Why do most archtops use 14th fret body join

[Toat]

I get because most are copying Benedetto and that was his basic design. But is there some actual legitimate reason why?

Most body designs have plenty of real estate to accommodate the neck pickup closer to the edge. More frets off the body = better.

[Hammertone]

I get because most are copying Benedetto and that was his basic design. But is there some actual legitimate reason why?
Most body designs have plenty of real estate to accommodate the neck pickup closer to the edge. More frets off the body = better.

Interesting question that deserves a a considered response.

However, your comment regarding "copying Benedetto" is not accurate. Most are not copying Benedetto. The total number of archtops built that copy Benedetto designs, is a tiny fraction of one percent of archtops built since he published his book.

[sgosnell]

Have you ever seen a Gibson?

The 14th fret join is a good compromise. And everything on an archtop is a compromise of some sort.

[rlrhett]

The body join at the 14th fret dates from the beginning of the 20th Century. Bob only dates from the mid ‘40s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Cunamara]

I get because most are copying Benedetto and that was his basic design. But is there some actual legitimate reason why?

Most body designs have plenty of real estate to accommodate the neck pickup closer to the edge. More frets off the body = better.

There are guitars that offer lots of frets off the body: Teles, Strats, ES-335s, etc. If that's what you need, you're set.

Archtops are designed with acoustic response as a consideration, either as a purely acoustic signal or including resonance in electric tone. As with classical and flattop guitars, 12-14 frets are a good compromise. There are structural reasons for the neck joint in keeping with this. And of course tradition is also a factor.

[cosmic gumbo]

Even earlier flat top makers had decided 14th fret was a good place to join the body for balance and playability. If you get a standard size flat or archtop with a neck joined beyond the 14th fret, first position can be more of a reach than players like, and be neck heavy unless you make some compromises to the body.

I notice fellow forumite Mark Kleinhaut posts videos often in the showcase section playing a Tom Ribbecke single cut archtop with a 16 fret neck joint.

[Hammertone]

The body join at the 14th fret dates from the beginning of the 20th Century. Bob only dates from the mid ‘40s

Bob built his first archtop in 1968. He didn't make a dent in the fairly small archtop market until the late 1970s.

[TH]

The guitar body has its traditional roots in the Spanish tradition; the classical guitar. With its smaller (relatively) body, it's most similar to a 15" archtop which is like a George Benson size. So through a lot of trial and error, the 12 fret nylon guitar has a longer scale (over 25") and that's what's needed to tension a gut string with greatest tension before breaking. The body size puts the bridge at the optimum placement at the acoustic centre of the lower bout.
So the first consideration was string scale length. Second was position of the bridge. Then you alter the body shape so your body join takes this into consideration. Any deeper on a classical and the upper bout would be moved and a really squashed shape would result. Any longer and the upper fret access would be severely limited. Designed for optimum acoustic consideration, a 25.5 string length body with mid bout bridge placement has a mid point on the string at the 12th fret, where the body joins the neck.

With the introduction of steel strings to the mass market, some of the first designs were from Martin. Their 00 models were like parlour guitars as we'd refer to them now. There were 12 fret 00's which are still considered by many pure acoustic players to have the sweetest, fullest sound all other factours the same. Now with the shorter scale of steel (I won't bore you with the relative tension vs scale between nylon and steel), on a 12 fret, that already starts to move the bridge towards the sound hole; out of that optimum spot.

Enter bigger bodies, greater volume and projection, the 000, OM and Dreadnaught and the priority moves from perfect acoustical balance to performance volume.

This is the origin of the 14 fret join. On an acoustic guitar, it is the furthest you'd want to move the bridge towards the upper bout.
When Lloyd Loar designed this first archtops for Gibson, that was the standard of fret access he used. The L-1, a body size smaller than today's guitars was small and the bridge had a nice placement in the lower bout. As successive L designated guitars grew in body size, that 14 fret access stayed the same and cutaways were introduced to gain any access higher than that.

Electric guitars. Electric guitars are not limited by body size for acoustic vibration. The bridge doesn't move a thin top, it anchors the string to a piece of wood. So with an electric you can go steinberger and it'd still be fine. Hell you can go chapman stick and it'd still work. So the game is changed. And here we are today.

Make any sense?

David

[feet]

Bob built his first archtop in 1968. He didn't make a dent in the fairly small archtop market until the late 1970s.

i assume he meant Bob the person, but I don't have the facts in front of me.

I tried my first 12 fretter a couple years back and I had to have it. there are certainly some trade offs in terms of width and spacing and access but they just sound badass. the difference is hard to explain, but the best word I read for it was "chocolaty".

it's a flat top, though. not sure if they make archtops that way. I suspect that by now. most people have expectations of what a guitar is, what they look like and where things go. if deviations from the norm sold, you'd see more of them. people still complain about the difference between the neck placement on a casino and a 335 all the time.

I'd trade frets for power, balls, tone etc of it were an option (and I could afford it), but it generally isn't.

[Grez]

As TruthHertz said, it puts the bridge in the right place for an acoustic instrument.

[rlrhett]

Bob built his first archtop in 1968. He didn't make a dent in the fairly small archtop market until the late 1970s.

Of course. My joke was that he PERSONALLY dates from 1946.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Hammertone]

Of course. My joke was that he PERSONALLY dates from 1946.

I figured as much - it was for the OP's benefit.

[Hammertone]

David covers it off nicely.

In the second half of the 19th century, steel-string guitar design generally followed designs developed by builders such as C.F. Martin and his contemporaries. These were related to gut-string designs that were also evolving to become the "modern" classical/Flamenco guitar. By early in the 20th century, most guitars had necks that joined bodies at the 12th fret. The music of the day did not require much by way of frets past that point, and the proportions of these instruments not only allowed them to be played comfortably while seated, decently balanced, but also allowed bridge placement to be optimized in terms of tone, near the center of the bottom bout.

In the quest for volume, guitars got bigger, and string technology evolved as well. Steel string guitar from Gibson and Martin competed with banjos and mandolins, then resonator guitars, for consumer attention. Both Gibson and Martin experimented with new designs - the Gibson Style O archtop essentially had the upper bout cut away, resulting in a 15th fret neck/body joint while maintaining traditional bridge placement. In 1923, Loar's L-5 was introduced with a 14th fret neck-body joint, although Gibson did continue to offer the L-4 archtop with 12th fret neck body joint for several more years. During this period Gibson made guitars with neck joints at the 12th, 13th and 14th fret, both archtops and flattops.

In 1929, Martin introduced the OM guitars with the neck joint at the 14th fret and longer scales, prompted by successful banjoist Perry Bechtel. He advocated for a 15th fret neck/body joint, and they settled in the 14th fret, a design change that swiftly made its way across most of the Martin catalogue. I suspect that competition from Gibson may also have had something to do with it as well.

After that, 14-fret neck/body joints because fairly standard for both Gibson and Martin, along with the other guitar companies of the day.

Here’s a good read from Richard Hoover a SCGC:
http://www.lutherie.net/12-14-evolution.html


more...

[Hammertone]

...

Practically speaking, there were a several inter-related ways to integrate 14th fret neck/body joints into what had previously been instruments with 12th fret neck/body joints. The same is true of integrating 15th and 16th fret neck/body joints into what had previously been instruments with 14th fret neck/body joints :
-increase the scale length of the guitar.
-move the position of the bridge closer to the neck body joint / pull the neck further away from the body.
-shorten the body of the guitar.

These design changes affect the physical balance, tone and volume of the instrument. And the visual balance as well. With flattops, the shape and position of the traditional round soundholes is also affected, as Hoover points out in his article.

Focusing on archtops, I think they are easier to play with in terms of neck/body joints, because archtop bridges float and are easy to move forward or backward a bit to accommodate changes. Once one gets to semis with blocks and solidbody guitars, it's more importantly about balance.

While 14th fret neck joints are the "standard" for hollow archtop guitars, there have been other styles built as well, such as the Gibson Style O, with a 15th fret neck joint, essentially achieved by shortening the body from the top end. In Germany during the 1930s, Felix Starke built his ESTE archtops with 15th fret neck/body joints. After the war, Wenzel Rossmeisl built a few Roger archtops with 13th fret neck/body joints (something Erich Solomon has done more recently, as well).

Hofner started using a 16th fret neck/body joint in the late 1980s when it introduced the Jazzica, and subsequently used it on the New President, and Chancellor. These instruments all have shortened bodies (as does the Ribbecke shown above) to make the design work, with soundholes designed to visually line up with altered bridge placements and shortened bodies. These are also guitars designed to be played electrically, so purely acoustic response is secondary. Moving the bridge up and away from the sweet spot is not as consequential as with purely acoustic archtops.

Sadowsky made the Jimmy Bruno model (small body hollow laminated archtop, 15th fret neck/body joint) immediately after Jimmy left his Hofner endorsement. There are several other builders doing similar work. I think many modern jazz players who like to play hollow electric archtops appreciate the increased upper fret access that they can get on solid-bodies and semis and that, just like the introduction of the cutaway, the idea is here to stay.

[Woody Sound]

While I enjoy the extra frets on some nylon crossovers, they NEVER sound as good as 12 fret nylon guitars. The bracing probably has something to do with it, but I believe bridge placement on 12 vs 14 has more impact.

[rio]

I have wondered that too. I love the 17th fret joining on my PM100 and there is no compromise in sound there. For acoustic guitars I can understand but on an electric archtop I’d love to see more builders experiment with a higher body joint.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Woody Sound]

I have wondered that too. I love the 17th fret joining on my PM100 and there is no compromise in sound there. For acoustic guitars I can understand but on an electric archtop I’d love to see more builders experiment with a higher body joint.