L5c Cutaway Binding?

**lawson-stone** · 01-30-2017, 11:00 PM

So as I plan my entry into building guitars, I periodically just have questions that bug me. This is one of them.

The L5c models seem apparently to have started off as non-cutaways, and then the cutaway was added, and the design became traditional. The result is that the arch of the top is not tapered to the cutaway, and the guitar top rides higher above the cutaway than at other places. You can see this easily as the binding is thicker at that point.

My question is... how do builders who want to imitate that style get that gradual swell of the binding in the cutaway right? Is it related to the reinforcing block that the L5c models have in the cutaway that isn't a part of the design of most other archtops featuring a cutaway?

Forgive my curiosity, but I have always wondered about this.

**rlrhett** · 01-30-2017, 11:40 PM

I had the same question recently. The answer apparently is that cutaways were afterthoughts. The just cut a big scoop out of a symmetrical top. They filled in the gap with a support block characteristic of some L5's. I've been told it was spruce, but in pictures it looks like mahogany. I didn't even think to look the last time I had a chance to play one.

FWIW, most archtops have the cutaway carved differently than the bass side blending it down to the rim. I learned from the Benedetto book, and that's how he does it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**lawson-stone** · 01-31-2017, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by rlrhett

I had the same question recently. The answer apparently is that cutaways were afterthoughts. The just cut a big scoop out of a symmetrical top. They filled in the gap with a support block characteristic of some L5's. I've been told it was spruce, but in pictures it looks like mahogany. I didn't even think to look the last time I had a chance to play one.

FWIW, most archtops have the cutaway carved differently than the bass side blending it down to the rim. I learned from the Benedetto book, and that's how he does it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes I assumed that was the story. My question was how people who keep to that method do the binding with it's changes in size. It seems a technical challenge.

**Matt Cushman** · 01-31-2017, 10:23 AM

If you want to have the same look of tall binding in the cutaway area. You have to have the top plate thicker in that area. The ribs are uniform and flat where they join with the plates and the bottom of the binding follows the top of the ribs. If you want the same look you will need to leave your top plate thicker in this area. When you cut your binding rabbet, you will find out how uniform your plate thickness is at the rim. If the plate is thick at the cutaway, you will have to compensate the depth of your rabbet cut for the binding. I guess you could keep the top carved the same and cut a deeper rabbet but then the rim would appear to be tapered.

**lawson-stone** · 01-31-2017, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Matt Cushman

If you want to have the same look of tall binding in the cutaway area. You have to have the top plate thicker in that area. The ribs are uniform and flat where they join with the plates and the bottom of the binding follows the top of the ribs. If you want the same look you will need to leave your top plate thicker in this area. When you cut your binding rabbet, you will find out how uniform your plate thickness is at the rim. If the plate is thick at the cutaway, you will have to compensate the depth of your rabbet cut for the binding. I guess you could keep the top carved the same and cut a deeper rabbet but then the rim would appear to be tapered.

In other words, when I see L5c's with that, I'm looking at some pretty serious hand-work on fitting the binding! I suspect if I ever try to build a 17" L5ces-a-like I will likely have to sacrifice that little element of fidelity to the original on the altar of my poor skills!

**Matt Cushman** · 01-31-2017, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by lawson-stone

In other words, when I see L5c's with that, I'm looking at some pretty serious hand-work on fitting the binding! I suspect if I ever try to build a 17" L5ces-a-like I will likely have to sacrifice that little element of fidelity to the original on the altar of my poor skills!

There is no doubt that to copy that feature would be considerably more difficult to bind than a uniform bind would be. The binding strip could be cut with a wide section for that area. You could do that or be ready to do a lot of scraping. I think after you gain some experience you could successfully copy the look if you wanted to.

**deacon Mark** · 01-31-2017, 12:39 PM

Barker and Hollenbeck both used uniform and that would be my choice. D'angelico S can be seen both ways, my 49 NY is uniform in the cutaway. I find both ways look equally fine go with easiest.

**lawson-stone** · 01-31-2017, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by deacon Mark

Barker and Hollenbeck both used uniform and that would be my choice. D'angelico S can be seen both ways, my 49 NY is uniform in the cutaway. I find both ways look equally fine go with easiest.

I've just always adored that L5c swell in the binding in the cutaway. My Heritage Golden Eagle (which was one of the first) had it too. The Aria and Epiphone L5ces copies have it. Don't know why I like the look of it. I know it represents a design compromise-the same top can be used for a cutaway or non-cutaway; and I know theoretically at least it has an impact on tone.

But still it just looks luxurious to me!

**sbeishline** · 01-31-2017, 12:54 PM

Curious to visualize this.. anyone have any pics to show the difference?

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 01-31-2017, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by sbeishline

Curious to visualize this.. anyone have any pics to show the difference?

yes, you could compare L-5C to L-5P.

**lawson-stone** · 01-31-2017, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by sbeishline

Curious to visualize this.. anyone have any pics to show the difference?

Here you go. L5c style on the right, notice the swell in the binding depth; and on the left, on an admittedly lower-class instrument, the uniform thickness.
L5c Cutaway Binding?-img_5946-jpg

**Hammertone** · 01-31-2017, 03:03 PM

Examples of a Heritage cutaway with shaped binding and a Gibson L-7C with Premier-style carving and straight binding.

**339 in june** · 01-31-2017, 05:12 PM

Something like that : L5c Cutaway Binding?-dsc_0038-jpg

From my sweet Heritage Sweet 16
And, it's the only feature I don't like on this guitar.
No prob with the headstock, but this .... !!!!

**lawson-stone** · 01-31-2017, 05:14 PM

It's funny because I think that's so classy. It's a pretty difficult piece of trim to execute well and they accomplish it. But it really comes down to each one's own preferences. It's definitely part of the Gibson heritage.

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 01-31-2017, 05:37 PM

I like that leetle hump on the L-5P, but then I own one.

**Matt Cushman** · 01-31-2017, 06:34 PM

I like it when the binding extends around the neck heel. This also adds to the difficulty when fitting the neck to the body.

**deacon Mark** · 01-31-2017, 06:42 PM

Here is the 49 New Yorker carved I assume equal regardless of if guitar was a noncut or cutaway. Binding is even.

**deacon Mark** · 01-31-2017, 06:49 PM

Here is something not seen too much either. The binding goes around the neck block. This my Hollenbeck and Barker did it the same. Notice the 4 layers of smaller binding more work for sure.

**lawson-stone** · 01-31-2017, 07:16 PM

Binding is clearly where luthiers like to show off a little. I like it.

**deacon Mark** · 01-31-2017, 07:54 PM

Matt if this is one or your guitars it really looks nice and I agree much work to line up the "lines."

**Matt Cushman** · 01-31-2017, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by deacon Mark

Matt if this is one or your guitars it really looks nice and I agree much work to line up the "lines."

Thanks Mark. That is one of my guitars. It features fiber binding and purfling.

**2bornot2bop** · 02-02-2017, 11:42 PM

Originally Posted by lawson-stone

In other words, when I see L5c's with that, I'm looking at some pretty serious hand-work on fitting the binding! I suspect if I ever try to build a 17" L5ces-a-like I will likely have to sacrifice that little element of fidelity to the original on the altar of my poor skills!

You're describing and aspect of binding in cutaways that I've always been a big fan of, and drawn to like a magnet. Last year, while ordering an archtop build I emphasized a request for an L5C style binding in the cutaway, complete with photos of its obvious width...the builder tried, but that turned out to be the visual sore spot of the build. Nonetheless, the guitar sounds great...but an L5C cutaway it is not.

Good luck with your building!