3D Scanning Madness

[Archie]

Not sure how much sleep I'm going to get tonight; I've been buzzing for days now.
The 3d scanner I've rented arrives tomorrow and I've got some really intense scanning ahead.
I've got around 30 archtops belonging to various collectors around the UK.
Putting all this together has been a challenge. Scanners are expensive and the different collections are scattered about. Luckily I think I've put together a really worthwhile list. Some more than others but I'm super excited.

***I want to give a special thanks to ATB guitars @ Home For allowing me to come and scan some of their guitars. They have a great shop/studio and likely the best collection of rare and vintage guitars in the UK***
***I also want to thank Guitar Village @ Guitar Shop UK | 1000+ Guitars in Stock | Guitar Village for allowing me to scan some of their guitars****
Both companies went out of their way to help a fellow enthusiast whilst the majority told me to get lost.

4 hour drive:

1) 1956 ES350
2) 1946 ES-300
3) 1949 L5C
4) 1962 sup 400
5) 1967 DE 500 (Guild)
6) 1956 ES-175
7) 1963 ES-175
8) 1960 ES330
9) 1962 ES330
10) 57 Srat
11) 62 Strat
12) 54 Tele
13) 62 Tele

1 hour drive:

1) Tacoma Jazz King (set Neck)
2) The 'jimmy' Twin Pickup
3) The 'Jimmy' Oval hole
4) 2012 Byrdland
5) D'Aquisto Jazz Line (Jim Hall D'Aquisto)
6) D'Angelico NY2-FH (Vestax)

5 hour drive:

1) Collings CL Jazz
2) L4 CES
3) Tal farlow

11 hour drive:

1) 68 Johnny Smith
2) L5 Wesmo
3) 60's Byrdland (pointed cutaway)
4) 63 Tal Farlow

Guitars I've already scanned

1) 96 ES-165
2) 2002 ES-165
3) Guild Johnny Smith Award
4) Guilty Benny JS award
5) Heritage Johnny Smith
6) Gibson Chet Atkins (semi hollow L5)
7) Guild X500
8) 90 Ibanez JP20
8) 82 Jp-20
9) 1977 Ibanez 2471
10) Guild 67 DE400
11) 2000 Campellone deluxe
12) Ibanez GB100
13) Ibanez GB200

After this I will only really need to pickup a late 50's L5CES and L5C (different carve to 40's).
A 50's L4 (different plate carve to later models).
Then whatever D'Aquisto, D'Angelico, Koontz I can get my hands on.

I hope that within 3-5 years, I will have scanned well over 100 seminal, rare and vintage archtops that can exist in digital form forever!
I'm also going to be using a new colour capture scanner. Previously I'd only been using blue laser, which cannot capture colour.
I'll do some CAD comparisons once I;ve got al the data so we can see the differences in carves and neck profiles etc..

[supersoul]

I always enjoy your updates

[vintagelove]

That's awesome.

[Archie]

Ok day 1 down.

Scanner arrived Thursday (yesterday). Luckily it arrived in the morning, not early evening.
This gave me a chance to get familiar with it again and run through the software.
To be fair I'd forgotten a fair bit so was a case of working things through.
For the rest of Thursday I spent scanning what guitars in had in the house: Tacoma Jazz King + Ibanez JP20.
That kept me up till 2am. I had to make sure I knew what I was doing as I had my big day on Friday and I couldn't afford for that to go wrong.
I had managed to just about get things working, grabbed about 3 hours sleep, woke up at 6:30am (Friday)
and drove out west (2.54 hours). At this point I've had 9 hours sleep in 3 days!

Things started to fall apart pretty quickly however when it took me nearly 3 hours to scan and take internal dimensions of my main target, the 1956 ES-350.
Making a quick calculation I realised I was only going to be able to scan 5 guitars at best and so I had to pick wisely.

This was my original list:

1) 1956 ES350
2) 1946 ES-300
3) 1949 L5C
4) 1962 sup 400
5) 1967 DE 500 (Guild)
6) 1956 ES-175
7) 1963 ES-175
8) 1960 ES330
9) 1962 ES330
10) 57 Srat
11) 62 Strat
12) 54 Tele
13) 62 Tele

I went with

1957 Strat
1955 Tele (for all you jazz guitarist out there )
1956 ES-350
1949 L5C
1969 Sup 400

I figured those were the best of the bunch. Would be interested to know others choices and what they would have chosen instead? You have to pick 5.
I needed a vintage L5C, the 350 was paramount and a sup 400 is nice to have as it fills out the range. The two fenders are to try and raise a penny making some bodies and necks whilst continuing with archtop manufacturing.
Probably not a good idea but worth having them on file.

Got back at 19:30 and started doing the editing. It's not CAD per se but a program that coms with the scanner called 'elements'. It allows me to orientate and edit the data before exporting as a mesh into CAD.
I scan the top and then back of a guitar as you cannot really scan them in 3 dimensions. Scanners like to have a surface to know where they are. This can be achieved a few ways but guitars are very difficult to scan because of the shiny surface and often dark colours. Most scanning is done using a spray but I cannot use them on nitro. They also use stickers which again can cause issue with finish so I have to put the guitar lying down and scan the top, then bottom seperately.
After doing that, I can then join them in elements.

Tomorrow I'm off to another collection to scan a beautiful looking blonde single p90 ES-175 from 1956. I'll also throw in a a couple early 60's ES-335 (one is 10 digits away from Claptons). Btw Gibson lost the patent or claims to exclusivity for their 335's in Europe (licks lips).

Here are some of the results from today. Yes gutted I couldn't scan the amount I wanted to but I think I did well and made the right choices.

Sorry if the pics are out of order. It's 2:30am I need to crash. Busy day of scanning tomorrow.

Cheers!

[nbevan3]

Ok day 1 down.

Scanner arrived Thursday (yesterday). Luckily it arrived in the morning, not early evening.

I am impressed with your dedication to the art

[GuyBoden]

Excellent work, well done.

[Heybopper]

Hi
Im wondering what your aim is? I thought Slaman covered most of the early Gibson arch tops or was he not so specific about the carving?
Or are you using these guitars as templates for your own designs? I am interested as a UK member and you have certainly put in a lot of work. Im wondering if 17 inch full bodied arch tops are going to be less in demand in the future. Im seeing lots of 15 inch and thinner rims these days days. Perhaps you could figure out feedback issues in your designs, that would be something.
I do wish you all the best and hope that you can make the business work. I only know of fibonacci and Cranmer that are building archtops in the UK so hopefully bring something new to the table and I look forward to seeing your designs. Best wishes

[Archie]

Hi
Im wondering what your aim is? I thought Slaman covered most of the early Gibson arch tops or was he not so specific about the carving?
Or are you using these guitars as templates for your own designs? I am interested as a UK member and you have certainly put in a lot of work. Im wondering if 17 inch full bodied arch tops are going to be less in demand in the future. Im seeing lots of 15 inch and thinner rims these days days. Perhaps you could figure out feedback issues in your designs, that would be something.
I do wish you all the best and hope that you can make the business work. I only know of fibonacci and Cranmer that are building archtops in the UK so hopefully bring something new to the table and I look forward to seeing your designs. Best wishes

Hey bopper.

Thanks for your message.
You’re right about most of it.
I am at the bleeding edge of reverse engineering. What that means is not yet known. I can only follow the path with as much determination as I am allowed to give it, in the only way I know how.
I believe that perfection is lots of little things done well. Whether or not that makes for good business sense is another question.

[Archie]

Right Day 3 over. Well technically day 2 of scanning. Tomorrow is the last day.

Today I scanned a:

1956 ES-175 (blonde), single P90.
1964 ES335
D'Angelico NY2-FH
Hagstrom Jimmy Oval Hole
Hagstrom Jimmy Standard.

I was supposed to scan a D'Aquisto Jim Hall (jazz line) and a Gibson Byrdland but I ran out of time and need a break.

Todays batch was not that exciting. The 335 was ok but I doubt I'll do anything with it. The D'Angelico has a nice top and back plate; the rest is pretty generic.
The Jimmy's are part of a secret project I'm working on that could be quite the scoop.

The 1956 175 was stunning. The neck was very nice. Really happy to have that.
I was going to scan a 1981 175 for JZ but on inspection I just didn't think it worth while. I inspected the inside as I felt the neck join area was very heavy. Turns out the neck block they put in those is twice the size of the 'normal' ones.
That's why when you pick them up, the neck join are just feels heavy. I initially thought it might be the pickup weight distributing itself into the neck join area.

Tomorrow I will do the Byrdland, Jim Hall, Collings CL Jazz, Tal Farlow and L4CES. There is still a chance I wont drive to Wales and that just leaves me the first two.

I've taken a drastic hit in the number of archtops I've actually been able to scan but; I think the 'big hitters' have made this worthwhile.

49 L5
56 350
56 175
69 400
Byrdland
57 Strat
55 Tele

Definitely worth going to Wales tomorrow. Just need to dig deep! Really deep!

[jazzloverfat]

How accurate is the process?

Oh, and with the renders, why does the blue colour look like it's chipping off in some areas?

[Archie]

How accurate is the process?

Oh, and with the renders, why does the blue colour look like it's chipping off in some areas?

Hey JLF.

The accuracy is in the microns, way above woodworking norms. This is metrology stuff so very fine engineering. You can't get more accurate really.
The 'chipping off' is where the 'mesh' data is not smooth or the scanning has a hole in it. It's something I can fix down the road by using CAD or otherwise.
If you're looking to reproduce parts from these scans then small areas where the scan laser couldn't get a proper reading, are insignificant.
In CAD you can invert triangles, smooth them and do all sorts of surprising things. Where there are holes, I can use tangential predictive filling, so they will be made good and you would never know they were there.
There are programs live Magic Worx that can fill entire pickup cavities using surrounding typography and you would never know there was a hole there. It's quite miraculous.
I don't use such software because I rebuild the plates from the ground up to remove any inconstancies in the original manufacturing. That and it costs like £30K for a license.

[Archie]

Right last batch.

It's 6:50am and I've not yet been to bed.

I was going to Wales to see a friend and fellow forum member but I couldn't make the trip. Too much scanning has made my eyes go a bit funny and it's brought on some vertigo.
I managed to do the last of my guitars which are here.

Byrdland (2012?)
D'Aquisto Jim Hall
Tacoma Jazz King





My total list of guitar scans is now



That brings this scanning session to an end. It's been 4 days, probably 80 hours of work, 14 hours of sleep and 7 hours driving.
There are obviously tiers to the list. There's a fair bit of low grade stuff, but there's some really nice high grade stuff too.
All the guitars have been scanned for a reason.
The Ibanez Gb's because I think they are some of the best necks ever made (as many do). You also need to have a smaller body to reference and they're a good jumping off point.
The Jimmy's because the laminate plates are the finest laminate plates made (not yet inspected a Borys carefully to compare.). The design and manufacturing that went into them is remarkable. There consitacncy and recurve stands out. Just look at the scans.
The Tacoma is the most impressive acoustic archtop I've heard so I want to know the secret.
The D'Aquisto Jim Hall if accurate (and the internal construction is), then these plates date back to early Borys ones. They are very much in line with the 'modern' laminate shape of being subtly arched. Again worth studying.
So yes even the ones that could be dismissed have a lot to offer.

I look forward to studying them further and giving some results.

Cheers!

[Christian Miller]

Hi
Im wondering what your aim is? I thought Slaman covered most of the early Gibson arch tops or was he not so specific about the carving?
Or are you using these guitars as templates for your own designs? I am interested as a UK member and you have certainly put in a lot of work. Im wondering if 17 inch full bodied arch tops are going to be less in demand in the future. Im seeing lots of 15 inch and thinner rims these days days. Perhaps you could figure out feedback issues in your designs, that would be something.
I do wish you all the best and hope that you can make the business work. I only know of fibonacci and Cranmer that are building archtops in the UK so hopefully bring something new to the table and I look forward to seeing your designs. Best wishes

Fibonacci are a UK company but as far as I know the guitars are manufactured overseas (Korea iirc)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Heybopper]

I love my d'aquisto Jazz line. I like the short scale at 24 3/4. The16inch body and thin but not too thin rims. Ive tried out a few different tailpieces and the intonation and action has always been perfect. On stage im less that 2 feet away from my blues deluxe and music man amps and im right next to a drummer. I can have any eq setting a like and no feedback issues.
I do miss the higher end guitars that I used to have but feedback is a killer.
There is nothing worse that having to mute strings or try and put more distance in between you and your amps, or bend down and adjust settings whilst trying to solo over changes.
I would be interested in your d'aquisto if it ever comes up for sale oh and id like to try the d'aquisto New Yorker junior but they are not easy to find

[Archie]

I love my d'aquisto Jazz line. I like the short scale at 24 3/4. The16inch body and thin but not too thin rims. Ive tried out a few different tailpieces and the intonation and action has always been perfect. On stage im less that 2 feet away from my blues deluxe and music man amps and im right next to a drummer. I can have any eq setting a like and no feedback issues.
I do miss the higher end guitars that I used to have but feedback is a killer.
There is nothing worse that having to mute strings or try and put more distance in between you and your amps, or bend down and adjust settings whilst trying to solo over changes.
I would be interested in your d'aquisto if it ever comes up for sale oh and id like to try the d'aquisto New Yorker junior but they are not easy to find

Just a moment...

Yes Jazz line will be up for sale shortly. Will keep you posted.

[Heybopper]

Hi
can you pm me when it goes up and give me first shout thanks so much cheers Archie

[Archie]

Hey Bopper

I can do. There is one fellow forum member before you but I think he's already bought something.

[Rickco]

Thankyou for sharing all this. How will the scans be used for your design? Size and arch geometry? for plates? you mention plates "The Jimmy's because the laminate plates are the finest laminate plates made (not yet inspected a Borys carefully to compare.). The design and manufacturing that went into them is remarkable." I thought his plates were made by Hagstrom, Fender and Borys? did they have the secret recipe? How did you confirm that construction, cut one apart? Were they all the same. Wouldnt each lamination have to have exactly the same thickness and be the same species shop to shop? You say you will inspect a Borys, how will you determine the laminations? Is all this proprietary?
Incredible amount of work, even if you dont make a guitar you could write "the book" on guitar construction. Enjoying and learning from your adventure!

[voxo]

yes it is and an adventure just reading the posts...may i suggest a go fund for some refreshments...thirsty work

[Archie]

Thankyou for sharing all this. How will the scans be used for your design? Size and arch geometry? for plates? you mention plates "The Jimmy's because the laminate plates are the finest laminate plates made (not yet inspected a Borys carefully to compare.). The design and manufacturing that went into them is remarkable." I thought his plates were made by Hagstrom, Fender and Borys? did they have the secret recipe? How did you confirm that construction, cut one apart? Were they all the same. Wouldnt each lamination have to have exactly the same thickness and be the same species shop to shop? You say you will inspect a Borys, how will you determine the laminations? Is all this proprietary?
Incredible amount of work, even if you dont make a guitar you could write "the book" on guitar construction. Enjoying and learning from your adventure!

Hey Rickco

The scans give me an accurate reproduction of the surface which I can use in CAD, to reverse engineer the outer dimensions of the body and the neck.
I then have a special probe that measures the thickness of wood. I can use this probe to make incredibly accurate thickness maps of carved plates + the sides and backs of carved and laminate bodies.
There is a gauge called a Haklinger gauge which is often used by violin makers etc.. A lot of this stuff (not the scanning per se), is pretty common in the violin and smaller acoustic instruments. I know Ken Parker put a D’Aquisto into a sort of x-ray machine and got some amazing results. That actually gave him the thickness of the plates without him needing to use a probe or gauge.
There are issues with the scanning, such as how to overcome pickups, pickups holes, and f-holes. You can use very expensive software ($40K+) to over come this but I have a better way that’s free! It took me 3 years to figure out though.


Laminate plates are easy enough because they are all made the same (depending on the model). Once you can determine the thickness of each veneer and what material it is, you can then use the CAD data to machine a former of the top and back plate, with which to press your veneers.
You don’t need to cut a guitar apart. With the right tools, probes and skills, you can revers engineer anything. Well.. perhaps it would be difficult to know the exact depth and length of the truss rod but that is why I take off the truss rod cover on scanning.

I’m trying to do a thread on how I reverse engineer this stuff but it’s hard to do so, given that there aren't many CAD surfaces modellers that can do it and amongst us, we each seem to have learned our own way.

The Jimmy plates were made by Hagstrom or more accurately, a production company used by Hagstrom. The plates are very good because they have a recurve, which is usually only associated with carved guitars. Achieving that with pressing is quite difficult and would have taken some serious know how (or so I imagine). I am going to remake them but it's going to push my pressing skills far beyond what they are currently.

[Rickco]

Great info, I was in "wood products" manufacturing for over 50yrs. We never made instruments but we made and used press's and forms for laminated shaped parts. We used techniques from pattern makers and what would be primitive CNC machining to you (replaced pin router) Im still wondering "Once you can determine the thickness of each veneer and what material it is," how you do that on a fully bound guitar, not only something as fine as a Jimmy but Peerless made an inexpensive Epi Regent acoustic for a few years and there were endless debates on whether they were solid, lam or otherwise. (it was settled when someone cut a hole for a pickup) Is there a way to determine the ply assembly without looking at a slice? ( Im not asking how, just if it can be done) Ive been retired for a while now but we used to joke in the shop that the only thing we hadnt made yet was an instrument or an airplane, really enjoying your process vicariously and admire your research.

[Archie]

Great info, I was in "wood products" manufacturing for over 50yrs. We never made instruments but we made and used press's and forms for laminated shaped parts. We used techniques from pattern makers and what would be primitive CNC machining to you (replaced pin router) Im still wondering "Once you can determine the thickness of each veneer and what material it is," how you do that on a fully bound guitar, not only something as fine as a Jimmy but Peerless made an inexpensive Epi Regent acoustic for a few years and there were endless debates on whether they were solid, lam or otherwise. (it was settled when someone cut a hole for a pickup) Is there a way to determine the ply assembly without looking at a slice? ( Im not asking how, just if it can be done) Ive been retired for a while now but we used to joke in the shop that the only thing we hadnt made yet was an instrument or an airplane, really enjoying your process vicariously and admire your research.

Hey Rickco.

That sounds great! Looks like we might do some work together the on a plate or two!
Maybe you will finally get to make a guitar
The easiest way to find out the ‘veneer stack’ (as I call it) is to take a pickup out.
Very few laminates have only floating pickups. The GB10 might be one of the hard ones but find another laminate guitar from the same factory that has a set pup. Or ask the manufacturer. They are usually pretty open. Often it’s in their marketing material.
The 90’s Epiphone Regent? Had a floater but the broadway had pups. Between the two models they will be made exactly the same. So find a Broadway, take the pup out and copy that.
Deciding what wood it is can be hard or easy. More often than not, just look up a manufacturers spec sheet.
the Japanese use birch (so do the Scandinavians). The Americans use mostly maple and poplar, although Gibson have used Birch
In reality it doesn’t matter too much. They’ll likely be more variation between a model of the same material, than between the same model made of different materials.
At worse, cut a hole in the tail piece. That will let you know their veneer stack for the sides at any rate. Chances are that will be the same for the back and sides. Although most sides are about 3mm and tops and backs around 5mm. You could at least measure the thickness’s from there and if they are the same the you’re on to a winner. Then fill the hole. The tail piece will cover the intrusion but then you will damage the guitar.

Sometimes it’s not worth knowing. You know the top and underside as you can see them. Whether it’s 5 or 7 or 3 ply, won't really matter. You already know 2 of them and the thickness of the top by using callipers on the f-holes. It’s relatively academic from there. Although I would avoid 7 ply if poss. Too much glue and not enough wood (imo)

[Rickco]

"That sounds great! Looks like we might do some work together the on a plate or two!
Maybe you will finally get to make a guitar" Id rather watch you, if I was in the neighborhood you couldn't get rid of me! I started in the trades as a kid and now I have a home shop for the first time and am living the old man dream...wander in late morning, admire my hand tools, rearrange my bench while I have my coffee, plan my next masterpiece, I have lots of great ideas and designs...mabey after my nap
Thanks for sharing your work!

[Archie]

"That sounds great! Looks like we might do some work together the on a plate or two!
Maybe you will finally get to make a guitar" Id rather watch you, if I was in the neighborhood you couldn't get rid of me! I started in the trades as a kid and now I have a home shop for the first time and am living the old man dream...wander in late morning, admire my hand tools, rearrange my bench while I have my coffee, plan my next masterpiece, I have lots of great ideas and designs...mabey after my nap
Thanks for sharing your work!

Sounds perfect.

I do my best work in my sleep.

[Heybopper]

Hi
I wodnder if this is a crackpot idea but what if you were to scan arch top f holes on an arch top that doesnt have binding on them and make custom binding that just slots in ? Ie white plastic or maple? Id love some for my Jazz line.