Posted on

About Alcohols Used as Solvents in French Polishing

About Alcohols Used as Solvents in French Polishing

by R.M. Mottola

Originally published in American Lutherie #105, 2011



Most any kind of pure or nearly pure simple alcohol can be used as a solvent for shellac, because shellac will dissolve completely in any of them. But the choice of what kind of alcohol to use gets complicated pretty fast when issues of application, availability, price, and safety are considered. The two most common choices for shellac solvents for use in French polishing are ethanol and denatured alcohol, which is nominally ethanol to which some poisonous substance(s) has been added to make it undrinkable. Both of these are discussed here in terms of all of the qualities listed above.

The research behind this article is one of those good examples of one thing leading to another. We were discussing the general availability of ethanol around the American Lutherie cyber water cooler one day, and this led to the realization that both Contributing Editor Cyndy Burton and I suffered from burning eyes when we have used denatured alcohol. This seemed odd, given the generally accepted belief of what is used to denature alcohol (methanol) and how little of it (5%) we believe there is in the mix. This in turn led to a detailed look at denatured alcohols, in terms of chemistry and safety, and this turned up information which I thought fascinating enough to share.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of the Articles Online featured on our website for Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. For details, visit the membership page.

MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.

Posted on

Classical Guitar Setup

Classical Guitar Setup

by Kevin Aram

from his 2014 GAL Convention workshop

Originally published in American Lutherie #132, 2017



Thank you for turning out. I appreciate it. I put on this natty little microphone and now I feel like Dolly Parton at Glastonbury — without, of course, the rhinestones. (laughter)

Bringing one of my guitars with me wasn’t possible, so a couple days ago I bought a guitar in Seattle for demo purposes. It’s brand new, cost about $300, is mass-produced in China, and has a solid top. Because I want to talk about setup from different angles, I’ll use this guitar, and assume you are interested in building new guitars and repairing older ones as well.

To me, setting up a classical guitar means making it play as easily and as in tune as possible, and to make it sound as good as possible. And, most importantly, it must meet the player’s satisfaction. If you’re making a guitar for yourself, you just make it to suit you. Obviously, if you are making guitars for other people, then you have to take into account the way they play. Some people want a guitar that is harder to play. They’ve got a strong technique and they physically need to dig into the strings when they play. No two players are the same, so no two setups are the same. It’s a very personal thing. It’s a balance; on one side is “ease of playing” and on the other “tone” or “quality of sound.” Basically, the higher the action on the guitar, the harder it is to play and the more volume it will produce — all things being equal. The lower the action, the easier it is to play, the quieter it will be, and it will be more prone to buzzing and problems in the sound.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of the Articles Online featured on our website for Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. For details, visit the membership page.

MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.

Posted on

It Worked for Me: Neck Angle Accuracy

It Worked for Me: Neck Angle Accuracy

by Kevin Rielly

Originally published in American Lutherie #119, 2014



The last instrument I made was based on plans for a 1957 Gibson J-45, an instrument I’ve always admired. The plans called for the neck to be set at an angle of 88.5°. Given my tools at hand, achieving such accuracy would be a daunting task. Other factors to consider that affect the neck angle are the angle of the sides to the top, and the arching of the top.

In their book Guitarmaking: Tradition and Technology, Cumpiano and Natelson say that if a straightedge is placed down the center of the fretboard to the bridge, there should be no more than 1/16" and no less than 1/64" clearance between the straightedge and the bridge. Such clearance would allow for a saddle about 1/8" tall. To help me mark the correct angle to achieve this end, I developed a neck angle jig.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of the Articles Online featured on our website for Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. For details, visit the membership page.

MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.

Posted on

1930 Santos Hernández Guitar with Segovia’s Autograph

1930 Santos Hernández Guitar with Segovia’s Autograph

by Jeffrey R. Elliott

Originally published in American Lutherie #115, 2013



A few years ago, after I had all but ceased accepting repairs in order to concentrate on my own commissions, I was asked to do a repair that I just couldn’t turn down. The owner had inherited a 1930 Santos Hernández classical guitar, which hadn’t been played in decades, and wanted to put it on the market. Universally recognized as one of the most revered of Spanish makers (so much so that he is simply referred to as “Santos”), Santos Hernández has long been one of my heroes of lutherie, and as I was confident that I could do what it needed, I gladly accepted.

Santos Rodríguez Hernández (1874–1943) began building guitars in 1890, apprenticed to Valentín Viudes, and in 1895 joined the workshop of Manuel Ramírez where he refined his craft alongside Manuel for twenty-one years, and eventually became foreman. When Manuel died in 1916, Santos ran the workshop for Manuel’s widow for another five years.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of the Articles Online featured on our website for Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. For details, visit the membership page.

MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.

Posted on

Taming the Wild Wood Binding

Taming the Wild Wood Binding

by Tom Harper

Originally published in American Lutherie #114, 2013



Like many folks, I built my first guitar following the book Guitarmaking: Tradition and Technology by William Cumpiano and Jonathan Natelson. Every task had me holding my breath and hoping for a good outcome. It pretty much worked; by the time I finished the book, I was the proud owner of what could be the world’s ugliest guitar, but it was still a guitar.

The book’s introduction to the binding and purfling process states, “Purflings should be restricted to veneer lines around the soundboard, back, and back stripe.” I followed the dictum, completing my first guitar blissfully unaware of the pitfalls awaiting me when I would attempt to add side purfling. I didn’t have long to wait. Guitar #2 was my first attempt to incorporate side purflings. I wish I could jump in the Wayback machine and review the disaster that unfolded. It never crossed my mind to try to bend them to shape before attempting to glue them in with the binding. What a mess. There were also gaps between the plates and the bindings that had to be filled. Gaps continued to be a problem for a number of my beginning instruments.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of the Articles Online featured on our website for Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. For details, visit the membership page.

MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.