Inconsistencies in Gibson Guitars: How & why

[Archie]

That would be a great experiment but the wood would have to be from different batches. I think much of the variance in like models comes from the different batches of woods purchesed through the years along, with slight differences in the manufacturing process. Whether it's human or machine, tolerances must change slightly.

There’s two claims here:

If the claim is ‘no two guitars sound the same’, then the only way to challenge that, is to make two guitars from as close to the same materials, and resources as possible.
If they cannot be made to sound the same, then the later claim of ’no two guitars within a model range can sound the same’ is answered by default.
If they do sound the same, then move on to claim 2.

That then leaves two paths ahead:

1) Make two bodies from the same source.
2) Make two bodies from differing sources but same model.

My setup is suited to making consecutive bodies from the same source, so it might be easier to do that first?
If we get a positive result, then do two bodies from differing planks to answer number 2nd.
If claim one fails, then there is no need to do claim 2.

Or something like that.

[skiboyny]

I would bet same source tight tolerances would be pretty darn close. Real world though, is different sources, different people, different years. Still, unless the manufacturing process is really controlled, there would at least be "personal preference" between the two.

There’s two claims here:

If the claim is ‘no two guitars sound the same’, then the only way to challenge that, is to make two guitars from as close to the same materials, and resources as possible.
If they cannot be made to sound the same, then the later claim of ’no two guitars within a model range can sound the same’ is answered by default.
If they do sound the same, then move on to claim 2.

That then leaves two paths ahead:

1) Make two bodies from the same source.
2) Make two bodies from differing sources but same model.

My setup is suited to making consecutive bodies from the same source, so it might be easier to do that first?
If we get a positive result, then do two bodies from differing planks to answer number 2nd.
If claim one fails, then there is no need to do claim 2.

Or something like that.

[SOLR]

My setup is suited to making consecutive bodies from the same source, so it might be easier to do that first?
If we get a positive result, then do two bodies from differing planks to answer number 2nd.
If claim one fails, then there is no need to do claim 2.

Or something like that.

Archie, If I remember correctly were you not trying to do just that ? "consecutive bodies from the same source" ...Clones.

One would expect individually handbuilt archtops like Treniers or Campellones to be as near a clone to each other in a particular model/size/wood choices?

P.S. I tried to visit to your linked YT page but it seems it's down (does not exist anymore error 404)

S

[Archie]

Archie is actually going to do this comparison of the bodies. Looking forward to that. What percentage of the sound is the body as compared to the neck the strings the action the player the pick (or not) the room the temp not to mention I think the OP was referring to a carved top guitar which as has been said could be ruffed out by machine but must be voiced by hand and experience of the maker. A carved instrument is completely different thats why guys like MC and BT are busy and respected. I dont believe any machine will duplicate what a luthier can do on a carved guitar. Where automation could come in is on a pressed top guitar (solid woods) where consistency of outcome could be more predictable. Peerless made some exceptional guitars of that construction and Gibson blew it with shit marketing and ridiculous prices. Personally I wouldnt want a "perfect" cnc carved archtop, I respect the hand work and its variations, its what you cant see that really makes the difference.

Hey Rickco, the point isn’t to compare a luthier product to a mass manufacturing process, which I think are two different but overlapping fields.
Is there room for a cnc to help a luthier? Sure.

CNC is driven by software design. If we look at archtop design through the lens of CAD, we could very well start to see a lot of opportunity for development. That does not mean something better but it does mean being able to see things from a more mathematical perspective.
CAD does perfect geometry far beyond the capability of the human hand and eye. This geometry may be able to increase plate strength against opposing forces by tweaking say the radius contours, allowing for more even displacement. This could lead to a thinner, lighter top? Simulations can then be made to show weak spots in the design and those areas can be addressed to further aid in refining a plates geometry and strength, allowing the luthier to further shape sound. A CNC can then process that design to perfection in concert with a luthier. The luthier will always have to tune the pate. That is their skill and is irreplaceable with a machine and some software.

On another thought, If a luthier has to spend 1/2 of their time getting a plate to the fine tuning stage, that is a lot of work and a lot of room for error. This then stops a luthier from experimenting too much because they cannot afford to spend too much time in RnD. In CAD this type of constant revising and tweaking can be done before a tool hits the wood, allowing a luthier so much more freedom to do what they do best. A good relationship between a CAD designer/CNC operator and a luthier, can only help that luthier excel.

One could argue however that in the roughing stage, a luthier gets a feel for the wood. {insert pic of Jim Triggs with angle grinder}

[Archie]

Archie, If I remember correctly were you not trying to do just that ? "consecutive bodies from the same source" ...Clones.

One would expect individually handbuilt archtops like Treniers or Campellones to be as near a clone to each other in a particular model/size/wood choices?

P.S. I tried to visit to your linked YT page but it seems it's down (does not exist anymore error 404)

S

Hey SOLR, I don't want to speak for MC or BT because I’m not the correct authority but I would think that a luthier guitar, is as far from the type of guitar, that could prove this point.
The woods purchased by such luthiers, are often one off cuts for specific models. They are often chosen as per the clients requirements, or what is available from select suppliers.
I would imagine it very rare that a luthier would buy an entire log (tree trunk) or even half a log that if well figured, would easily cost up to $10,000+.

I also think but don't know, that a skilled luthier wont be trying to create the same sound but instead get the best sound, out the materials they have, even if working on the same model.

Someone like myself, who can buy a full plank of maple and then re-saw that into 1mm (or whatever) thick veneers, from the same billet, can get closer to using the same woods for the job and the premise so far for this challenge, would be on a laminate guitar first. It's not my mission to create a repeatable sound but it is my mission to design a superior laminate archtop. To do so would involve a lot of RnD that won't work, unless things can be tested and measured. Once accomplished, the resulting product then needs to be repeatable, otherwise you're going round in circles. Of course based on first principles, if all inputs are as close and as identical as can be (CAD design/CNC machining), then the sound should be likewise.

Thanks for letting me know about the link. I did change the handle. It should be @archtopheaven.

[SOLR]

Hey SOLR, I don't want to speak for MC or BT because I’m not the correct authority but I would think that a luthier guitar, is as far from the type of guitar, that could prove this point.
The woods purchased by such luthiers, are often one off cuts for specific models. They are often chosen as per the clients requirements, or what is available from select suppliers.
I would imagine it very rare that a luthier would buy an entire log (tree trunk) or even half a log that if well figured, would easily cost up to $10,000+.

I also think but don't know, that a skilled luthier wont be trying to create the same sound but instead get the best sound, out the materials they have, even if working on the same model.

Someone like myself, who can buy a full plank of maple and then re-saw that into 1mm (or whatever) thick veneers, from the same billet, can get closer to using the same woods for the job and the premise so far for this challenge, would be on a laminate guitar first. It's not my mission to create a repeatable sound but it is my mission to design a superior laminate archtop. To do so would involve a lot of RnD that won't work, unless things can be tested and measured. Once accomplished, the resulting product then needs to be repeatable, otherwise you're going round in circles. Of course based on first principles, if all inputs are as close and as identical as can be (CAD design/CNC machining), then the sound should be likewise.

Thanks for letting me know about the link. I did change the handle. It should be @archtopheaven.

Archie, thx for the detailed reply, I had always assumed you wanted to replicate the best plates and sell those to "?? luthiers?? There's more to it than I originally thought.

S

[Archie]

Archie, thx for the detailed reply, I had always assumed you wanted to replicate the best plates and sell those to "?? luthiers?? There's more to it than I originally thought.

S

Things seem to be in flux given the size of the workshop I find myself in, having just set up my third in as many years.
I would very much like to work with luthiers on developing their products. Whether they want to have someone help them design tooling for help collaborate digitally on a new model. Or perhaps whether they want someone to produce components for them which they can finish.
Luthiers can struggle with RnD because it means they’re not making and selling guitars to customers.
Other than that, I have certain models I would like to make and may perhaps get the opportunity to do so, in conjunction with an established luthier as a collaboration. Sort of like a limited run, if they find that appealing.

[SOLR]

I certainly hoped a luthier would step in with some valuable input, perhaps this thread should have been posted in the Luthiers sub forum ?https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/builders-bench/

It certainly be great if you'd finally teamed up with a builder even if just to test the theory, sort of speak

S

[Archie]

I certainly hoped a luthier would step in with some valuable input, perhaps this thread should have been posted in the Luthiers sub forum ?https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/builders-bench/

It certainly be great if you'd finally teamed up with a builder even if just to test the theory, sort of speak

S

Yes I couldn't decide. If in doubt, go for the one with the most engagement lol.

[Marty Grass]

As we grow up, we stop believing in magic. But there are things we can't yet quantify or directly appreciate. Much of the universe is a mystery beyond our reasoning.

I'm okay with intuition as a means of knowing. I don't bet money on it though.

[2bornot2bop]

As we grow up, we stop believing in magic. But there are things we can't yet quantify or directly appreciate. Much of the universe is a mystery beyond our reasoning.

I'm okay with intuition as a means of knowing. I don't bet money on it though.

But what about Santa?

[Marker]

Perfection is an illusion because what is perfect is subjective. It is also elusive, even perfect things become imperfect and vice versa.

For every CNC’d part you find ‘perfect’, someone else will find it imperfect. Ditto for hand-shaped, etc. Every neck you found ‘perfect’ in the beginning you will eventually grow to find its flaws.

If CNC existed in the 50s and 60s some people would have liked it and some wouldn’t, same as today!

[213Cobra]

Perfection is an illusion because what is perfect is subjective. It is also elusive, even perfect things become imperfect and vice versa.

For every CNC’d part you find ‘perfect’, someone else will find it imperfect. Ditto for hand-shaped, etc. Every neck you found ‘perfect’ in the beginning you will eventually grow to find its flaws.

If CNC existed in the 50s and 60s some people would have liked it and some wouldn’t, same as today!

General sector consumers reward consistency. Aficionados tend to find the quirks of production inconsistency in wooden guitars engaging, interesting and worth geeking over. I'm among the latter. The Gibson, Guild and Fender production variances are interesting, understandable and worth the resulting attention and preferences-sorting. Plus, the odds are raised I can find (stumble on) a more precise fit to my preferences.

Phil

[Sigmund451]

I make custom sax mouthpieces. They are far less complex than a guitar but every one of them is just a little different. They may all be correct and still produce a slightly different tone. The interactive variables in a guitar are almost infinite...for better or worse.

They wont tell you so but even the makers dont always know exactly why one might behave slightly different than another.

[Rickco]

Im not sure this applys in the 21st century, but for old tradesmen (like me) things we made with our hand tools had a soul. Even a simple thing hand made was special. a quote from a Rick Burns doc about immigrating workers coming to the U.S. in the early 1900s " Men came here to do their best work and be judged by it..." Our modern processes have taken that idea off the table, for people of that generation an instrument popped out of a machine will not have a "soul". Its kind of a silly idea now but for me I want to picture the guy making my guitar in my imagination, when I hold my hand made prewars I feel like Im holding hands with the guy that carved it, he may be a relative of one of the guys that trained me with a thick accent and no sense of humor. I name my guitars, for old romantics there alive with the energy of the maker still within them and I think modern luthiers are some of the last craftspeople to have that connection to the work. So do I want a perfect guitar at a great affordable price? Very much looking forward to the next installment of the Archie exploration!

[Archie]

Im not sure this applys in the 21st century, but for old tradesmen (like me) things we made with our hand tools had a soul. Even a simple thing hand made was special. a quote from a Rick Burns doc about immigrating workers coming to the U.S. in the early 1900s " Men came here to do their best work and be judged by it..." Our modern processes have taken that idea off the table, for people of that generation an instrument popped out of a machine will not have a "soul". Its kind of a silly idea now but for me I want to picture the guy making my guitar in my imagination, when I hold my hand made prewars I feel like Im holding hands with the guy that carved it, he may be a relative of one of the guys that trained me with a thick accent and no sense of humor. I name my guitars, for old romantics there alive with the energy of the maker still within them and I think modern luthiers are some of the last craftspeople to have that connection to the work. So do I want a perfect guitar at a great affordable price? Very much looking forward to the next installment of the Archie exploration!

Thanks Rickco. A lot of what you're saying is true and it is something I think about often.

I would like to say that there is perhaps a dimension to this that is not often considered, or dare I say appreciated. Take this for example.

If a master of 60 years can no longer carve a plate and instead he builds a machine to do it, how much of that plate now being produced has the soul of the master?

I see my machines and the custom tooling I have made to make them do a specific thing in a unique way, as an extension of myself.

Is it the conductor or the machine, who is ultimately responsible for putting soul in the music, if the machine only plays the notes in the way dictated to it?