jarrah for body

[black1]

is jarrah a good timber to make a solid body from. glued together 3x2. then cut and routed?
just happen to have some laying around

[kiwigeo]

Jarrah can be used for acoustic side/backs so it should be ok for a soild body. Its a very dense wood so youre going to end up with a very heavy guitar...might be worth considering creating some cavities in the body to lighten the instrument a bit.

[rhoads56]

Dont bother, the frequencies dont work well with solid bodies. All you'll end up with, are some blunt router bits, and an aching back.

[old_picker]

Dont bother, the frequencies dont work well with solid bodies. All you'll end up with, are some blunt router bits, and an aching back.

??
Pls explain what you mean by "the frequencies dont work well with solid bodies" :?

[kiwigeo]

I'm also all ears for an explanation. "The frequencies dont work" is an explanation I'd be happy with if I was at a New Age/Psychic Fair but we're in the Ubeaut Musical Instrument forum so I'd like to hear some reasoning behind the statement.

I dont see why you cant use Jarrah to make an electric guitar body....like I said its quite suitable for use on acoustic backs and sides......Ive got some of the stuff in my workshop. I reckon with my relatively crude guitar building skills I could turn far inferior timber into a passable electric instrument :D

[HiString]

Jarrah, because of it's nature, tends to favour "higher" frequencies, or at least gives that impression due to the way the timber affects the transmission of sound energy.

The resonant frequency of a "body" essentially depends on mass, size and cellular density (which ties in with mass), sure there are other factors but these are probably the most important.

:cool:

[kiwigeo]

A denser material transmits higher frequencies better agreed.....surely having cavities within the jarrah body reduces overall density and changes frequency response of the body.

[HiString]

Hmmmm..........cavities will reduce the mass (weight) but not the natural density of the timber. What effect they may have on the sound will likely vary, depending on timber species, cavity design and numerous other factors, then again depending on the individual block of wood they may not have any effect.

From my own "hands on" observations...........6 LP's in the studio here, two are chambered and there's no discernable difference that I could attribute to the chambered bodies. Each guitar has it's own subtle character sound, sustain, etc., but that is as you'd expect. Then I pick up my Patrick Eggle, small PRS'ish body, Mahogany with Maple cap, Ebony fretboard, etc., and it is so much brighter sounding that it's not funny, this is something that is "in built" in PEGs and is usually attributed to their smallish size.

I may be wrong but I feel that to get a "well rounded/balanced" sound out of a Jarrah body you would have to increase the size/mass considerably compared to a body made from the more common timbers.

Of course, a lot of this can possibly be balanced out by wise choices in pick ups and electronics.

:cool:

[rhoads56]

There is a reason why jarrah doesnt work. The tone it adds to the flavour, doesnt work as well as other timbers, in fact its almost as if it sucks the tone out of a guitar. It is dull sounding, very heavy, and harder to machine, compared with other more 'usual' timbers. But, by all means, dont take my word for it, go and build a few and see what you think. Compare them to ten or so other guitars youve built using 'known' guitar timbers, and the same design and construction methods, so you arent getting the 'my first guitar rocks!' bias.
Ive tried a lot of the local WA timbers (karri, jarrah, marri, to name a few), and none work well enough to substitute them for the usual timbers. Sure, they all have that 'aussie woods', and 'im different' vibe, but thats all they have going for them.

[Jackspira]

I don't have the experience with solid bodies, but I agree with Perry from the point of view of an acoustic maker. I've never heard a good jarrah guitar. Its funny how some woods just don't sound nice.
I've had a similar experience with Zebra wood (zebrano?) Looks great, sounds terrible!
I'm not sure I trust the stability of jarrah either, I feel it moves too much with changes in humidity.
I had an interesting and slightly related experience at the Port Fairy festival on the weekend. We got an interisting talk from an acoustics expert. One of the things he did was play a recording of a drone from a set of bagpipes, not the most pleasant sound in the world! He put it in a spectrum analising set up and found that the 11th harmonic was really loud compared to all the other overtones. The computer was able to edit out the 11th harmonic and the sound of the drone was greatly improved.
I guess the trick with jarrah would not so much be in finding the bad overtones, but figuring out how to edit them out!
jack

[rhoads56]

I had an interesting and slightly related experience at the Port Fairy festival on the weekend. We got an interisting talk from an acoustics expert. One of the things he did was play a recording of a drone from a set of bagpipes, not the most pleasant sound in the world! He put it in a spectrum analising set up and found that the 11th harmonic was really loud compared to all the other overtones. The computer was able to edit out the 11th harmonic and the sound of the drone was greatly improved.
I guess the trick with jarrah would not so much be in finding the bad overtones, but figuring out how to edit them out!
jack

That would be easy. Just remove the four screws that attach the neck, and replace the jarrah with alder/mahogany/swamp ash/etc :doh:

Ive also had numerous discussions with peers about jarrah (and other aussie timbers). No one likes it. Well, no one who makes a living from this craft, likes it. A lot of them OFFER Jarrah, purely to sell a guitar once a year to someone who must have an 'all aussie' guitar.

[kiwigeo]

Rhoads..thanks for elaborating on your previous statement. All interesting stuff, particularly Jacks comments re acoustics. Think I might haul out the Jarrah back/side set Ive got in my shop and knock up a steel string with same and see for myself.

[rhoads56]

Rhoads..thanks for elaborating on your previous statement. All interesting stuff, particularly Jacks comments re acoustics. Think I might haul out the Jarrah back/side set Ive got in my shop and knock up a steel string with same and see for myself.

make sure you build another, exactly the same, with more traditional woods to gauge the differences.

[black1]

thanks for all the info. but i will still make it from jarrah as it that or meranti, as that is all that is laying around here.:2tsup:

[black1]

thanks for all the info. but i will still make it from jarrah, as its that or meranti,(i think) as that is all that is laying around here.:2tsup:
might take a while to do but will post a pic when done.:2tsup:

[kiwigeo]

make sure you build another, exactly the same, with more traditional woods to gauge the differences.

Already have a pile of instruments to compare it against. It'll be a dreadnaught with a Sitka top and mahogany neck...exactly same as one just completed except for Jarrah back and sides.

Note that Im building an acoustic and youre talking electrics....with the latter youve just got one lump of wood with a neck attached. With an acoustic you've got a top, sides and back all contributing to the sound of the instrument.

[kiwigeo]

thanks for all the info. but i will still make it from jarrah, as its that or meranti,(i think) as that is all that is laying around here.:2tsup:
might take a while to do but will post a pic when done.:2tsup:

Sounds good Black1. And as soon as youve got the itch to build an electric out of your system well get you converted to the dark side and into making acoustics :D

[old_picker]

That would be easy. Just remove the four screws that attach the neck, and replace the jarrah with alder/mahogany/swamp ash/etc :doh:

Ive also had numerous discussions with peers about jarrah (and other aussie timbers). No one likes it. Well, no one who makes a living from this craft, likes it. A lot of them OFFER Jarrah, purely to sell a guitar once a year to someone who must have an 'all aussie' guitar.

Well I think Jim Dyson may disagree on that. (http://www.jimdysonguitars.com.au/tonedeluxe.html)

[dazzler]

is jarrah a good timber to make a solid body from. glued together 3x2. then cut and routed?
just happen to have some laying around

i would stick with latex....much more lifelike :2tsup:

[rhoads56]

Well I think Jim Dyson may disagree on that. (http://www.jimdysonguitars.com.au/tonedeluxe.html)

Making a body, is totally different to using it for a fretboard where its effect is a LOT less noticable. Either way, Jim is entitled to his opinion. I dont like it, but will still use it, at a higher cost to the client. Afterall, its their guitar, they can have whatever they like.

[old_picker]

"and other aussie timbers" is what you said.
Jims guitar is vic ash and jarrah
all "aussie timber"

[kiwigeo]

Ive just taken delivery of seven King Billy Pine tops...should I send them back?

[rhoads56]

"and other aussie timbers" is what you said.
Jims guitar is vic ash and jarrah
all "aussie timber"

Like timbers throughout the world, there are only a very very very small handful that work with stringed instruments. The thousands of other timbers are not as good, for various reasons. "Other" aussie timbers means 'selected other aussie timbers'. Sorry, i didnt think someone would take my post the wrong way, so i didnt bother with an extensive list. Either way, im not bothered, if you like jarrah, or Jim Dyson, thats fine by me.
I have thousands of dollars worth of aussie timbers here waiting to be used to build guitars, but i am selective in what i use. If you like jarrah, use it. I would prefer NOT to, and charge accordingly or simply decline the order. Afterall, it is my name on the headstock, and every guitar i build is an advert.
I am not totally against aussie timbers, in fact i have a special range coming soon that feature 'our' timbers, but its taken a while for me to qualify what works and what doesnt (for me). But the range of timbers i find suitable (and those thoughts and opinions seem to be simular for most pro's in this game) is extremely small.

[kiwigeo]

All your comments taken onboard Rhoads and appreciated. Ive got a fair bit of Aussie tonewood in my shop as well but have yet to use most of it. The King Billy Pine I received today is beautiful looking wood and it has a nice tap tone so Im confident Ill get a decent sounding acoustic out of the stuff. On set is an absolutely stunning looking figured top and is destined to go on a classical. My favourite for backs and sides is Tassie Blackwood. The Americans have cottoned onto this wood and if we Aussie luthiers dont start stock piling the stuff it'll all be disappearing across the Pacific.

Cheers Martin

[rhoads56]

The Americans have cottoned onto this wood and if we Aussie luthiers dont start stock piling the stuff it'll all be disappearing across the Pacific.



Already started :)

[JupiterCreek]

I've used it for smaller instruments... solidbody ukes in all sizes and electric mandolins. It worked well on those instruments. I built a tenor guitar with a jarrah body a while back and the tone was pretty average with a fairly quick decay to the sustain, so I wouldn't race out to build a guitar in jarrah.

If I'm building something for myself or just experimenting I build from all sorts of different timbers. If I'm building for a customer then I use timbers that I know will give the desired outcome. For example I've been using both Hoop pine and Jarrah for bodies on my Aussie oak necked lap steels, but in both cases the body is really just something to bolt the neck to and act as a platform for the pickup and controls.

[bricks]

Just like to add that I'm sure i've seen electric guitars made from all sorts of stuff including aluminium and plastic, Wood however is the most accepted material.
The build quality and type of construction seem to me to be the most critical.

[black_labb]

i was thinking of possibly using jarrah for a skunk stripe between 2 pieces of queensland maple for my next guitar ( just a thought, was planning on checking out how well it would work first) and thought this was a suitable place to ask. would the jarrah be a negative impact on the tone? it sounds like the jarrah would favour the higher frequencies but this being evened out a bit by the rounded sound from the queensland maple.

[willie]

i was thinking of possibly using jarrah for a skunk stripe between 2 pieces of queensland maple for my next guitar ( just a thought, was planning on checking out how well it would work first) and thought this was a suitable place to ask. would the jarrah be a negative impact on the tone? it sounds like the jarrah would favour the higher frequencies but this being evened out a bit by the rounded sound from the queensland maple.

For the sake of accuracy, it sounds like you are speaking of a laminated neck as opposed to a skunk stripe. A skunk stripe is simply a "plug" in a one piece maple (or other I suppose) neck. It allows the insertion of a truss rod in a solid neck.

More and more I notice skunk stripes on necks with fretboards. These are for looks only as the truss rod can be put in before the fretboard. I find this practice a little dubious as it seems to compromise structure for the sake of appearance.

[black_labb]

For the sake of accuracy, it sounds like you are speaking of a laminated neck as opposed to a skunk stripe. A skunk stripe is simply a "plug" in a one piece maple (or other I suppose) neck. It allows the insertion of a truss rod in a solid neck.

More and more I notice skunk stripes on necks with fretboards. These are for looks only as the truss rod can be put in before the fretboard. I find this practice a little dubious as it seems to compromise structure for the sake of appearance.


yes you are right, sorry about that. i would be installing the truss rod under the fretboard on a laminate neck. just wondering if the jarrah would make a good tonal contrast or wether it would detract from the sound

[old_picker]

This is a question that really has no answer.
traditional timbers usually give a good result ie maple, qld maple, walnut, mahogany etc
use non trad materials and you in no mans land kinda like a pioneer
best way is to try it out and see how it works.

All i can say about necks is 1/4 sawn is better than flat sawn. this gives a slightly stiffer neck which generally gives better tone. They reckon the fat necks also giver better tone.

generally laminates are stiff and strong so by extension your qld maple and jarrah laminate neck would work pretty good

i say go for it but post back and lets know how it sounds

[willie]

I agree. Laminates are a very stable construction be if for guitar, banjo whatever.
As far as the wood combination goes, I have no idea.
Try the Jarrah + Qld Maple. Nothing to lose. I doubt it would be awful or anything and it may be really good.

[black_labb]

thanks guys, i think ill try it, i ws going to do a neck through but im not sure now, either way i think ill give it a try. ive just purchased enough coiling wire to make 20 singlecoils so ill need a guitar to put them on(maybe not all 20 :))

[oz tradie]

I guess the proof is in the pudding. And no matter how much talk gets bandied around, no one person can really know ,one way or the other, what the tonal effects are with 'non-tonewoods' until they've experimented with them themselves.
My good mate Jon built an electric guitar with a blackwood body,
with a carve top cap in Jarrah, and that thing knocks my socks off !!:)

Needless to say, I'm doing one with a jarrah burl 8mm bookmatched cap.
I'm looking forward to see how it ends up, and either way, whether it ends up a fizzer or a real ripsnorter, it's all in the interests of learning and education.
It's not too far removed from the whole parenting thing,
where your parents told you something you shouldn't do but you had to go and do it anyway. Just to see what they were going on about.:B

cheers, Stu

[kiwigeo]

It's not too far removed from the whole parenting thing,
where your parents told you something you shouldn't do but you had to go and do it anyway. Just to see what they were going on about.:B

cheers, Stu

I often take that approach but before doing so I first look back and see how the master luthiers approached the same problem in the past.

[JupiterCreek]

Hi Martin

Therein lies the problem. Usually it's only the Americans who are pretentious enough to call themselves "master luthiers", and most Aussie makers who would possibly be up to the title tend to stick with "traditional" North American and European timbers, leaving just a few who are willing to experiment with local timber.

If Orville Gibson had been born in Victoria we'd consider blackwood and King Billy Pine to be traditional tonewoods. If C.F.Martin had been born in Queensland we'd consider Queensland maple and Bunya Pine to be traditional tonewoods.

There was a discussion on the MIMF a while back about what makes someone a master luthier. I think the consensus was handmaking 300 complete quality instruments... a lifetime of building! I'd rate people like the late Charlie Derrington or maybe Mario Proulx as Masters, but in every YouTube video you see on making a copy of someone famous' favourite solidbody there's some thirty-five year old guitarmaker being described as "Fred Smith, Master Luthier".

At the end of the day it's a collection of sticks that you glue or screw together, add some metal bits to, and if things go well it can be played and makes a pleasant sound. ;-)

[kiwigeo]

All good points Rob,

For the record I have a workshop full of traditional and Australian woods. My approach has been to start with a learning phase where I build mainly using traditional woods and following the designs and techniques of other makers. I also want to become more aware of the controls on the sound of an acoustic guitar and how to manipulate same. The field of plate tuning intrigues me and I'd like to get into same.....I guess its the scientist coming out in me. Ever since I started classical lessons at the age of 14, everytime Ive picked up a guitar theres always been a strong urge to see how the thing is made and poke around inside the soundhole with my fingers feeling the bracing etc.

Re Master Luthiers.....my own definition would be a person who has mastered the craft of building guitars. One could argue that even after a lifetime of building guitars many have often not fully "mastered" the craft. I guess in the context of my previous post a master luthier is anyone who knows a sh*t load more than me about building guitars! That would put you and many others in this forum with more experience than me in the category of master luthiers.

[Wood Butcher]

My sister is a professional cellist and owns some very high quality instruments (her cello is worth around $25,000). I asked her once what made a good cello maker and her reply is someone that can make an instrument that sounds fantastic...and then do it again and again.

I'd class a master luthier the same. someone that can make what many knowledgeable people would class a great guitar and then do it again and again.

[JupiterCreek]

Good point Wood Butcher.... I remember reading where someone (I think it may have been James Morrison but I can't be sure) said that an amateur is someone who practices until they get it right; a professional is someone who practices until they never get it wrong.

For my money a luthier is someone who has the knowledge and skills to make an acoustic instrument in the guitar/lute family. A master luthier is someone who has made vast numbers of high grade instruments and successfully passed the basics on to others. I guess I look at is as the old European apprentice/master relationship, but sometimes I think our US cousins just like adding an impressive adjective to the noun to gild the lily.

I mainly make small solidbody electric instruments, so I just call myself a maker of funny little guitars, but when the bank asked what my vocation was I said I was a guitarmaker, so I guess I gave myself an upgrade! :;