DjangoBooks.com
Welcome to our Community!
Categories
- 18.2K All Categories
- 447 General
- 287 Welcome
- 11 Archtop Eddy's Corner
- 82 CD, DVD, and Concert Reviews
- 39 FAQ
- 9 Gypsy Jazz Italia
- 19 Photos
- 27 Gypsy Picking
- 4 Unaccompanied Django
- 4 Pearl Django Play-Along Vol.1
- 1 Gypsy Fire
- 26 Gypsy Rhythm
- 606 Gypsy Jazz University - Get Educated
- 117 Gypsy Jazz 101
- 192 Repertoire
- 144 History
- 96 Technique
- 40 Licks and Patterns
- Daniel Givone Manouche Guitare Method Users Group
- 17 Eddie Lang Club
- 1.1K Gypsy Jazz Gear
- 701 Guitars, Strings, Picks, Amps, Pickups and Other Accessories
- 353 Classifieds
- 41 Recording
- 39 Other Instruments
- 17 Violin
- 3 Mandolin
- 6 Accordion
- 3 Bass
- 10 Woodwinds
- 223 Gypsy Jazz Events
- 87 North America
- 87 Europe
- 49 International
In this Discussion
Who's Online 0
Today's Birthdays
Busato vs Selmer construction
Craig Bumgarner
Drayden, MarylandVirtuoso Bumgarner S/N 001
With all this talk about Busatos, would anyone want to take a shot at the construction differences between a Busato and a Selmer. In particular those characteristics that distinquish the sound of one from the other. Both Busato and Selmer made lots of different models of course, but I'm thinking of the 14 fret, small oval types with similar body shapes. The kind I think most of us play. Here's what I have so far:
Compared to a Selmer, a Busato has:
Is there a set of plans anywhere like there are for the Selmers and Favino? If not, anyone have a Busato they would like to lend me for week?
Craig
Compared to a Selmer, a Busato has:
- 675mm scale length vs. Selmer at 670
- Lower bout is 3/4" wider
- Overall profile is very similar, slightly more "stocky"
- More pronounced arch in top and back.
- Beefier neck
- Some differences in style that probably don't effect sound
- How are the tops braced compared to Selmers
- Are the sides and back laminated?
- Type of wood in various places?
- How thick are the tops?
- How much arch?
- Body depth?
- Neck angle?
- Bridge height?
- Overall weight?
Is there a set of plans anywhere like there are for the Selmers and Favino? If not, anyone have a Busato they would like to lend me for week?
Craig
Comments
ala Gibson and Guild as well as many other archtop makers
So the originals varied from braced back to non braced back as well?
Interesting stuff
Rich
'm
Ask Bob.....
Yes, I think most are but Bob would know more.
The Vintage ones are usually Brazilian Rosewood back and sides, spruce top, 3 pc. mahogany neck with an ebony center strip. But I've also seen many other woods: Indian Rosewood, Maple, Ash, etc.
Bob measured several and found that unlike Selmers, Busato actually did a lot of tone shaping. So each one is different and the tops vary in thickness depending on were you measure it. I think some spots are so thin they get down to around 1mm, while other spots are over 2mm.
Pretty massive...I don't think anyone did a bombe quite like Busato. And Dupont really nailed this....
4"...I noticed the Dupont Busatos are a tad thinner, around 3 7/8". I think the binding is just a bit thinner on the Duponts.
Ask Bob for #s...but they have a lot of neck angle, similar to a Favino.
Very small, because the bombe is so huge you hardly need a bridge.
Busatos are not the lightest guitars because of their large size, heavy hardware, and (on the vintage ones) massive necks.
40s Busato - 4.4lbs
Dupont Standard - 4.3lbs
Dupont Luxe - 4.3 lbs
Bob probably has some....and he's pretty nice. He'd probably be glad to lend you his Busato.:D
I should mention that while chatting with Stochelo this weekend we touched upon the topic of Busatos. He said that in most cases the vintage Busatos sound better then the vintage Selmers. He said that only a few select Selmers are really good, but other then those he prefers the Busatos (of which he's owned several.) I told him I had two here right now and his eyes nearly popped out of his head! :shock: Too bad he didn't have time to come over and play them.
'm
“I want to build a Busato (or a true pliage Selmer)”
Kudos to you, but I'm not sure it's a good place to start. Start with a Maccaferri style - or a Selmer style but forget making the pliage. Just go with a 2mm soundboard and a ~ 2 degree neck angle and a 2mm thick soundboard and get to building. - this way it will sound good - it won’t be terribly sensitive to little errors in design & you're good to go. Doing a Busato Bombe that isn’t so tight that it strangles the sound of the guitar (or getting it so light that it doesn’t cave in over time) is really flipping difficult. Also, doing that Selmer pliage right requires making the soundboard essentially backward so your joinery and inlay and rim preparation and brace preparation have to be darned near perfect and it makes your neck angle tougher to plan. Start with something that you’re going to be able to finish and that is going to sound good and make you feel good.
“I’m thinking of buying this really expensive wood - here’s a picture of it - should I?”
Regarding wood, use anything like Yellow Cedar or Sitka/Engelmann/Carpathian/Lutz spruce. They’re easy to work with and they sound good. Cedar and Redwood are really soft so unless you know what you’re doing - you’re going to break or beat the crap out of them while you’re building. Forget German/Adirondak spruce, you won’t bring out the extra mojo they have to offer on your first guitar anyway and they cost a ton - and really - I haven’t observed that their special qualities are all that valuable in gypsy guitars anyway though I’d have to work with them more to say for sure. Moreover, most German and Adirondak spruce you get isn’t really German or Adirondak, so unless you’re an expert at identifying woods and you trust the supplier, you’re going to wind up with Engelmann or Lutz anyway - just at 3x the price - and finally - it’s not really the type of wood that’s important - it’s how good that individual piece of wood is... and looks are deceiving... tapping / scraping / thumbnail / strength testing... that’s how you identify good wood. So paying extra for premium wood is not a wise thing to do unless you know enough about wood to recognize the species and evaluate the acoustic qualities of the individual piece and then how to adjust your build to take advantage of what that individual piece of wood has to offer.
“Should I laminate or use solid wood”
While it’s true that the old ones are pretty much all laminated, doing this right requires building really intense jigs (see Eimers’ site) using glues that I’m not going to recommend that you use because unless you’re using them properly they can hurt you - and hunting down veneers of the proper thickness cut the right way.... and so when you get this all together and snap the first three veneer sets at $$$ each it’s just going to ruin your day. Use solid wood - Josh’s guitar is solid and it’s great - in fact, he prefers it because of that singing sustain and his rhythm hand is so good he can chop that sustain off with technique anyway so he has the best of both worlds. Remember, he sold his MD50B to buy that guitar so anyone who tells you solid wood guitars can’t sound good is smoking the funny stuff. If you must laminate - do it the way Michael Collins’ book says. I don’t think that’s the way he does it - but it’s a way you can do it successfully without a huge investment of time and money which is what I think he was going after with that book and now I understand why he did it that way. Just get some good Mahogany or Walnut (if you’re doing a guitar that you want mojo & midrange crunch out of) or any kind of Rosewood if you want a deeper clearer attack. You know that guitar Lulo Reinhardt & Doug Martin & The Nolan Brothers & Gonzalo & Matheiu & Rom’ all freaked out over? Solid wood. Solid American Black Walnut to be specific, so again - if you have any preconceived notions that you absolutely positively have to laminate to get a good sounding guitar... let go of them. I laminate when I’m going after very specific tonal qualities. It doesn’t make the guitar sound better - just different.
“But I really want to build a traditional guitar...” (Busato/pliage-selmer/lamination etc.)
You have your whole life ahead of you to figure out how to make “dead-on” Busato or Selmer guitars if that's what you want to do... I'm guessing it's going to take me about that long to do it... But if you try to start there, you’re likely to wind up like all the other guys with half a guitar sitting on a shelf - always saying: "Someday I'll finish that." I can tell you from personal experience that there is a reason so few people make these guitars traditionally... it’s just a whole lot tougher to build and much more sensitive to small design differences. To put it another way - this is sort of like starting by playing Minor Swing instead of starting by trying to play Montagne Ste. Genevieve... whole different ballgame and starting with MSG is a recipe for frustration... especially when you get to the “B section” (which in this comparison would I guess be the Busato bombe/lamination and the Selmer pliage).
“Where can I find a Busato Plan?”
Bottom line - Michael is absolutely right - Busato changed everything on nearly every guitar. I've studied ... what... 8 of them now? (9?) and no two are identical. The top thicknesses are radically different from guitar to guitar and the soundboard shaping is too. The neck angles are steeper, in general (though not on all) but it is not related to action height or bridge size... it’s only because the bombe is so darned high that you have to make the neck angle high so the strings don't smack into the soundboard on the way to the bridge. I'm sure that given the recent increase in popularity of Busatos that someone will come out with a plan - though I'm guessing that it won't be any closer to accurate than any of the other gypsy guitar plans I've seen. I'm not sure why this is - maybe people just aren't measuring accurately or maybe they just don't want to hand plans to Chinese factories on a Silver platter - who knows.
“What do you think about these new Dupont Busatos / Dusatos / Busaponts?”
Dupont did a good job with his new Busato and I'm thankful for that. When he first took Busato's name it infuriated me because all I could think of was... well... there goes another good guitar name... Epiphone Stromberg DeArmond... eventually someone does a cheezeball recreation of all good old guitar names to make a quick buck... and as Busato is my hero - this one really ticked me off. But, seeing them, it's apparent that Dupont did not do this - he respects Busato. He's doing a pretty straight down the line Busato Grand. Playing it I don't think he's doing any soundboard shaping etc.. so... it’s not going to have the depth and complexity of a really top Busato - but the important part is that he nailed the basics - it is not a 'quick buck' guitar and it’s not priced like a really top old Busato either... which is a real bonus. They're as close to a Busato as the Hommage is to a Favino and that's saying a lot (the Hommage being the most underpriced gypsy jazz guitar out there) and the Busato is much tougher to build. Michael uses the comparison of Dupont MD50 to Selmer - I wouldn't argue with that comparison either.
“What’s the deal with your Busato style guitars - why do you call them “Busato style and Busato inspired instead of just calling them Busatos?”
I don’t make Busatos. I study Busato’s work as I study the work of Maccaferri/Guerinet, DiMauro(s), Favino, Bucolo and others because they fundamentally built guitars differently than what is now commonly accepted to be modern luthiery practices. I know of no other way to understand what they were doing. The end result that I’m trying to achieve is an understanding of what they did so I can build guitars that capture the spirit of this music in a traditional way. I have no desire to use any name other than my own but I refer to their names out of respect because their work inspires me and it would be disingenuous to not credit their work. They built the textbooks that I study and they did it better than anyone since. I want to understand those old guitars before they all disappear into the obscurity of collector’s vaults or become damaged and repaired beyond recognition so that those designs and that knowledge of traditional European jazz guitar construction will live on. Specifically, my goal with regards to Selmer is to capture the mid-period design (500’s / 600’s) with the true pliage which seems to have been perfected under Guerinet. Those guitars sing - they’re the “cathedral” as the famous quote goes. My goal with the Busato design is to understand how the individual changes in designs affect the sound and arrive at one or two variations that are syntheses of my favorite aspect of the work of Busato. My Busato's bottom end, Michael's Busato's topend, the tonal clarity of the Busato owned by a gent in the Carolinas, the impeccable balance of the Busato formerly owned by Neil Andersson. These elements are just haunting - they are what drive me to get up in the morning. Matheiu told me of a Busato in Europe that has an almost classical flair to it that I should hear. As of today, Josh's guitar and a Busato style guitar a gentleman from Washington just purchased best represent one flavor I'm working on - bringing out the open / balanced / powerful / singing aspects of Busato's work. The other flavor, bringing out more of the megaphone-like Busato midrange honk - that guitar is currently owned by a gent in California but Neil Andersson recorded a track from his upcoming album on it which I can't wait to hear. Other guitars - like that antiqued F-hole guitar I brought to Djangofest 2008 have elements of Busato but are primarily of other designs - most notably A.DiMauro.
“But I really want a Busato plan!”
Bottom line, I can’t give you a Busato plan because I have 9 of them and the synthesis of these and others will be a significant portion of my life’s work. Someday I’ll publish them. But if you absolutely want a Busato to study and you don’t have the investment capital to spring $10k-12K, I can tell you that the new Dupont Busatos are fine rigs and Kudos to Michael for yet again using his knowledge and contacts to kick open doors to give us access to "the real thing". Without him, the gypsy jazz revival in America would be a much less rewarding experience.
For sh*ts and giggles, here's a phone vid of Sebastien playing an F Hole which was inspired by A.DiMauro and B.Busato. It's short and the quality is crappy, but surprisingly the character comes through. You can hear the cutting tone - it was maybe 95db background noise in there and he cut right through. This is why I study the work these old guys did - because they were amazing and for reasons I can't fully explain, (midlife crisis maybe?) I need to get inside their heads and understand what they knew about guitars. I'll also put one in of Mathieu doing a "Schmitt Intro" on the guitar he inspired. It's based on Maccaferri with some classical elements and Mathieu's feedback on the tone he likes. It has the nice balanced tone but when you step on it... it has an upper midrange power band like a 2-cycle enduro motorcycle. The blunt, truthful, insightful feedback from players is invaluable. Without them I can't objectively know how close I'm getting (or not getting) to the goal.
Keep up the great work,
All the best,
Daniel
PS If you ever come to California, or LA I owe you a meal and a few drinks.
Great info!
I was wondering how you manage to bend the one really tight bend if you use solid wood without cracking it? Ditto for solid wood binding.
Thanks
PS- I'm working on my first Maccaferri Style
Thanks so much for your thorough and thoughtful reply. You have answered what I suspected. There is no magic bullet. With Busatos or any instrument where you are striving for the very top performance, it is the mix of a hundred (oh, if it were only a hundred) things in combination.
You said if people liked the post, you might make it the basis of a FAQ. I'll vote for that!
Bones,
I'm just an amateur, and don't have anything like Bob's experience, but I recently completed a Selmer style guitar w/ solid Bubinga sides and back. The bend at the cutaway was tricky and I worried about it a lot beforehand. I practiced on scraps for several days. I broke quite a few scraps before I got the hang of it. On the actual side bend, I thinned the wood a little at the bend point and used a smaller hot pipe for this bend only. I boiled this portion of the side for five minutes before bending and used leather gloves and coaxed the bend carefully but firmly with my hands all over the bend area to contain the grain. Worked first time, no problem.
Some woods bend better than others, bubinga was pretty good. I haven't tried this tight a bend in any other tone wood so I can't say how other woods might react. Most guitar building books have comments about which woods bend better.
On bindings, I steam bent mine to shape before fitting to the guitar. I broke a few at the cutaway before I got the hang of it. The cutaway bend is one of the trickiest parts of a Selmer style, at least for me anyway. The dove tail neck joint is another place that can drive you to drink. I did mine by hand, without a router jig, turned out good though.
Craig