Posted on July 5, 2024May 15, 2025 by Dale Phillips The Case for Using Natural Dyes The Case for Using Natural Dyes by Nicholas Von Robison Originally published in Guild of American Luthiers Quarterly Volume 11, #1, 1983 and Big Red Book of American Lutherie, Volume One, 2000 Luthiers do not need to color their raw materials as much as other woodworkers. We use fine woods that can stand on their own merit without any help from the dye pot. But now and then we do find a need for dyes: for example, for rosettes, bindings, taking grey streaks from ebony, enhancing the color cast of wood, and tinting finishes. In 1856 young William Henry Perkin was trying to synthesize quinine but instead wound up with a black tarry mess. This was mauveine, the first of the coal-tar derived dyes. By 1900 the aniline dyes (coal-tar derived) had virtually replaced all other dye materials. Up to this point, dyeing was done with naturally occurring materials and was more of an art than a science. With aniline dyes results were predictable, repeatable, stable, nonfading, and a heck of a lot simpler. There was bound to be a reaction, of course. The art of natural dyeing is returning to the amateur weavers and textile artists; I doubt if woodworkers will be far behind. Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page. If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on July 5, 2024May 15, 2025 by Dale Phillips Two Tuvan Instruments Two Tuvan Instruments by Thomas Johnson Originally published in American Lutherie #98, 2009 Originally, the igil and morin khuur (also spelled morin huur) were made by nomadic people with rudimentary tools. Instrument making in Tuva remains a cottage industry, and the master makers have mostly died off without leaving a trained younger generation. It can be difficult to find wood big enough for Tuvan instruments, and it is becoming common practice to build up the piece by gluing extra bits on. For example, the height of the horse’s head above the fingerboard of an igil is enough to significantly increase the block of wood required. A maker can easily use a smaller block and, using a piece cut from it, add to the height by gluing it to the top. As the wood is from the same block, it can be fairly invisible. This is also possible for the soundbox and the fingerboard; two equal-sized cheeks can be added to either side to enable the correct dimension to be achieved. Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page. If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on July 4, 2024May 22, 2025 by Dale Phillips Questions: Instrument Plan #36 Questions: Instrument Plan #36 by Scot Tremblay Originally published in American Lutherie #101, 2010 Bob Barnard from Olympia, Washington asks: I just finished making a copy of the 1816 Martínez Salon Guitar from GAL Instrument Plan #36. I strung it up with Aquila Alabastro classical guitar strings (normal tension) to pitch (A440). It was overpowered and did not have the right tone or response. I lowered the pitch a whole step and it improved substantially, leading me to think the string tension is too high. Any suggestions on appropriate string tension for this wonderful little guitar? Plan author Scot Tremblay from Victoria BC responds: My preference in strings for most smaller Early Romantic guitars, including the Martínez, is the La Bella ERG #1 or the La Bella 2001L Light Tension strings. I think it’s best to keep the tension to 5.5–6.5KG/string. Because of the 614MM string length of the Martínez you are going to get closer to 5KG/string which should be fine.
Posted on July 1, 2024May 22, 2025 by Dale Phillips Questions: Instrument Plan #39 Questions: Instrument Plan #39 by Deb Suran Originally published in American Lutherie #101, 2010 Remco Busink from the Netherlands asks: Two months ago I ordered GAL Instrument Plan #39 of the hammered dulcimer. The instrument is almost finished and I need to know what the numbers are in the string gauge table. Plan author Deb Suran of Deer Isle, Maine responds: The numbers are W&M music wire gauges. I would suggest purchasing plated music wire from a supplier to the music trades (piano / harpsichord / dulcimer strings), and not from a hardware store or industrial supplier. Hardware store wire is oiled, not plated, and will rust.
Posted on July 1, 2024May 22, 2025 by Dale Phillips Letter: Technical Qualm with Jim Blilie’s Article in AL#100 Letter: Technical qualm with Jim Blilie’s article in AL #100 by Alan Carruth Originally published in American Lutherie #101, 2010 Tim — I really enjoyed AL#100. It’s a nice mix of “technoid,” “art,” and “craft” articles. Lots of good info, but I did see a couple of things I wanted to respond to. First, in Jim Blilie’s article, which was excellent overall, I have a disagreement that rises above the level of minor. He says, on p. 31: “The fact that the relationship between stiffness (Young’s modulus) and density is inherently linear shows that just changing wood species doesn’t affect the stiffness-to-weight ratio very much.” The problem with that is, while the lengthwise Young’s modulus (E) values for both hardwoods and softwoods tend to fall on straight lines, they are different lines, owing to differences in basic structure in the woods. I’ve been measuring the properties of wood samples for several years. I’m enclosing a graph of long grain E vs. density for most of the pieces I’ve measured so far (147 samples), with eyeballed “average” lines drawn in. The softwoods include all of the usual-suspect top woods, as well as white pine and Mediterranean cypress. As you can see, the points fall very close to a straight line toward the left side of the chart. The hardwoods include a lot of lutherie woods (most of the samples are Indian rosewood), and some others, with balsa and blackwood being the end points. As you can see, the scatter of the points is greater, but they do at least suggest a line. One could, of course, draw a single line that took in all of the data points, but at the cost of accepting quite a lot more scatter in the softwood data. Given the relative homogeneity of softwood structure, this seems unwarranted. Besides, the resulting line would not approach the origin at all closely, which would be illogical. As is, the hardwood line is in no way an extension of the softwood line. Balsa, and yew, ’way down on the left, overlap the softwood area, as do a few of the softer hardwoods, such as butternut. Still, compared with the softwoods, hardwoods tend to have higher density for the equivalent E value. Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page. If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
