HarrisCustomGuitars

axisus

They look very excellent indeed! I would be interested in buying one but for the fact that I plan to build all my own guitars now. The one with the Macassar ebony top is right up my street!

Harriscustomguitars

Thanks guys. Yes the Macassar Ebony Top abraxis 6 really is sparking some interest, wouldn't surprise me if someone takes a liking at the show. And to think, this guitar was initially an afterthought, just to give you guys another guitar to look at and play the the show! There will be plenty more to come

sgosden

These look incredible, I'm itching to give one a try!

Just found out I might be working 27/28th, which is a bitch.

 

Harriscustomguitars

Twin 7 demo for all you good people out there, come and see it at the show, she'll be up for sale too!

sgosden, if we have any left after the show I'm sure we can arrange something for you

Harriscustomguitars

Harriscustomguitars

Usually the standard of timber only used on guitar tops. Prime Quarter sawn European Walnut, makes for beautiful shaping, and produces a beautiful warm tone, good sustain, yet dense enough to carry treble tone, without turning muggy. Oh, and it's beautiful!

Harriscustomguitars

Harriscustomguitars

The Abraxis in all her beauty. This one's from last year, and a semi hollow, but still one of the very best. Stunning ebony tops that we are able to consistently source thanks to great suppliers

Harriscustomguitars

What are people's preference when it comes to guitar tops and body timbers? Do you like ebony caps, flamed maple, solid Ash and Walnut bodies?........

Gassage

Harriscustomguitars said:

What are people's preference when it comes to guitar tops and body timbers? Do you like ebony caps, flamed maple, solid Ash and Walnut bodies?........

Great question.

My view- every piece of wood is different. Every single species has things I like and things I don't.

Like, a piece of swamp ash can have a gorgeous grain, like when it's very porous and and deep.

For me, a Les Paul should have a dirty, curly flame.
A PRS should be a ten top quilt or a quilted flame
An Anderson can have a pin straight tiger stripe
A Rosewood tele can have a deadly straight choc/black/purple grain
A rosewood cap neck looks stunning with birds' eye and a maple neck is better flamed.

And then it's the quality of the figuring...

And then you match the wood to guitar- I mean I'd never want a flamey strat top on a vintagey strat....

So basically, I've repeated to you exactly what you know I guess!!

Tonewoods the same- depends on what you want.

Harriscustomguitars

Haha fantastic, well I love to hear what potential customers like, then it's the timber that I source and hand pick, ready for builds

Personally, as a builder, I love to work with the exotic, and also the most tonally rich timbers. Dark quartersawn Indian Rosewood, coupled with an exotic fingerboard, or a limba body with a macassar ebony top is absolutely stunning in person. The sheer beauty of a heavily flamed maple cap can never get too much though, nature really is incredible!

Harriscustomguitars

Harriscustomguitars

An early, solid European Walnut twin 6, not everyone's cup of tea, but tonally, it's superb, coupled with a Cuban mahogany neck, she sounds almost dreamy!

Gassage

Harriscustomguitars said:

Haha fantastic, well I love to hear what potential customers like, then it's the timber that I source and hand pick, ready for builds

Personally, as a builder, I love to work with the exotic, and also the most tonally rich timbers. Dark quartersawn Indian Rosewood, coupled with an exotic fingerboard, or a limba body with a macassar ebony top is absolutely stunning in person. The sheer beauty of a heavily flamed maple cap can never get too much though, nature really is incredible!

We should have a thread with luthiers actually posting hi-res fine examples of tonewoods and timbers and explaing/debating the tonewood properties as few of us really understand this fully.

Deadly serious- doesn't need to plug brands, just like a bluffer's guide?

@ttony @felineguitars ? @wezv How about it?

WezV

The problem would be people take it as gospel.

Its not. It's a fuzzy rough guide to one of the many factors

I have moved away from pretty exotics to simpler builds with simpler woods. I still get excited by exotic wood, but my favourite guitars are the most basic and I have to remind myself of that every so often.

Gassage

WezV said:

The problem would be people take it as gospel.

Its not. It's a fuzzy rough guide at best.

Really?

I'm pretty knowlegable about cricket bat timber properties. It's fuzzy with that too and I understand what you mean- however, one weird thing- when a bat looks REALLY stunning, it normally is (straight dark grains on very white wood like below).

But even explaining the visual properties is useful on guitar woods

WezV

really

perfect example of someone being disappointed because the whole guitar does not match their expectations of a hyped "tonewood" .   It ignores a few hundred design decisions which may not be suited to that player and places the blame for their disappointment purely on the wood choice

http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/comment/954854

Gassage

WezV said:

really

perfect example of someone being disappointed because the whole guitar does not match their expectations of a hyped "tonewood" .   It ignores a few hundred design decisions which may not be suited to that player and places the blame for their disappointment purely on the wood choice

http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/comment/954854

My point is that tonewoods are not bad, good or whatever. They are what they are-

what is generally bright, dark, snappy, deep, bassy, middy is the thing I really don't know much about.

Harriscustomguitars

I couldn't agree more guys,

Unfortunately, the sheer amount of work a man has to pass through his hands to seriously understand the tonal qualities of individual timbers, only comes to those who do this day in/ day out, or play, day in/ day out. There are always going to be those who have negative comments toward it, and those who profess to tell us our jobs, when they read it off another forum. Being a full time cabinet maker, as well as luthier, puts me in a very privileged position when it's comes to high end timbers.

And as you said, the tonal property of a guitars timbers, is only a very small part of the puzzle. Without high end electronics, a seriously stable neck, a properly routed and fitted neck joint and accurately set up guitar, the timbers will make no odds bar aesthetics. On high end instruments though, they play a larger part. The way the timber transmits vibrations, creating a different feel, really does effect the overall character. Another reason why I try and persuade my customers to atleast have the back of their guitar in a natural finish, although polyester really does offer a lot to a player, with regard to aesthetics, durability ect..

but that's a whole different story!

Keep it up guys

HCG

WezV

Gassage said:

WezV said:

really

perfect example of someone being disappointed because the whole guitar does not match their expectations of a hyped "tonewood" .   It ignores a few hundred design decisions which may not be suited to that player and places the blame for their disappointment purely on the wood choice

http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/comment/954854

My point is that tonewoods are not bad, good or whatever. They are what they are-

what is generally bright, dark, snappy, deep, bassy, middy is the thing I really don't know much about.

I agree with that but they are not always what they are

lets take mahogany

My preference is for straight grained quartersawn mineral rich mahogany for necks and flatsawn lightweight mahogany for bodies.  I will freely admit thats driven by a love of vintage gibsons - but when i repeat that it gives good results both tonally and ergonomically (if an LP can ever be described as ergonomic).  

Its a pretty well balanced combo for a blues player, but becomes a muddy combo for a metal player. Use that quartersawn mineral rich mahogany on the body and you get something the metal player can live with, the blues player finds a bit harsh - and both find too heavy.  

So then you chamber it.  You lose the metal player, but are looking after the blues players backs and it gets you part way back towards that flatsawn lightweight body

wood is one choice.  Construction is another, hardware another and pickups/wiring  the final one 

with mahogany for all but the fretboard you could make a guitar to suit  player just with relevant hardware and construction choices.   The same is true for ash and alder and any other reasonably weighted wood as long as you allow for a stiffer neck wood in the mix too

I find almost all wood beautiful in some way, simple woods can be just as enchanting as highly figured stuff ad really that's all just for the player and nothing to do with tone.  I don't find the cricket bat woodpretty in the pic, but i am sure if I was holding it, moving it in sunlight and tapping it to hear the donk I would change my mind quite quickly.

DO you know old violins were build with flamed maple because it was scrap?  There is even a luthiery myth that it is oars sold by Turks to Armenians or something  like that.  Basically an oar made out of flamed maple is a bad idea and eventually results in driftwood which was then used to make violins.  that may not be true, but the fact violins were made with cheap wood no one else wanted does seem to be.  

We now associate figured wood with good tone, even though structurally its less than ideal and those old violin makers will have had to allow for that.  The exact same thing can be seen with swamp ash, which was rejected by everyone 25 years ago because its structurally crap.  real swamp ash, or punk ash as it used to be known in america, is super light and structural shit.  Most of the swamp ash I buy these days is  average guitar weight, it used to be lightweight.  i remember tossing a blank at a mate and seeing the fear in his eyes until he caught it and realised it weighed as much as a sponge 

but thats all probably for another thread.  I own a john birch which is solid plain looking rock maple and sounds amazing.  it defies most "tonewood" discussions.  John birch did not believe wood was important at all, he basically factored it out of the builds.   This is similar to those old yamaha SG'sthat where built for weight because weight equalled tone.    I personally think its more important to have a builder who knows what they think is important.  Its not about the wood used, its about the builders focus