Solid woods versus laminates

djadam

For those of you who have played many fine gypsy instruments, I'd be curious about your opinions about guitars built with solid back and sides versus those built with laminates. I was surprised to find out that some top luthiers are building selmacs with laminates, as I've long associated laminate with cheap, coming from the acoustic world. Leaves me with some questions:

Can a solid wood project as loudly? Can a laminate from a master luthier sound as sweet as a solid? If I remember correctly, Favino is not using solid woods and it seems he's legendary around here, so he must be doing something right...

Anyway, I'd love to hear some thoughts...

Bob Holo

My admittedly subjective impression is that well made solid wood backed guitars **all other things held equal** have more sustain - but that is such a generalization I almost cringe saying it. Sustain is a function of many things - of which the back is one component.

The only reason I don't totally cringe saying this - is that common sense and a little acoustic engineering knowledge bear out the conclusion that backs/sides made of laminated materials will resonate less. One of the more effective ways of dampening resonances in structural materials is through constrained layers. Two of the more common ways to achieve constrained layer dampening are: 1.) Sandwich layers that have greater strength along opposing axes (like plywood) so when one layer starts to vibrate - it can't because the layer(s) next to it don't expand and contract along the same vectors - so the opposing sheer-strengths of the materials dampen energy. 2.) The other common method is to sandwich materials that have different densities so that none of the materials resonantes at the same frequency and so if any layer hits resonance, it is dampened by the layers on either side that are not at resonance. The Selmer/Mac method of cross-graining three layers of wood of different densities makes use of both of these techniques. Whether that was part of the intention of the lamination technique? Who knows - but the Selmac lamination method is significantly different than the standard "cheap 1950's archtop" lamination method... three specific materials bonded and stressed... that doesn't sound like a cost-reduction effort to me considering that wood was more plentiful back in those days.

I suppose one could make the case that resonance of the back and sides is not a goal - and that a resonance free box provides a superior base on which a soundboard can resonate. One thing is for sure though - laminated material -itself- is less resonant than solid-wood of similar weight/size/rigidity.

Charlie Ayers

In my experience, on a very general basis, since every guitar is different. guitars with solid backs and sides have more sustain, and possibly brighter trebles.

The guitars I've owned/played with laminated back and sides have more of a nasal, woody character to the trebles and more treble to midrange to bass balance. They also feel to me like thay respond more quickly....

Both are great, of course.

It may also just be my particular guitars, and my aging ears....

Charlie

djadam

Bob Holo wrote:

Who knows - but the Selmac lamination method is significantly different than the standard "cheap 1950's archtop" lamination method... three specific materials bonded and stressed... that doesn't sound like a cost-reduction effort to me considering that wood was more plentiful back in those days.

That's an interesting point. Please take the following thoughts with a grain of salt, since I'm but a fascinated novice...

As I've played more Selmacs, I've developed a strong preference for Maple. It sounds so dry and clear to me and this is what I think luthiers refer to as the "transparent" quality of maple. A mandolin luthier I talked to said that maple actually may absorb some of the overtones, possibly making for a less complex tone. For me, that's desirable, as jazz chords already have a lovely complexity.

Well I wonder if the theoretical dampening effect of layed laminates actually produces a similar effect with rosewood. I doubt if a rosewood laminate would sound quite as dry as a maple instrument, but perhaps it's somewhere in between maple and solid rosewood. What do you think? Crazy?

Thanks for taking the time to comment on this - I find the art of lutherie fascinating. How lucky we guitarists are when the instrument of our art is a work of art in itself!

Josh Hegg

My Patenotte is Maple laminate and has a very dry tone. It also has a but of an odd sized body that helps with this. I think your ear is good on the Maple = drier tone factor.

Cheers,
Josh

Charlie Ayers

I think your ear is good regarding the lamination adding some dryness to Indian rosewood, too. To my ear the lamination somewhat neutralizes the tonal characteristics of the wood used in the back and sides.

Charlie

scot

I'm pretty sure that Maccaferri/Selmer used laminate for reasons of stability, strength and light weight. Maybe cost. I don't think that it was about sound, since it was established long ago that nearly all the sound in a guitar comes from the top. After all, Maccaferri was an innovator and wasn't interested in the CW.

Selmers are very light - even with the sound box they are the lightest guitars I've ever played. And you never see one advertised with back or side crack repairs. I had the opportunity to play my solid wood Dupont d-hole next to a Selmer d-hole over a period of nearly a week, and the two guitars sounded almost exactly the same. So I am not convinced that laminate/solid makes a lot of difference in sound.

After playing a lot of these guitars in the last 14 years, made of both solid and laminate wood, IMO there are good reasons for laminate construction - strength, stability and light weight. Proving again the soundness of Maccaferri's original design ideas.

It's true what DJ Adam says - it's not easy to come from other guitar cultures where laminate was and is a synonym for cheap. This even though many expensive guitars had laminate back and sides - Gibson J-200 for example There were intense arguments about this on the Yahoo group several years ago. Just remember, this is another type of guitar, as different from an American-style steel string as a classical or an archtop. And BTW, it's not just here where Favino is legendary - it's everywhere. Many modern makers make "Favino" models because these guitars are (in their way) every bit the equal of a Selmer. And as hard to duplicate...

Best
Scot