Posted on July 7, 2024July 9, 2024 by Dale Phillips Monochord Enthusiasts “Dig” Colo. Monochord Enthusiasts “Dig” Colo. “14,000 Feet and Beyond” Proclaims Participant by Bonnie Carol Originally published in Guild of American Luthiers Newsletter Vol. 4, #4, 1976 Note: The following is a report on the “In Search of the Wild Dulcimer, Kindred Gathering II”, held August 13, 14, 15, 1976. We dulcimer players got together at a 130 acre homestead in the Colorado Rockies near Fort Collins. It all began with the arrival of Janette Gould, Robert Force, Albert d’Ossche, Ian, Neal, Sally and Shilo Hellman, a week or so in advance. We all fixed trucks, dug outhouses, hiked into snowstorms at 14,000 feet and beyond, ate meals prepared by professional cooks, Neal and Sally, and even played dulcimer on occasion. The festival included workshops of “Rhythm” (Albert d’Ossche), “Fingerpicking” (Bonnie Carol and Roger Harris), “Mode within Modes” (Neal Hellman), “Moving with Voice” (opera as learned in Southwestern New Mexico from an Italian opera singer by Robert and Janette), “Blues Dulcimer” (by some California folks with chromatic dulcimers with guitar-like necks, Robert and Susan Cole and Mark and Julie Warner), “Building” (Roger Harris and Bonnie Carol), and probably others that I didn’t hear about. Many impromptu jams and occurrences — including a banjo (played by Blind Boy d’Ossche), fiddle, kazzo, and even dulcimer reveille on Sunday; square dancing with a live Colorado caller, Connie Baker; and a Saturday night fireside song swap. What more could we want? ◆
Posted on July 5, 2024July 8, 2024 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, 2024July 9, 2024 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, 2024July 9, 2024 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, 2024July 9, 2024 by Dale Phillips Questions: Instrument Plan #33 Questions: Instrument Plan #33 by R.E. Bruné Originally published in American Lutherie #101, 2010 Joe Franklin of Whitesburg, Tennessee asks: Regarding GAL Instrument Plan #33 (1937 Hauser by R.E. Bruné): Are the depth dimensions as annotated on the back view the inside or outside dimensions? Plan author R.E. Bruné of Evanston, Illinois answers: The side measurements given around the circumference of the instrument are the measurements I took of the total outside dimensions at those points, so one would have to subtract the specific top and back thicknesses at those points to arrive at the actual side dimensions prior to cutting the purfling/banding channels. For those making replicas, getting this correct within ±1MM would suffice in my opinion, but I know the favorite pastime of luthiers is splitting hairs and arguing over which is the bigger half. Actually, I suspect the original dimensions may have been slightly bigger by about .25MM to .5MM but have retracted due to shrinkage. There is nothing in the side assembly that would prevent the sides from shrinking from dryness, and they are just about crack-free because of this. It seemed to me that the instrument was originally built under fairly high humidity conditions, or at least part of it. The back has no arch left in it, probably because of shrinkage; this is also a question I have been frequently asked. I drew the instrument as is, where is, with no attempt to “correct” what I thought might have been the original state. I leave this to other scholars.
