On building your own instrument
On the interesting crossover between making sound AND the soundtool.
I was (literally) inspired by a fellow pickleballer to build my own guitar. The acoustic guitar she brought in one day was of such a high quality, so far above the range of my usual bangers and street-finds, that I was empowered to sign on with the AGMS and get building.
Her instrument was beautiful: customised with dragonfly inlays and superbly finished, and set up for her exact playing preferences. Importantly: it sounded and played amazing.
After 8 months of weekly guided sessions, I've now got an amazing instrument myself.
I've learnt a huge amount about the build processes and woods, setup and fine tuning. I've also skated around some pretty deep rabbit holes of highly specialised, arcane and fierce debates about bracing systems and modal tuning, the exact qualities of various tonewoods (and whether they matter all that much), and both the scientific and the subjective nature of hearing. That we also listen with our eyes: that is, we think colour makes a difference when scientifically it doesn't.
[Oh, I definitely land in the 'tonewoods matter' camp**.]
The great thing about building an instrument is customisation. I wanted a slightly wider neck to facilitate my bassplayer hands and a fingerpicking style. I wanted a guitar that's comfortable (smaller than a dreadnought) and which sounded consistent and bright without being boomy and boxy. I wanted a guitar that was easy to play and of a standard with Gibsons and Taylors.
Now, this was an expensive exercise, and I've had to set up a GoFundMe which tied in nicely with a milestone birthday. It's maybe not for everyone — it might be slightly less daunting if you've done some woodwork before — but it's still highly doable. If you're a guitarist and you've played a number of instruments and know broadly what you're looking for, then I'd definitely recommend building your own in a guided context. If only to expand your knowledge of what makes the sound happen, and how to optimise and tune it to your taste.
It's all about the soundboard. It's all about the size of the resonant body (and soundhole). It's all about the bracing system. And then it's about the choice of woods for the sides and back, the neck and fretboard. The density of the bridge. And then other small shapes and details. I ended up using Spruce, Australian Blackwood, African padauk, Mahogany & River gum.
With so much variability, generally following that order of importance, it's amazing that anything consistent and alive-sounding can result. My guitar ended up nice and resonant with a lovely mid-range and clear definition on every note.
Now I don't mean that every musician or musical hobbyist needs to build an instrument to fully appreciate it (although building your own synthesiser is totally doable too), but if anything it'll fine-tune your ear for the puff and bullshit endemic in the industry. That you could pay tens of thousands of dollars for an unresonant box, no matter who endorses it, or how great it sounds 'live'. That (largely) machine-made instruments and/or low-wage overseas manufacture are the norm and the reason why price points can stay relatively low (& artificially high). That marketing (and worse: personal marketing) dominate the retail scene.
And importantly, speaking of machines: learning that a proper, hand-made instrument takes many hours of work (even for a pro: 2-4 weeks of solid work, maybe more with the proper settling) and is therefore worth the expense in real terms. Wood is an organic, pliable and moveable material; and shaping and settling takes proper time and care. A cookie-cutter, CNC build creates an instrument that mirrors the cookie but won't taste like one. Quality takes time and care to bake in.
I mean, it's obvious, right? Something handmade has an aura, an authenticity and a respect-for-art-and-materials that's special. It's worth the price, even if only to cover the time, expertise and care to make it properly. The sourcing of materials, the experience and quality control. I’m grateful for the guidance on this.
I've had some frustrated, sweary moments bending bloodwood strips for the binding (AND a burn mark on my arm), and I misaligned the tuners slightly, and there was an incident cutting the fret slots that had to be fixed with superglue (wonderful fixer!). And I've had to be patient and focused.
But I know everything that's possible to know about this particular instrument; I've shaped it into being. When you build it, you own it differently.
And which plays and sounds so nice that I've become an advocate for everyone to build-your-own — at least once. You'll listen differently to your sound tools, to how an instrument responds to the way you play and coax tones from it. You’ll learn how to set it up properly and how that makes playing easier. You'll get an education in the form of a guitar that sits in the upper ranks of quality and which makes you sound and play better. Win win.
Do it.
I should point out that Martin Taylor at AGMS is the reason why all guitars from the school sound so good and punch far above their weight. Also, he built (and I've played) the exact replica of Scottie Moore's guitar from the 68 Comeback Special that was used in 'Elvis'. Oh lordie, what a guitar...
** And my thoughts on guitar tonewoods, hyper-specific gear obsessions and misplaced focus: the choice of metals in the tuners and frets, the micro-variation in woods*** (for top, body, neck, fretboard, capping etc; how dense and resonant each are, the colours), the relative virtues of pickups (and then number of windings, thickness of wire, covers) and suppliers, the electric wiring and potentiometers, type of finish used, any ageing process as well as the age of the wood(s), the choice and qualities of leads, pedals, amps etc ETC. It's for gear nerds who endlessly tinker with the mechanics of their instrument or signal path without really becoming better, more nuanced players. They hear a difference because they see a difference. It's a rabbit hole all right — of excuses — and the parts market.
My opinion: about 90% of all that clap doesn't matter. An artist — any good artist — will make an instrument sing or move, even if it's a banger they found on the street. And what fills the remaining 10%? Nine percent is the ergonomics of the instrument. And that means a) the setup (eg string height and type, correct intonation, no errors in fret buzz or rattles or uneven notes) and b) the ergonomics of playability, that is the comfort and ease of the instrument. Is the neck right for your hands, does it contour well against the body, and most simply: is it easy to play in your style? Do you keep coming back to it? With 1% left over for minor variation in parts.
The idea of making a custom guitar should be about making an instrument with the best fit and sound which collaborates to draw out expression****. Does it help you play — is it easy in the hands — or does it work against you? Almost everything else is just a distraction.
Or, to quote Rick Rubin:
Nothing is needed. The true instrument is you.
*** But, I will go to my grave insisting there are tonal qualities in woods that determine the instrument's sound. In the overall hierarchy of influence, I think this sits relatively high. Especially with bass guitars and acoustic guitars, harder woods sound darker and mid-scooped; soft woods more mellow. There is a physics to this. But the overall build/execution can temper those differences. A guitar is a multi-faceted resonance- and harmonic-generating machine; every part potentially affects the sound; all parts work together — positively and negatively. And then it's the hands, the way it's played. More rabbit holes: the weight of the pick, where and how it impacts the strings, how heavy the strum and how light the touch. The factors a player controls in playing are far more affective than the minutiae of the sound tool. And your specific hands, your style of playing, will sound different again…
**** In the end: it’s about soul.