Guitars without trussrods

Jeff Moore · June 2016

Bones, I have a small left over pile of of gym floor (maple) I salvaged. It's like steel. I don't build guitars, but often build little mechanical things requiring strength in three dimensions. Can't say it is or isn't stable, but it is strong in all dimensions, like a metal. Can't imagine its not stable.
Have a look at the vid "Selmer 503" just to try and get a relative guess of the thickness of the neck. Either the light is funny, or Django's guitar neck was thicker than anything you'd see today.
I haven't found a neck that's to thick for me. It's easier, not harder to play, especially for a long practice.
I'd love to have the dimensions of unmodified selmer necks and the truss arrangements if any. Maybe its in Charles book, but I don't have that.

bluetrain · June 2016

Wim Glenn wrote: »

Are you talking about your Barault? Mine moves like crazy ... so I'm very glad it has the truss rod!!

Wim, do you mean the action changes a lot or the relief? The Barault I have doesn't have any noticable changes in the neck relief but of course the top arch moves depending on the humidity. I keep my guitars between 40-60% humidity so there hasn't been any visible changes though I can say that the sound of my Barault changes a lot. Some days it I love it and some days I hate it. Never had the same with any other guitar. I never adjust the action on my guitars by adjusting the relief.

bluetrain · June 2016

Amir_G wrote: »

Nice to know it's a common thing among Barault guitars. I also own a Barault guitar, and it definitely moves like crazy.
Barault's guitars are very lightweight - so maybe it has something to do with these radical changes. I believe that the top wood is a bit thinner than some other GJ guitars.

Yeah they definately are really unique guitars in many aspects. I'm curious to know how much relief did Jean Barault put in your guitar? I've had quite many interesting conversations with him and he favours a lot of relief. He said a perfect relief is 1mm which is crazy!

bluetrain · June 2016

Bob Holo wrote: »

So the answer is: “It depends”. When I use trussrods, I make them, so I know the steel is top quality, the design is proper, the weight is low & the installation is proper. I use traditional rods that are a combination compression/bending much like Lloyd Loar used in the late 20’s and Leo Fender used in the early 50’s. They’re a PITA to install right, but they’re light & they lock in with the neck - they have a lot of throw and are low tension so they achieve a lot of throw and don’t over-compress & damage the neck. If done that way, there’s no difference in the acoustic performance of a good adjustable truss neck (Prewar Loar/Pre-CBS Fender) and a good fixed-truss neck (Selmer / prewar Martin) because they're essentially the same thing - a light strong reinforcement locked into and working with the neck wood as part of the neck system. But if the trussrod is a heavy rattly POS glued into an oversized channel with gooey sealer to keep it from rattling, well... all bets are off. I don't know of any good GJ builders who use crap rods though. It fairly small & harcore community of builders, like the player community, come to think of it ;-)

Thanks Bob for your indepth reply!

It's always a pleasure to read your thoughts. Just curious, why did you start using adjustable trussrods or do you still build guitars without them?

bluetrain · June 2016

Appel wrote: »

@klaatu, @Bob Holo , wow, absolutely great posts. @Jeff Moore, your words about modern necks ring true for me. Thin necks are maybe for young hands that have never swung a hammer, metaphorically or otherwise ... but, as hard as swinging a hammer is on the hands, swing one enough times and you eventually get to work with a luthier who can build you a guitar neck that suits your hard-worked hands. And that is one sweet reward.

This is actually the reason I started this thread because I've been thinking about ordering a new guitar with vintage style big round neck that fits well into my hands and playing style and I'm curious to know if there's any advantages soundwise if the guitar didn't have any adjustable trussrod.

Jeff Moore · June 2016

bluetrain.
I appreciated hearing you talk about top and sound changes from humidity.
I don't think it's just Barault. I think any guitar that really shines does so because the tops is reactive (to whatever including humidity) My Lebreton changes character a little all the time. I still don't know if I'm crazy or they are crazy, but its not the same guitar from week to week.
Great guitar, but very temperamental. Or maybe the weather changes my ears?
I notice differences in all of my herd, but more so with the "sparky" ones.

Amir_G · June 2016

bluetrain wrote: »

Yeah they definately are really unique guitars in many aspects. I'm curious to know how much relief did Jean Barault put in your guitar? I've had quite many interesting conversations with him and he favours a lot of relief. He said a perfect relief is 1mm which is crazy!

It's really interesting. The relief on my Barault is FAR from 1mm. It remainds me, that I once asked him about his recommendations regarding string action. He suggested 3.5 for the low E string, which is also crazy. Barault guitars are knowen for their great playability. I always see Baraults guitars with 3mm action, and even less. Mine sounds great at about 2.6.
Maybe he's measuring from the fingerboard surface, and not from the top of the fret?

wim · June 2016

@bluetrain No, the action is mainly changing because the top moves up and down, depending on the environment. I don't adjust the truss rod to compensate for that, I use shims. I travel a lot, and I have a bunch of rosewood shims of different heights in my case and I have to swap those up or down depending on the city or the season.

To a lesser extent, the neck moves sometimes too, so I also adjust the truss rod occasionally - but the main movement is I think in the top, which is crazy thin. It also has the bottom brace omitted, like the 503. You can push the top lightly with the thumb and see it bend... :O

The guitar is a real featherweight and it has a significantly thinner top than any other guitars I've had. I guess this is the reason for the dry punchy sound and also the reason for the annoying movement, it's a trade-off !! I'm well familiar with the love-hate relationship you mention, yes, but at the end of the day I love the sound of this one, and willing to put up with her mood swings because I've never heard an instrument I like the sound of better ..

:x

Bob Holo · June 2016

bluetrain wrote: »

Thanks Bob for your indepth reply! It's always a pleasure to read your thoughts. Just curious, why did you start using adjustable trussrods or do you still build guitars without them?

I do fixed and adjustable depending on what I’m trying to achieve. Either way I still inlay two reinforcement rods at a slight diagonal to reduce piping/torsion and increase mass under the fretboard a little. The variable trusses are easier to adjust, which is nice, but that also means they’re easier to improperly adjust. A few years ago at Djangofest, an artist called me back to the green room to look at his guitar because it sounded and played horribly. He had it adjusted by a tech in his local area and the action was fairly low, but it had a lot of shims under the bridge and the dynamic range was atrocious. At first I thought, “Oh man, this guy’s top is sinking” which seemed unlikely as it was a nice guitar made by a good luthier and it was strung with proper (Argie) strings. But when I got it back to my place and put a straight-edge on it, the thing had an 11/1000” backbow and had been shimmed up to the desired action. Uggh. The artist called the luthier who relayed his preferred setup. I set it to that and… lo & behold… the shims came off and it played and sounded proper again. As to which is best, there probably isn’t a right answer. Variable trusses are easier to adjust but also easier to fubar… but they will generally take more abuse because part of the resistance to string tension is mechanical compression which means less tension on the glue joints if the guitar gets hot. Though, an over-cranked trussrod can pop frets, pop the fretboard, or strip the trussrod and cause $ignificant damage. To go back to the above example, 11/1000" backbow when strung... is... HUGE. When unstrung, that neck had I think 18/1000" backbow... ouch. It was lucky that the trussrod wasn't stripped.

In any case, for me it was an opportunity to delve into something and understand it down to the nuts & bolts so I can do it either way with equivalent acoustic results. Learning is a good portion of why I do this, so it was a worthwhile endeavor. I'm not sure it has made be believe that there is a best way; rather each has its benefits.