Never in the history of luthiery has so much thought and ingenuity gone into the construction of a guitar. I want one of these guitars. I'm going to make it a goal to own one! Absolutely unparalleled beauty!
Thank you for these videos. I'm a huge admirer of your guitars and designs and watching has given me great inspiration to build better and more innovative guitars myself.
That alignment bushing is seriously cool, and I can't wait for a more in-depth look at the whole neck system! The geometry is what confused me the most (and still does!)
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 It's great! It's all lathe work, which is always a ton of fun. I recently figured out how to add neck angle, which has really compacted the whole design. Also - poor cat!
I remember listening to the Luthier On Luthier podcast and being most intrigued by the episode with Ken Parker (there my have been more than one if I remember right). I really appreciate the drive to take guitar design to new heights and possibilities. Very interesting comment about relieving the top material within the square hole so there is not tension against the top. I’ve heard other builders speak of similar intentions while building in order to not build tension “into” the instrument. Cool stuff!
There is plenty of force on the top exerted by the strings through the block/top structure, and I certainly do want to load the top with the compressive forces of the strings. I think it's important. I guess I wasn't clear, but I was referring to the neck pin getting involved with the end grain in the front of the pocket, which can stress the top and crack it, ask me how I know. In other words, I need to remove a little end grain material on the compression side of the neck pin to keep it from getting pressure on the end grain at the top in the hole. Make sense?
There's something elvishly intrigueing about your designs and seeing them being realised by hand without as much as a pencil line for reference. I do wonder though if one wouldn't want action adjustments to have a larger effect on the bass than on the treble strings? I definitely tweak my lowly adjustable saddle more on the bass side. Maybe you already get some of that if the saddle is cut to give a higher action on the bass side (I'd have to do the math) but if not (or if that's not enough), could the mechanism be adapted to achieve this effect?
Thanks for your praise, I'm having a blast! I measure action as the space between the bottom of the string and the 12th fret's top surface, while the string is fretted gently at the first fret so as to take the nut height out of the measurement. Although some players will want their strings higher or lower, most acoustic guitar players will be comfortable with the action set at .090" at the bass E, and .070'' at the treble e string. (2.3mm - 1.8mm) For electric guitars, the numbers are more like .070" and .050". (1.8mm - 1.3mm) The idea is that the treble e string is set about 25% lower than the bass E string. Although most players will find that this 25% Delta works very well, there are some who want a slightly different setup, something easily adjusted by the builder or repair technician by filing the slots in the bridge top. For me, adding a mechanical system to adjust the E - e action difference would be complex, and not often used, as this is normally a "set and forget" relationship for most of us. Sometimes arranging for the "convenience" of adjustment is clearly inconvenient, all told. PS, "Delta" (△) is useful math lingo meaning "Change of any changeable quantity, in mathematics and the sciences"
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 I hope you're having a blast even without (my) praise! ;) I hear you on the cost of adjustability but as a purely acoustic fingerpicker I like to dig in and thus appreciate the possibility to *raise* just the bass-side action a bit when needed, like when going into drop-D. Then again I get by without any on-the-fly action adjustment on my classical and resonator...
Um, not yet, but hang in there. First big project is to fully explore the design and making of plates, about which there is nearly Zero useful info to be had. My neck construction will be fully explained when I'm done with the body. There are lots of viable ways to build an adjustable neck, and I expect to see them more and more, it's so better.
I would imagine that while the tolerance is pretty tight (where the neck interfaces into the square aluminum piece) there is some space. Do you use anything like dampening grease?
There's around .005" clearance between the carbon/epoxy neck pin and the square aluminum socket. The neck pin is loaded at the front of the top of the socket, and at the bottom of the back of the socket, as you might imagine. I want a nice solid connection for energy transfer, and this is a fine way to get it. Here's a place I don't want any dampening. If you're suspecting that the neck might rattle around in the socket, I can assure you that the 165# of force that a set of .012" - .053" bronze wound strings applies is not gonna let that happen!
I assumed the neck post connected with the sliding aluminium element but couldn't work out how. Weirdly (because I've been thinking about this for a while) as I type I've just realised the answer to my question is probably that it doesn't attach to the sliding block at all - it just rests on it, kept in place by the pressure from the strings. Is that right? If that's happening, and the neck post is held against its hole by string pressure, it seems the strings are actually a structural element in the design. In a sense I suppose they must always be, but this has echoes of tensegrity structures. Or have I got it all wrong? Wouldn't be the first time ;¬)
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 Hi Ken Thanks for this - I'm always so impressed that you find the time and benevolence to respond to these dumb questions ;¬) Have to say though that I still don't feel I've really got to the bottom of this joint. I couldn't reconcile the apparent use of one screw to both lock in the neck *and* adjust its position, which seem like contradictory requirements, hence my question. Strings alone just doesn't seem like enough - what happens when the guitar is unstrung? Anyway, not to worry - I guess I'll have to wait for the remaining videos to arrive - luckily the journey is just as entertaining as the destination ;¬)
That's a long story, and it's quite a complex process. We'll get to the neck in full detail, but first, I'll show how to create a sensitive top plate, which is the heart of the archtop guitar!
I’m not a luthier but it seems there would be ZERO forgiveness regarding any unwanted off axis-ness regarding how the block/tube gets fitted to the back of the neck. Seems one degree off could cause the low E string to be too far inside the neck, while the high E would be falling off the fingerboard’s edge. Seems like a job for CNC but the fact you’re doing it by hand is mind blowing to me.
As a non-luthier, you are correctly tuned in to the very low "rotational" tolerances required by this method. Next series is the building of the neck, and I'll better show how this all works. The name of this segment starts with the word Discovery, and I used it to suggest that the neck block and thin wall aluminum tube that accepts the neck pin already exist, we're just removing the top material that covers the opening after it's glued on. I install the tube in my Bridgeport milling machine, carefully aligning the rim assembly while firmly clamped in a mold. CNC is great if you're making many identical things, but isn't right for this job. By the way, let's always remember that supremely accurate work was done in many fields, all over the planet without the use of newcomer CNC.
Genius on a depth not seen in ages.
Funny, I often feel out of my depth, but thanks anyway. The big benefit of aging is the potential to know a thing or two about a thing or two!
I don't know what I love the most your guitars or the tools you created to build them
I feel the same way!
This is amazing. Simply amazing.
Thanks!
Never in the history of luthiery has so much thought and ingenuity gone into the construction of a guitar. I want one of these guitars. I'm going to make it a goal to own one! Absolutely unparalleled beauty!
Thanks, Martin!
Thank you for these videos. I'm a huge admirer of your guitars and designs and watching has given me great inspiration to build better and more innovative guitars myself.
Great to hear!
You have left us all in suspence!!!...look forward to the rest Ken!...such an incredible idea!!
Patience! Plate carving before necks, I'm afraid! We'll get there and then some.
I appreciate watching a Master at work
Me too, and I've had the pleasure to work with several of them.
I fell in love with this guitar! Every little detail is thought thru, everything has its purpose and reason.
Thanks! Obsession + Decades seems to be the formula.
Always thrilled when you have more to share with us. Thanks Ken!
My pleasure
As always, thank you for sharing all this with us younger guitar makers. You're an inspiration. Cheers.
Best luck in your work, work safely and get lots done!
That alignment bushing is seriously cool, and I can't wait for a more in-depth look at the whole neck system! The geometry is what confused me the most (and still does!)
There's a lot of ways to skin this cat, as you have helped demonstrate! How do you like the two pin system I've seen you use?
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 It's great! It's all lathe work, which is always a ton of fun. I recently figured out how to add neck angle, which has really compacted the whole design. Also - poor cat!
your take on it is pretty nice
At 1:14 "That's kinda cool." The understatement of the year!
Yeah, Heels are in the way, and present all kinds of problems. Let's lose 'em!
Maestro!
MyMannski!
Beautiful, all of it!
Thanks
Genius. Thank you.
Thanks, but it's really just hi stakes woodworking!
I've wondered how that system works. Ingenious!
Thanks, The rest of it comes next with the neck series.
Well young man that is terrific ,thanks for sharing .More please !
More to come!
hey Ken i m still playing your fly till the ninety thank you!
Nice!
Such an elegant solution. Thanks for sharing it with us.
My pleasure!
I remember listening to the Luthier On Luthier podcast and being most intrigued by the episode with Ken Parker (there my have been more than one if I remember right). I really appreciate the drive to take guitar design to new heights and possibilities. Very interesting comment about relieving the top material within the square hole so there is not tension against the top. I’ve heard other builders speak of similar intentions while building in order to not build tension “into” the instrument. Cool stuff!
There is plenty of force on the top exerted by the strings through the block/top structure, and I certainly do want to load the top with the compressive forces of the strings. I think it's important. I guess I wasn't clear, but I was referring to the neck pin getting involved with the end grain in the front of the pocket, which can stress the top and crack it, ask me how I know. In other words, I need to remove a little end grain material on the compression side of the neck pin to keep it from getting pressure on the end grain at the top in the hole. Make sense?
Oh, I see.
spectacular idea would love one of these
Good Idea!
Thanks
Welcome!
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for watching!
Absolute genius!!
It's all the product of head scratching, believe me, but thanks!
Nice #riff...Dude!! "then, I turn the circle into a square..." of course...
Square the circle, haven't I heard that somewhere before?
There's something elvishly intrigueing about your designs and seeing them being realised by hand without as much as a pencil line for reference. I do wonder though if one wouldn't want action adjustments to have a larger effect on the bass than on the treble strings? I definitely tweak my lowly adjustable saddle more on the bass side. Maybe you already get some of that if the saddle is cut to give a higher action on the bass side (I'd have to do the math) but if not (or if that's not enough), could the mechanism be adapted to achieve this effect?
Thanks for your praise, I'm having a blast!
I measure action as the space between the bottom of the string and the 12th fret's top surface, while the string is fretted gently at the first fret so as to take the nut height out of the measurement.
Although some players will want their strings higher or lower, most acoustic guitar players will be comfortable with the action set at .090" at the bass E, and .070'' at the treble e string. (2.3mm - 1.8mm)
For electric guitars, the numbers are more like .070" and .050". (1.8mm - 1.3mm)
The idea is that the treble e string is set about 25% lower than the bass E string.
Although most players will find that this 25% Delta works very well, there are some who want a slightly different setup, something easily adjusted by the builder or repair technician by filing the slots in the bridge top.
For me, adding a mechanical system to adjust the E - e action difference would be complex, and not often used, as this is normally a "set and forget" relationship for most of us.
Sometimes arranging for the "convenience" of adjustment is clearly inconvenient, all told.
PS, "Delta" (△) is useful math lingo meaning "Change of any changeable quantity, in mathematics and the sciences"
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 I hope you're having a blast even without (my) praise! ;) I hear you on the cost of adjustability but as a purely acoustic fingerpicker I like to dig in and thus appreciate the possibility to *raise* just the bass-side action a bit when needed, like when going into drop-D. Then again I get by without any on-the-fly action adjustment on my classical and resonator...
are there any videos on the construction of the neck?
Um, not yet, but hang in there.
First big project is to fully explore the design and making of plates, about which there is nearly Zero useful info to be had.
My neck construction will be fully explained when I'm done with the body.
There are lots of viable ways to build an adjustable neck, and I expect to see them more and more, it's so better.
I would imagine that while the tolerance is pretty tight (where the neck interfaces into the square aluminum piece) there is some space. Do you use anything like dampening grease?
There's around .005" clearance between the carbon/epoxy neck pin and the square aluminum socket.
The neck pin is loaded at the front of the top of the socket, and at the bottom of the back of the socket, as you might imagine. I want a nice solid connection for energy transfer, and this is a fine way to get it.
Here's a place I don't want any dampening. If you're suspecting that the neck might rattle around in the socket, I can assure you that the 165# of force that a set of .012" - .053" bronze wound strings applies is not gonna let that happen!
made from the Tree... no big deal haha.. Amazing video!
Thanks for watching!
The Tree is very special tonewood...
I assumed the neck post connected with the sliding aluminium element but couldn't work out how. Weirdly (because I've been thinking about this for a while) as I type I've just realised the answer to my question is probably that it doesn't attach to the sliding block at all - it just rests on it, kept in place by the pressure from the strings. Is that right?
If that's happening, and the neck post is held against its hole by string pressure, it seems the strings are actually a structural element in the design. In a sense I suppose they must always be, but this has echoes of tensegrity structures.
Or have I got it all wrong? Wouldn't be the first time ;¬)
Sounds pretty familiar to me, you sorted it out. The aluminum tube is glued to the neckblock, and the strings hold it all together.
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 Hi Ken
Thanks for this - I'm always so impressed that you find the time and benevolence to respond to these dumb questions ;¬)
Have to say though that I still don't feel I've really got to the bottom of this joint. I couldn't reconcile the apparent use of one screw to both lock in the neck *and* adjust its position, which seem like contradictory requirements, hence my question. Strings alone just doesn't seem like enough - what happens when the guitar is unstrung?
Anyway, not to worry - I guess I'll have to wait for the remaining videos to arrive - luckily the journey is just as entertaining as the destination ;¬)
You're close, you'll see
@@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 I'm looking forward to it!
Got it! Clever :¬) @@kenparkerarchtoppery9440
Amazing! But how to you make the neck part? The square on the neck, how is it fixed to the neck? :)
That's a long story, and it's quite a complex process. We'll get to the neck in full detail, but first, I'll show how to create a sensitive top plate, which is the heart of the archtop guitar!
Yikes that started getting scary. Hands and nerves of steel needed.
I'll admit that I need to enter a certain state of mind for this little task.
I’m not a luthier but it seems there would be ZERO forgiveness regarding any unwanted off axis-ness regarding how the block/tube gets fitted to the back of the neck. Seems one degree off could cause the low E string to be too far inside the neck, while the high E would be falling off the fingerboard’s edge. Seems like a job for CNC but the fact you’re doing it by hand is mind blowing to me.
As a non-luthier, you are correctly tuned in to the very low "rotational" tolerances required by this method.
Next series is the building of the neck, and I'll better show how this all works.
The name of this segment starts with the word Discovery, and I used it to suggest that the neck block and thin wall aluminum tube that accepts the neck pin already exist, we're just removing the top material that covers the opening after it's glued on.
I install the tube in my Bridgeport milling machine, carefully aligning the rim assembly while firmly clamped in a mold. CNC is great if you're making many identical things, but isn't right for this job.
By the way, let's always remember that supremely accurate work was done in many fields, all over the planet without the use of newcomer CNC.