Posted on February 3, 2026February 25, 2026 by Dale Phillips In Memoriam: Ken Parker In Memoriam: Ken Parker August 25, 1952 – October 5, 2025 by Mike Doolin Originally published in American Lutherie #156, 2025 Photo by Ken Parker. I first met Ken Parker at the 2006 Newport Guitar Festival. He had a few prototypes out on his table. I didn’t know what he looked like so I was just checking out the design features. But then I noticed his trademark minimalist six-in-line headstock. I looked up and said, “Holy crap, you’re Ken Parker!” and he said, “Well, yeah.” We chatted about the usual lutherie stuff, particularly the use of epoxy graphite which I was also into. Maybe a year later, he called me to ask where I was getting my graphite cloth (TAP Plastics, walking distance from my Portland, Oregon, shop). I was quite flattered that he would ask my opinion on anything. I can’t say we stayed in touch at the time. He was on his archtop trajectory and I was still making flattops. But all that changed in 2019 when the GAL asked me to review the latest edition of Paul Schmidt’s book, Acquired of the Angels. I felt I should get my hands on a few D’Angelicos and D’Aquistos for background, and most of them were on the East Coast. So I planned a trip to several guitar stores that I knew had D’As. That seemed a great opportunity to catch up with Ken, too. By then I had built a few archtops and was curious about his now fully developed, very innovative design. I had my itinerary set and was about to book my flights, when COVID shut everything down. But I had reconnected with Ken, and we had some long discussions over the phone. I also watched some of his lectures online, in particular the one about Gibson history and the aborted development of the acoustic archtop guitar because of the advent of amplification. Radical stuff, but he made a lot of sense. So the first thing I did under COVID lockdown was to build an acoustic archtop using some of Ken’s principles, mostly the plate thicknesses and upper-bass-bout soundhole. The instrument was a great success, far and away the best sounding acoustic archtop I’d made. By this time I had retired from professional lutherie, so I could build anything I wanted. Over the next couple of years I built two more of the same design, and another two in the more traditional f-hole style. And then the pandemic lockdown ended. I had written my review of Acquired of the Angels (AL#143), and now Tim Olsen suggested I interview Ken. My trip back east finally happened in 2022, two years after I’d planned. I spent two days with Ken, and he was kind enough to put me up for the night. He was an open book about his work, giving me as much detail as I could absorb. I brought that first Parker-inspired archtop with me and he was very complimentary and encouraging. I was frankly a bit overwhelmed, but his friendly manner kept me at ease. But nothing could have prepared me for the breadth and depth of his knowledge and skills. Woodworking was just the beginning. He was equally adept in metalworking, having trained as a machinist. Probably the most impressive example of this was his purfling channel cutter, a mill attachment consisting of two eccentrically mounted bearings, which kept the cutter a consistent perpendicular distance from the edge, coincident with the inner edge of the linings inside. This was a critical feature of his guitars, and one that would be very difficult to accomplish without that attachment. He also ground the single-flute end mills for it. He said that as he cut the purfling channels, he would repeat the mantra, “Perfect.” He said he “hadn’t lost a man yet.” This was but one example of the way he rethought every aspect of guitar making. He made most of the hand planes he used, including a round bronze plane he’d just designed and completed. He shaped and sharpened his gouges differently. He joined his plates with a piece of paper in the seam, so he could rough carve and then separate the seam and re-plane it to account for internal tensions being released. His necks were a spruce core wrapped in many layers of epoxy graphite with a decorative veneer on the outside, all assembled in a heated mold that formed the graphite post as an integral part. In many ways he was a very traditional wood- and metalworker, with finely honed hand skills. But he was no slave to tradition, using power tools and even CNC when it made sense and would make a better guitar. Always, if it would make a better guitar. (Mike’s “Meet the Maker” with Ken appears in AL#149, and Ken’s personal take on the genesis of the archtop guitar is available to members in our Articles Online.) As a person, Ken was friendly and gregarious, with a quick wit. His crackling intelligence was always on display. Much of what he had to say was controversial, but never for controversy’s sake. He approached all subjects with great intellectual integrity. He had strongly held opinions, all well considered. He didn’t suffer fools gladly; he didn’t have time for that. But on balance he was very kind and well meaning. At the end of my visit I told him the visit was more than I’d even dared hope for. That earned me a hug.
Posted on October 10, 2025October 10, 2025 by Dale Phillips A Summary of John Greven’s Voicing Method A Summary of John Greven’s Voicing Method by Mike Doolin Originally published in American Lutherie #114, 2013 John Greven has been building guitars for fifty years, and has single-handedly built over 2200 guitars in that time. Doing the math, that means he averages close to a guitar a week. Given that kind of efficiency, it’s not surprising that his methods for controlling the sound of his guitars are simple and direct. He’s distilled the huge number of variables down to the handful that he believes are most important, and has evolved testing methods that take only seconds and require no measurement tools. While John is a trained scientist, and does speak of the scientific aspects of guitars and wood, he’s quick to point out that his methods are not scientific, but intuitive and experiential. This is a major problem in documenting his methods: in a sense, you have to be John Greven to fully understand them. They rely on John’s vast experience in building thousands of guitars, and playing those guitars and thousands of guitars by other builders, and on his “photographic” memory for sound, and the database of sounds that his experience and memory have created in his head. Moreover, sound is not accurately describable in words, and tactile sense is not accurately quantifiable. 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 October 9, 2025October 9, 2025 by Dale Phillips Calculating Guitar Side Height Calculating Guitar Side Height by Mike Doolin Originally published in American Lutherie #75, 2003 and Big Red Book of American Lutherie Volume Seven, 2015 Back in American Lutherie #58 (Big Red Book of American Lutherie Volume Five), Jon Sevy published the article “Calculating Arc Parameters” which described how to calculate the radius, length, or depth of a curve. I’ve used these formulae extensively ever since for radiusing fretboards, making dished workboards, calculating neck angles, and even nonlutherie shop tasks. Recently it occurred to me that one could use them to calculate the height of a guitar’s side at any point. If the guitar has a spherically domed back, the back falls off from its highest point in an arc in every direction, as in the photo. This “high point” is effectively the North Pole of the sphere from which the back arch is taken. If we assume a top whose perimeter is all in the same plane, as in Fig. 1, that plane intersects a line of latitude on that sphere. The high point is therefore the point on the back which is farthest from the plane of the top perimeter. All measurements of side height are then distances between that plane and the surface of the sphere of the back arch. I adapted Jon’s formula to calculate the falloff from the high point on the back to any point on the side: 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 July 7, 2024May 14, 2025 by Dale Phillips Waterborne Solutions Waterborne Solutions by Mike Doolin and John Greven from their 2001 GAL Convention demonstration Originally published in American Lutherie #73, 2003 Doolin: Waterborne finishes and methods of working with them are constantly evolving. New products come out every year and old formulas are continually being updated. This workshop is like a snapshot of what John and I were doing at the time, and our techniques have continued to evolve. We trade techniques back and forth and share our results with new products as they become available. We never seem to be using exactly the same products or techniques; this just goes to show that there is no perfect finish product or technique yet. However, John and I agree that the products which have become available in the last few years are finally up to the task of producing a finish worthy of a fine handmade guitar. Before we get into the nitty-gritty, I want to talk about what waterborne finish is. First, think of lacquer and shellac. Both lacquer and shellac are resins dissolved in solvent. Spray it on, the solvents evaporate out, and that’s it. There’s no structural cross-linking reaction going on. Anytime after the finish is dry, you can use lacquer thinner to wipe the lacquer off the guitar. The same is true for pure shellac, which is always soluble in alcohol. That’s useful for a finish which will be rubbed out, particularly if you’re going to be touching up at a later time. You can melt that coat in. Otherwise, if the subsequent coat has to stick by a mechanical bond, you get a witness line if you sand through the top coat. One of the advantages of the new waterborne finishes is that they seem to do that — to burn into their previous coats. That’s one of the things we’re looking for. 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. Members also receive 3 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page. MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on June 6, 2024May 28, 2025 by Dale Phillips Questions: Gibson Firebird Plan Questions: Gibson Firebird Plan by Mike Doolin Originally published in American Lutherie #75, 2003 See also, Questions: Gibson Firebird Plan by David Riggs Marc Vermeiren from cyberspace asks: I’m searching for a plan of a Gibson Firebird. Mike Doolin of Portland, OR responds: I’ve never heard of a published plan for a Firebird. It’s a Gibson solidbody that came out briefly in the ’60s and has occasionally been reproduced since then. It wasn’t terribly popular. The pickups were different than normal Gibsons, but I think Seymour Duncan makes a Firebird replacement pickup. I’d say your best bet would be to find a Firebird and trace the body shape. ◆