the larger shops like Hopf, Klira, and others.

He tended to copy other designs as opposed to having a particularly individual style. Late in his career, he built a few guitars that are very Gibson-like. Some were branded Hopf, some were branded Glassl, and some have no markings. They are fantastic guitars. @17 1/2" wide, deep rims, 25 1/4" scale (IIRC).

I have had a couple (below). I kept one, with every intention of having a new neck built for it, because it had a pencil neck. And that's the subject of this thread - the rehabilitation of that guitar.

This guitar is a total acoustic tone monster. Its vanishingly miniscule neck is now undergoing the Charles Atlas treatment by Mark Campellone. More importantly, Mark gets a kick out of it!

[Hammertone]

The neck was removed by yours truly.

[Hammertone]

The guitar was delivered to Mark in order to amuse him greatly.

[Hammertone]

Mark made a new neck blank to allow for a much larger neck to be fitted to the guitar (far right).

[Hammertone]

Various bits of the original neck were salvaged for re-use, and the original fretboard was widened.

[Hammertone]

The fretboard and headstock overlay were installed onto the new neck blank.

[Hammertone]

At this point, further work on the neck could be done in the same way as Mark does all of his necks. He rough-carved the neck with routers and jigs, then hand carved and sanded it into its final shape. The five-piece neck blank is a nice tip of the hat to one of the neck blank styles supplied by Kollitz to various builders, such as Höfner, Hopf, Guild and others, including Glassl.

[Hammertone]

Well, Mark's thoughtful and precise approach ran right into the reality of handmade vintage German archtops with tapered mortice neck joints - nothing quite lines up! Center seams, neck pocket angles, you name it - anything that could be slightly crooked was ... slightly crooked. So, the problem solving commenced, and Mark emerged, victorious. Hallelujah!

Out of consideration for the delicate sensibilities of some of our members, here are only a couple of pix of the gory surgical details. I don't want members haunted by too many bad dreams.

[cmajor9]

Bravo! I wish I could hear the great-looking guitar with its new neck.

It makes me think of how many fine German guitars would benefit from like treatment (Otwins in particular).

[RJVB]

So, the problem solving commenced, and Mark emerged, victorious.

Worked the problem, eh? It strikes me that a C and an 'l' can make a trident logo

Gory details? I just watched the dedestruction (literally) of a Martin C-1R classical guitar by a Ukrainean luthier (Tanya Chpachuk), I think I've seen gorier than yours!

[xavierbarcelo]

Actually, I’d be curious to see the gore details. If you think the pictures are too explicit for public consumption, it’d be great if you could pm them.

Thanks!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Hammertone]

Actually, I’d be curious to see the gore details....

Sure. I added a couple of them above. There was a lot of handwork involved to line up all three axes, resulting in this happy outcome:

[xavierbarcelo]

Thanks! It wasn’t so bad!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[RJVB]

Thanks! It wasn’t so bad!

Indeed!

(German engineering/handiwork never was what it used to be? )

[Hammertone]

The new neck has been glued in, with an endcap on the heel that complements the rim binding. The guitar now joins its American half-siblings to have its neck painted. Luckily, the existing body finish is quite close in colour to one of Mark's existing standard finishes.

[Hammertone]

One of the reasons why this project seemed logical was because Glassl's neck geometry and overhang design reminded me of Mark's. I suspect that the sound of the guitar may change very little as a result of the surgery. Or not!

[RJVB]

overhang design reminded me of Mark's. I suspect that the sound of the guitar may change very little as a result of the surgery. Or not!

You will probably think it does, and if you're anything like me you'd probably think it didn't quite improve - if anyone not the likes of a Campellone had done the intervention.

But it seems that the new neck extension is considerably beefier, raising the fretboard and thus requiring a higher saddle. That should have an impact on sound and/or playability!

[MCampellone]

You will probably think it does, and if you're anything like me you'd probably think it didn't quite improve - if anyone not the likes of a Campellone had done the intervention.

But it seems that the new neck extension is considerably beefier, raising the fretboard and thus requiring a higher saddle. That should have an impact on sound and/or playability!

The fingerboard extension is a little thicker on the new neck, but it won't necessarily require a taller bridge. There are two factors which determine string height at the bridge - one is the pitch (or angle) of the neck - the other is how deeply the neck is set into the body - and these two aspects are interdependent. A neck set deeply into the body (with the fingerboard close to the top of the guitar) can yield desired bridge height if the angle of the neck is made more acute. Conversely, a neck with less acute angle can achieve the same thing if it is set less deeply into the body (with fingerboard higher off the top of the guitar). In the first case, the fingerboard extension will by default be relatively thin - and in the second case, the extension will be thicker. The only resulting difference between the geometry of the two would be a slight change in the break angle of the strings over the bridge. Assuming the same bridge height in each case, this may affect the sound slightly, since a sharper break angle creates more down-pressure on the bridge and the top.

[garybaldy]

The fingerboard extension is a little thicker on the new neck, but it won't necessarily require a taller bridge. There are two factors which determine string height at the bridge - one is the pitch (or angle) of the neck - the other is how deeply the neck is set into the body - and these two aspects are interdependent. A neck set deeply into the body (with the fingerboard close to the top of the guitar) can yield desired bridge height if the angle of the neck is made more acute. Conversely, a neck with less acute angle can achieve the same thing if it is set less deeply into the body (with fingerboard higher off the top of the guitar). In the first case, the fingerboard extension will by default be relatively thin - and in the second case, the extension will be thicker. The only resulting difference between the geometry of the two would be a slight change in the break angle of the strings over the bridge. Assuming the same bridge height in each case, this may affect the sound slightly, since a sharper break angle creates more down-pressure on the bridge and the top.

And ofcourse a less deeply set neck increases the choice of floating neck pickup should the owner want to add one.

[Woody Sound]

This is a great thread.

[Hammertone]

And ofcourse a less deeply set neck increases the choice of floating neck pickup should the owner want to add one.

I'll be re-installing the pickup that was originally installed on the guitar, modifying it to a pickguard mount. It's a full-sized, shallow humbucker.

...But it seems that the new neck extension is considerably beefier, raising the fretboard and thus requiring a higher saddle. That should have an impact on sound and/or playability!

Good point about mass. The new neck has significantly more mass than the original, which was quite petite. Playability will be significantly better for me, since I do prefer large necks. The increased overall neck mass will certainly affect the sound of the guitar. If the sound is not up to my preferences, I can always convert it into a Switchmaster! With a Bigsby! ;^)

[MCampellone]

And ofcourse a less deeply set neck increases the choice of floating neck pickup should the owner want to add one.

Right - case in point - some of the old L5 Premiers had a deep neck set with fingerboard close to the top - barely enough clearance to squeeze a DeArmond pickup under the strings.

[Hammertone]

Mark is matching the finish of the new neck to that of the existing body, which does not need a new finish. The remains of the old neck come in helpful.

[Kirk1701]

I'll be re-installing the pickup that was originally installed on the guitar, modifying it to a pickguard mount. It's a full-sized, shallow humbucker.

Good point about mass. The new neck has significantly more mass than the original, which was quite petite. Playability will be significantly better for me, since I do prefer large necks. The increased overall neck mass will certainly affect the sound of the guitar. If the sound is not up to my preferences, I can always convert it into a Switchmaster! With a Bigsby! ;^)

I imagine Guitar George must know all the chords.

[fine-instruments]

Thanks for posting this, what an outstanding repair job, really awesome. Marc clearly knows his playground well and I deeply regret not buying a blonde Campelone Special once offered here in Germany a few years ago. If I ever get the chance again I will certainly not hesitate.