-
Hey gang,
Bob Benedetto mentioned in his book that guitars do not have the same quality fingerboard ebony as other stringed instruments (violins, etc.).
Why is that, and how are the ebony woods used on guitars inferior?
Further, where particular guitars are concerned, how does one tell if the ebony on a fretboard is of higher or lower quality? Does coloration indicate anything? (Such as uniform blackness vs. partially striped with light brown streaks?)
Thanks.
-
10-24-2012 06:38 PM
-
This is a fantastic question. I don't remember seeing that in the book but I haven't read it in quite a while. I don't understand why the ebony would be of a lesser grade unless it has something to do with the fret slots or differing rigidity. It makes me feel like someone out there believes the guitar doesn't deserve it. I'm going back to the book and check the context. Maybe I can find something somewhere.
-
Bob's a true master . . . and he has built both violins and guitars. But, I'm highly skeptical about that statement. If it was stated by anyone of a lesser status than Bob Benedetto . . . I'd probably just blow it off as BS. I know quite a few other true masters . . . and this really does pose an intriguing question. I'm going to ask some of the other people I know that I believe to be equally as knowledgeable as Bob.
I would anticipate an answer such as . . "there are many different types of ebony, with some being more conducive to musical tone and responsiveness . . . and while those might be more appropriate for a musical instrument, they're not necessarily of a better quality".Last edited by Patrick2; 10-25-2012 at 12:48 AM.
-
>>> But, I'm highly skeptical about that statement.
That makes two of us.
It must be EXTREMELY hard to write a book. Each thought must be 100% complete and capture every possibly way to misinterpret. I think one must cut an author considerable slack for some possibly misleading statements.
But yeah, that is one weird statement in some contexts.
I have goofed with my share of ebony over the last 30+ years, so my opinion:
For all (and I mean ALL) practical purposes ebony has color, grain, and density. It varies from piece to piece. As far as I can tell, there is no gradual decline in quality from the Cremonese Master's era to our present day.
Yes, the really black stuff from Madagascar is getting much harder to get. (There is the now sort of well known Lacey Act.)
But the gray/black (and sometimes more streaked) Gabon (or west African) ebony is really great stuff. Smooth grain, very even density, and in my opinion as good as any ebony ever was. Some object to any apparent non-black color. So that is what Fiebing's (sp?) USMC black shoe dye is for I suppose.
Anyway, the present ample supply of west African Ebony is as good for instruments as any ebony ever was in my view.
Any suggestion that we are all headed to "hell in a handbasket" will need to find some wood other than ebony from which to make said handbasket.
For purely aesthetic and nostalgic reasons, I do wish I had grabbed a few blanks of Madagascar before it got harder to score. But the supply could open up in short order anyway. ALSO, any trouble getting Madagascar ebony post-dates the Benedetto book by quite a few years.
And to tediously repeat, there is no inferiority to west African ebony.
All in my opinion.
Chris
-
oops. perhaps i remembered it in correctly. the only reference that i can find today is that Bob wrote that master violin and cello makers insist that the ebony should be "air dried no less than 20 years" if used on a master grade instrument.
so, making no further leaps,
how long do we think that the ebony used on fretboards on most archtop guitars is air dried?
-
Feel somewhat silly as a first post, but I happen to be looking at Yunzhi for a possible order and their specs for ebony fingerboard state, "air dried more than 19 years".
Now I wonder if that's true or if they just read the book!
-
also, is the thickness the same, and if not, does greater thickness require greater quality? i don't have a violin handy so i cant check, but my classical guitars certainly seem to have thicker fingerbords than my electrics.
also, i heard last week that Gibson won't have ebony fretboards on ANY of its traditional guitars - at least for the time being. they are unwilling to use thin ebony fretbords, or something along those lines. so they'll be using rosewood. again, this really makes me wonder what other luthiers are doing. i didnt mean to veer into Lacey again, but can someone clear this last issue up please?
-
Thanks Patrick. You got to the book before I did.
Originally Posted by Patrick2
I've gotten a hold of some Gabon ebony at my local woodcraft store that they use for pen barrels. I made a replacement saddle for an archtop bass I have. Folks, this stuff is dense and hard as a rock and polishes up like a piece of metal.
-
LOLOL . . . I don't have Bob's book. Don't need it!! I'll never build an arch top . . . and if I ever have any questions about how to do it . . . I'm a phone call away from a collective 100 years or so of arch top guitar building experience. Originally Posted by hot ford coupe
Last edited by Patrick2; 10-27-2012 at 04:20 PM.
-
And here I sit with egg on my face----and a non tilted hat. Originally Posted by Patrick2
The word from the K'zoo gang is word enough for me. They wrote the book but didn't put it down on paper.
-
The issue of thickness is a part of import policy and law, not a part of luthiery.
A read through the intent and details of the Lacey Act makes this clear.
Chris
-
Bob Taylor on ebony:
Brad
-
Bob Benedetto is spot on with his statement about guitar fretboards.
A well-respected American guitar maker once said: “Finding a good [tropical wood] fingerboard is going to be the hardest challenge in the ‘local wood’ search… “
Just read about the rant of another luthier, even if he is a bass maker: http://jeffbollbach.com/JB%20II/luthier_rant1.htm.
The fretboard is the most important wood part of a guitar neck; keywords being stiffness, hardness, evenness, cutting plane, wood shrinking… Color? Gee, most ebony fingerboards are dyed anyway; no more than 3 to 5% of the ebony species show a natural, uniformly black color.
A fine fretboard is an important, but just one of several dozen or hundred factors to result in a fine guitar. You can use second or third grade, non- or rough-selected, cheaper neck woods, and try to correct the subsequent moving and warping of the neck by an adjustable trussrod – which doesn’t work out well because that rod is just good for the fine-adjustment of the relief in the middle of the neck/fretboard. The best guitars I’ve ever run across had no adjustable truss rods, but excellent fretboards and neckwoods… a cello neck has to bear about the same string load as an archtop guitar,without any reinforcement. Of course, its fingerboard is massive, planed hollow from end to end, slightly more on the bass side; something, that is not plausible on a fretted instrument.
Really great luthiers know that gluing even the “best-grade” ebony fingerboard on with water-containing glue (Titebond, HHG etc.) will tend to back-bow the neck, so that you have to use a convex curved caul – or one of those dispensable 2-waytruss rods. They also know that epoxy will eliminate some variables of warping, but its necessary glue film thickness could impede the contribution of the neck to the guitar’s tone and response. Talking about fine acoustic archtop guitars here, not the ones where the electrics are responsible for 80% and more of the sound.
That said, I am convinced that the K’zoo gang here around will know better than Benedetto and any other guitar maker. They will never have to fumbling around in the dark, because they are just “a phone call away from a collective 100 years or so of arch tops building experience.”Last edited by Ol' Fret; 10-25-2012 at 08:28 AM.
-
Originally Posted by brad4d8
geat, this answers the question about color. Thanks.
-
Originally Posted by PTChristopher
well without reading the law, does it require that the import thickness be greater than or less than the desired thickness for a guitar fingerboard? ("less than" being the more debilitating concern).
-
a couple of additional thoughts after watching that video from Taylor (the new sole sourcer of world ebony, from Camaroon?):
1. Does this mean that Gibson won't be using ebony because they don't want to buy from Taylor? or Taylor doesn't have enough to supply Gibson? of Taylor cuts it too thin? or Gibson doesnt want streaks in the ebony?
2. that guitar that Taylor was holding with the streaky ebony proves the point - it was not air dried for at least 20 years. starting this year, you can probably say the same for any/all fretboards that you see on good guitars - if they have streaky ebony.
in that event it may make the point that guitar fretboards are indeed inferior to the above mentioned standard insisted upon by violin makers - not necessarily because of the inherent qualities of the ebony - but because the supply is so limited that the air drying is probably limited to a year or less. meaning, the wood may not "perform" well irrespective of its inherent potential quality.Last edited by fumblefingers; 10-25-2012 at 09:27 AM.
-
[quote=Ol' Fret;264541]Bob Benedetto is spot on with his statement about guitar fretboards.
A well-respected American guitar maker once said: “Finding a good [tropical wood] fingerboard is going to be the hardest challenge in the ‘local wood’ search… “
Just read about the rant of another luthier, even if he is a bass maker: http://jeffbollbach.com/JB%20II/luthier_rant1.htm.
The fretboard is the most important wood part of a guitar neck; keywords being stiffness, hardness, evenness, cutting plane, wood shrinking… Color? Gee, most ebony fingerboards are dyed anyway; no more than 3 to 5% of the ebony species show a natural, uniformly black color.
A fine fretboard is an important, but just one of several dozen or hundred factors to result in a fine guitar. You can use second or third grade, non- or rough-selected, cheaper neck woods, and try to correct the subsequent moving and warping of the neck by an adjustable trussrod – which doesn’t work out well because that rod is just good for the fine-adjustment of the relief in the middle of the neck/fretboard. The best guitars I’ve ever run across had no adjustable truss rods, but excellent fretboards and neckwoods… a cello neck has to bear about the same string load as an archtop guitar,without any reinforcement. Of course, its fingerboard is massive, planed hollow from end to end, slightly more on the bass side; something, that is not plausible on a fretted instrument.
Really great luthiers know that gluing even the “best-grade” ebony fingerboard on with water-containing glue (Titebond, HHG etc.) will tend to back-bow the neck, so that you have to use a convex curved caul – or one of those dispensable 2-waytruss rods. They also know that epoxy will eliminate some variables of warping, but its necessary glue film thickness could impede the contribution of the neck to the guitar’s tone and response. Talking about fine acoustic archtop guitars here, not the ones where the electrics are responsible for 80% and more of the sound.
Absolutely correct . . . and thanks for noticing! Also, it's great that you were kind enough to lend your unabashed sanctimony towards the end of your post. So, I guess now that you have weighed in with your knowledge and expertise . . . indicating that only Mr. Benedetto's take on things is correct, as long as you qualify it as such . . . we'll just all assume that's the final word on it. Much appreciated kind sir!!That said, I am convinced that the K’zoo gang here around will know better than Benedetto and any other guitar maker. They will never have to fumbling around in the dark, because they are just “a phone call away from a collective 100 years or so of arch tops building experience.”
-
Hey Patrick may I ask you a couple of questions? No sanctimony here, only sincere questions, this is a fascinating topic. (I was amazed by that Taylor video). No problem if you aren't comfortable answering.
1. Does Heritage have a multi-year stock of ebony for fretboards?
2. If yes, how long are they air dried, and where, and by whom? Also, when it runs out will Heritage have to buy ebony from Taylor's new Camaroon ebony company?
3. If no, where do they get it, and how long are they air dried, and where, and by whom?
4. How thick are the ebony fretboards installed on a Heritage archtop, and if there are different specs for different guitars what are the specs?
5. How is Heritage hamstrung or not hamstrung by Lacey, when Gibson is?
-
I asked Vince Margol that very question. His only reply was . . . "Patrick, we are sourcing all of our wood from the same place since Heritage began back in 1985. JP Moates (owner) used the same sources he used when he was ordering the wood for Gibson prior to Heritage. I didn't care to press him further on the matter. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
There's way way way too much being made out of this whole wood issue. It's true that the wood has to be dried . . . and it's true that air dried is better than kiln dried. It's also true that a controled environmental humidity level is better than air dried. But it's nothing short of ridiculous to think that one MUST wait 20 years on wood to dry naturally. Whom, if anyone . . has ever been able to determine whether wood aged for 20 years will be more musical or more stable than wood aged for a shorter period of time?? With each piece of wood being totally different from the next, whom, if anyone . . can say with surety that a 20 year old piece of ebony wouldn't have sounded just a good or been just a stable if it was only aged a couple of years?? Whom, if anyone . . . can say that a piece of ebony used after only a couple of years would have sounded better and been more stable if the luthier waited 20 years before using it . . instead of waiting only until his experience told him it was adequately aged and dry??
Does anyone really think that all felled trees have an exact equal level of moisture content?? Skilled arch top, violin, cello . . . etc., craftsmanship is and always will be more of an art . . . than an exact science. When John D'Angelico took in an order of spruce, maple, ebony . . . etc., I highly doubt he asked the supplier if it was twenty years old. I'm sure that just as Aaron Cowles and JP Moates and Marv Lamm and Jim Deurloo would do . . . he held the blank in hands, carresses it, smells it, feels it's weight and then makes an instinctive decision on whether or not it's ready to work with.
The larger production companies have a much more "scientific" approach to it with specially designed drying rooms . . not kilns, but controlled environments . . and a process for storage, aging and rotation. Smaller luthiers have a much less scientific approach to it.
I'm sorry man .. . I know Bob Benedetto is a true master luthier with very few peers . . . . but, he ain't God!!!
-
this lacey thing is dicey indeed.
also, Benedetto was quoting what violin and cello makers have as a standard for master grade instruments - it wasn't his standard (although any owner probably wouldn't mind if their particular intrument adhered to it...)
lastly, i would think that trial and error and observation through the years (1600s forward) would lead to the violin makers' standard in question here (ebony fingerboards - not tonewoods like spruce tops and maple backs). so by the same token, who's to say that they're wrong?Last edited by fumblefingers; 10-25-2012 at 06:47 PM.
-
What's with the ass-hat post from Germany?
[Fumble] >>> well without reading the law, does it require that the import thickness be greater than or less than the desired thickness for a guitar fingerboard? ("less than" being the more debilitating concern).
In essence, the law says that you can not import anything into the US when doing so violates the law of the source country. It is simple, and remarkably clear all in all.
Now a country (India in the most notable case) may want to use its natural resources (Rosewood in the recent big case) to employ its people making things as opposed to selling the resources off cheaply.
In this case Indian law says that you can not sell off the wood in pieces greater than a given thickness. I forget the actual thickness in question - but I recall it being thinner than an FB bank.
The idea is that they do not want to export valuable logs. They want to take their logs and use them to make value-added products from Rosewood, then sell the products.
The Lacey act says nothing about wood thickness. It does say, in effect, that if it is illegal to export wood larger than certain dimensions from India, then it is illegal to import the same wood into the US BECAUSE it violates Indian law.
This is a 100+ year old law. I believe it was originally conceived to control hunting and transport of killed game across state lines. But I am a poor historian and may be wrong on the origins.
ChrisLast edited by PTChristopher; 10-25-2012 at 07:37 PM.
-
I looked it up (the wood thickness thing):
Indian law bans the export of wood products classified as HS 4407: “Wood sawn or chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or not planed, sanded or end-jointed, of a thickness exceeding 6 mm,” but allows the exports of woods thinner than 6mm, classified as HS 4408.
I have seen the actual Indian law text, but can not find it right now. It is staggeringly simple, clear, and understandable as I recall.
In effect, India wants to sell you fingerboards and not natural resources.
Gibson wants to sell you a Gibson-built product with arguable special value as a product of a long-standing high end maker of guitars. They may well argue that a 6.001mm FB blank cramps their style.
ChrisLast edited by PTChristopher; 10-25-2012 at 07:32 PM.
-
OK . . . so then I'm curious as to whom Bob might have spoken with from back in the 1600s. Or, is this an unspoken religion an we are just to be guided by faith, trhat the word passed forward from some 4 centuries is the gospel. I'll just reiterate . . . a true luthier . . . a true and knowledgeable crafstman, in the would of "archtopguitarbuiderolegy" (WOW!!) . . . will know as soon as he/she holds a piece of wood in their hands, if it's ready. They will not need a calendar Originally Posted by fumblefingers
-
If I may opine here:
I think Benedetto has done the archtop world a fantastic and enduring service both with actual guitars and his book.
I hope this does not become a Benedetto-bash because a few of his comments may not be as 100% air-tight, in hindsight.
Chris
-
Agreed . . . on all counts. No one's bashing Bob, certainly not me, As compared to Bob's knowledge, I'm just an admitted piss ant, if even that. Let's remember that the OP referenced Bob's comments and opinions. That's the context of this discussion. Originally Posted by PTChristopher
I'm just pointing out that his writings and/or opinions are not necessarily gospel. Bob draws his opinions based upon his immense experience and practical knowledge. But, it's still just theoretic. That does not necessarily make those opinions absolutely irrefutable.
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos