Tap Tuned

[Sleeko]

My Gibson L4 CES came with a certificate stating that the top of the guitar was tap tuned by James Hutchins. I know the top is carved spruce and I was wondering if Gibson tap tunes or tuned the laminate guitar tops such as an ES 175? Out of all my guitars it certainly is the sweetest and smoothest sounding. Does anybody know about such things? I'm curious. Thanks in advance.

[Jimmy blue note]

Laminate guitars are not tap tuned. The tuning of plates is done through removal of mass until a resonance frequency is reached. The balance of modes, the notes targeted and the pliability of the top are the elements, like a tuned bell, that result in notes having the character that is heard as the attack and the envelope. It's the "voice" of a well built solid body guitar.
Laminate tops don't undergo that process because the laminates are thin, pressed and glued and although they have their own resonant character, are for the most part, non negotiably untuned.

That being said, there are vast differences in laminate plate construction. Some are, in fact, quite resonant, light and have a distinctive ring to them, but that's a product of their own laminating formula and once it's pressed, that's it. You gets what you get.

I will say, however, that playing an instrument, and playing it a lot, will play a huge role in an instrument maturing and becoming more playable, more resonant and more "musical". I dare say, I'd take a well built and broken in laminate over a new, green, or unplayed collectors' solid top.
Give me a choice between Jim Hall's D'Aquisto and a new unplayed pristine L-5CES, and yeah. I'll take the Jimmy D please.

[Tal_175]

Some luthiers believe tap tuning is snake oil. As soon as the guitar is assembled, the resonant frequency will change drastically (nevermind the bracings). Also as the wood ages, the resonance of the top will be different.

On the other hand some luthiers do use tap tuning, not because they are going for a magic note but that's how they estimate the desired stiffness of the top. Ideally the top should be only stiff enough to be structurally sound, not a hair more. But when it comes to electric amplified guitars like L4CES, the stiffness goals will be different. Most likely there is a stiffness for L4CES that James Hutchins liked and he estimated it with the resonant note. The desired stiffness was probably different when he was building a La Grande.

There is also a trade off between stiffness due to the bracing and top thickness. Some luthiers go for very thin tops reinforced with heavier bracings that are strategically placed. Other luthiers may go for thick top with light bracings. If they are measuring stiffness by the resonant note, they would be going for different frequencies (given the size of the guitar).

[Gitterbug]

What about pressed tops? Same as laminated, I guess. Tal_175 has a point about bracing. My Vestax D'A NYL-2 had two parallel braces that didn't run the full length of the top. My ES-175 -59 VOS has kerfed bracing, i.e. the braces were cut halfway through around the mid-point. Although period-perfect, this doesn't make much structural sense to me.

Carved tops often have a telltale recurve (very pronounced in many old German archtops), obviously inherited from the violin tradition. Is it a way to make the top thinner near the edges, or does the inner side of the top curve up similarly? Sorry if this has been dealt with in extenso in a previous thread. I've been a member since 2009 but can't remember.

[Jimmy blue note]

Some luthiers believe tap tuning is snake oil. .

Yes that's true. I've found that archtop guitar builders who've had training with violin builders build with parameters of sensibility that tend to be more deeply informed than, say, someone who's learned from Benedetto's book or a luthier who doesn't have as deep an understanding of the contributions of phase relationships and the role of wood harmonics and resonances.
There is a very wide spectrum of knowledge when it comes to the tuning of an instrument and too, there is a very wide spectrum of ability to appreciate the <10% difference that makes an instrument truly exceptional.

In the end, if it's a good match to what you do and it allows you to have your voice, it's the best instrument. Absolutely. Ed Bikert's tele. Not tap tuned. Perfect instrument.

[Sam Sherry]

In the end, if it's a good match to what you do and it allows you to have your voice, it's the best instrument. Absolutely.

When I was on the sales floor at LaSalle's in the mid-80s the guitar lead, Tom Baxer, told me: "Sam, everybody leaves the store convinced that they have just bought The One. And they're all correct . . . at least for a while."

[Archie]

Yes that's true. I've found that archtop guitar builders who've had training with violin builders build with parameters of sensibility that tend to be more deeply informed than, say, someone who's learned from Benedetto's book or a luthier who doesn't have as deep an understanding of the contributions of phase relationships and the role of wood harmonics and resonances.
There is a very wide spectrum of knowledge when it comes to the tuning of an instrument and too, there is a very wide spectrum of ability to appreciate the <10% difference that makes an instrument truly exceptional.

In the end, if it's a good match to what you do and it allows you to have your voice, it's the best instrument. Absolutely. Ed Bikert's tele. Not tap tuned. Perfect instrument.

I've not yet seen violin makers, who I mostly watch instead of guitar makers, overly fuss about tap tones, or a consistent thickness of the tops. They do obsess about the brace however and the bridge. That seems to be their number one concern. The placement of the tone brace and it's fitting to the arch, seems to be where most of the magic happens.

I'm hopefully going to visit a violin maker in Italy next year to learn some tricks of their trade.


Regarding the L4 and other Gibson archtops in the sub Citation category; I've never seen them recurve a top which would lead me to believe that they shape the braces for tone (maybe) but not the top itself. I think Heritage are the same.
A recurve usually occurs when the box is closed and the top and back are given a final adjustment.

Anyway, Jimmy Blue Note knows infinitely more than I do. I'll await his thoughts.

[Jimmy blue note]

I've not yet seen violin makers, who I mostly watch instead of guitar makers, overly fuss about tap tones, or a consistent thickness of the tops. They do obsess about the brace however and the bridge. That seems to be their number one concern. The placement of the tone brace and it's fitting to the arch, seems to be where most of the magic happens.

.

A violin, viola, and cello top and back are all tuned in extremely exacting ways. The specifications are a lot more standardized in the violin family craft because the dimensions are for a large part standardized. Yes there are long violas and short viola and the archings between a Strad, and Amati and a Guanari violin family are well known and rarely changed, each with its own characteristic sound and personality. Also the master and apprentice system is a lot stronger in violin craft so what you are taught and take for granted is the result of generations of luthiers passing that very information to the next generation largely unchanged. So they don't obsess on plate tuning as much as they just take it for granted that mastery involves these givens. Too, the driving system in a violin is one of constant input energy (the bow) so the unity of vibration is extremely interactive between the back and top through a sound post. A sound post that would tend to dampen a free vibrating top in a guitar would have a constant amount of bowed energy feeding the top and the back in a violin. That's why the placement of the tone bar and the post are so "obsessively" important: They're the variables in the system once the plates are carved.

Different beasts, same parentage in the cladogram of lutherie.
All this is to say there are LOTS more guitar luthiers with a much broader and more innovative take on what an archtop guitar is about. And there are a lot more mediocre builds who design by third party hearsay and experimental approximation than luthiers who have built violins under the apprenticeship, journeyman and master system or the guild system of European lutherie. In other words there are a lot more opinions than there are master builders who have a truly comprehensive idea of just what goes into a great archtop and how each of dozens of parameters effects the end result.

There's a whole lot better use of time learning to play the instrument in a personal way than there is in accumulating expertise in lutherie without experience. Try a masterfully built guitar at least once in your life. You'll understand the bar and why it's set so high.
Then go home and practice and get the most out of what you have. When the right one comes along, you'll have the chops and the experience to say "This is what I NEED to take me to the next level."
My opinion anyway.