| Author |
Topic: Need Some Lap Steel Building Advice Please. |
Dennis Saydak
From:
Manitoba, Canada
|
Posted 3 Aug 2021 11:56 am |
|
I have a new winter project in the works and I need some advice from lap steel builders. I have drawn a plan for a Gibson EH-150 style ten string guitar. It is based on my previous six string build.
1) Head Stock length: Since the new version will have four extra strings it needs to be longer. Should I increase the thickness to compensate for the extra tension placed on the headstock or does the increase width of the neck take care of this?
2) Would a scale length increase from 22.5" to say 23.25" be worthwhile? It's easy to do at this point.
Thanks in advance for any comments & suggestions.
_________________
Dennis
Just when you think you're getting ahead in the rat race, the rats get faster. |
|
|
 |
Jeff Highland
From:
New South Wales, Australia
|
Posted 3 Aug 2021 1:16 pm
|
|
Hi Dennis
As far as the headstock thickness,you are limited by the length of the tuner posts, but go as thick as that will allow with acceptable protusion, and transition the neck to headstock as close the the first tuners as you can. It is not likely to be a problem, but rigidity is good.
If you are going to tune the lower strings to D or lower extra scale length is good IMHO.
_________________
Duesenberg Fairytale
1949 Supro Supreme
1950 National New Yorker
2008 Highland Baritone Weissenborn
2020 Highland New Yorker.
2020 Highland Mohan Veena
2021 Highland Weissencone |
|
|
|
Brian Evans
From:
Nova Scotia, Canada
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 7:52 am
|
|
| Use the headstock thickness recommended for your chosen tuners, there is no need to think you need to go thicker - the string tension stress is almost fully in line with the headstock, nothing much is pulling up to try to bend the headstock. Like maybe 5 lbs, if I had to calculate it. Scale length is personal choice, I agree that if you are going to tune the low strings down, a 25" scale would be a nice choice. A 1/2" or 3/4" difference in scale length is the kind of difference you might be able to notice for the first 5 minutes of playing, but fades away after that. If you could do a blind A-B test, you probably couldn't tell the difference. |
|
|
|
Dom Franco
From:
Beaverton, OR, 97007
|
|
|
|
Dennis Saydak
From:
Manitoba, Canada
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 8:55 am
|
|
| Dom Franco wrote: |
Just in terms of appearance, the wider neck and larger headstock will look disproportionate to the original size body. I suggest enlarging the entire instrument in all dimensions.
JMHO
Dom Franco |
Thanks for all the replies everyone.
Dom. I basically used photo editing software to obtain the full size dimensions for the original guitar. I worked from the excellent pictures from this article for that: https://www.vintageguitar.com/22254/an-odd-gibson-eh-150-2/
The 10 string body as stated in that article is 9 3/4" wide, which is 3/4" wider than a six string version. Also, the 10 string alumitone pickup I will use is narrower in width than the Charlie Christianson style pickup of the original guitar. So, my neck can be narrower than in the picture. But yes, the headstock size does look a little "robust".
_________________
Dennis
Just when you think you're getting ahead in the rat race, the rats get faster. |
|
|
|
Jack Hanson
From:
San Luis Valley, USA
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 9:32 am
|
|
Don't know if this would be relevant or not, but I have two early postwar Gibsons -- a Century-6 and a Century-10 (the black ones). Their bodies are reportedly maple. Caveat: If you're using mahogany, this may or may not apply.
I measured both instruments at four different places on the headstock -- ahead of the front tuner and behind the rear tuner on both the treble side and the bass side. Each separate measurement is within .05" -- ranging between .56" and .61". Interestingly, the measurements on the 6-string headstock are marginally thicker than on the 10-string headstock. Note that both instruments have their original lacquer finish.
My conclusion: Six of one, half-dozen of the other. Probably unnecessary to make your new headstock any thicker than your original.
Last edited by Jack Hanson on 4 Aug 2021 10:36 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Jack Hanson
From:
San Luis Valley, USA
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 9:59 am
|
|
| Another point of consideration with the maple-bodied Centuries is that, being painted, there's no headstock overlay -- as on the prewar EH-style instruments. The overlay undoubtedly would add strength. |
|
|
|
Dennis Saydak
From:
Manitoba, Canada
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 10:15 am
|
|
| Jack Hanson wrote: |
| Another point of consideration with the maple-bodied Centuries is that, being painted, there's no headstock overlay -- as on the prewar EH-style instruments. The overlay undoubtedly would add strength. |
I now have all the wood I need for this project. I am using Mahogany for the neck/headstock with an Ebony head overlay.
_________________
Dennis
Just when you think you're getting ahead in the rat race, the rats get faster. |
|
|
|
Dennis Saydak
From:
Manitoba, Canada
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 3:18 pm
|
|
Another "light bulb" just came on. I think I can leave an extra 1/16" thickness in the center of the head stock underside (between the tuners) and rout the edges where the tuners are mounted to the normal thickness. Similar to the reinforcing volute used on some Martin acoustics.
I have a drill press planer disc from StewMac that may help.
The reason I'm concerned about adding a little extra strength on a 10 string is I've fixed a couple of broken off heads for some friends over the years.
_________________
Dennis
Just when you think you're getting ahead in the rat race, the rats get faster. |
|
|
|
Jeff Highland
From:
New South Wales, Australia
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 5:56 pm
|
|
The main problem with gibson style headstocks, besides the excessive angle, is the massive cavity that is excavated for the truss rod nut access.
Obviously that is not a concern on a lap steel.
But some people think that headstock rigidity is a plus for sound quality and that may be a good enough reason to strengthen it anyhow.
_________________
Duesenberg Fairytale
1949 Supro Supreme
1950 National New Yorker
2008 Highland Baritone Weissenborn
2020 Highland New Yorker.
2020 Highland Mohan Veena
2021 Highland Weissencone |
|
|
|
George Piburn
From:
The Land of Enchantment New Mexico
|
Posted 4 Aug 2021 7:22 pm Thickening plate
|
|
Your light bulb is on a good track, I've seen Bill Hatcher do the extra thickness on some his awesome creations.
You can actually make a separate piece and glue it to the bottom. Eliminate the fancy router work.
You can go thicker than 1/16 (.0625) to get more anti-deflection strength. 1/4 (.250) will be thousands of times stronger.
The Ebony head plate will also add massive strength too.
What you are concerned about is called Deflection in engineering language.
AKA the head coming up under full tension.
With our CNC guitars we ended up going with an overall head thickness of .600
as Jack pointed out in his measurements of the original Gibson.
As everyone points out, you gotta go with how much of the tuner posts you want on the top side of the head.
The main reason guitar heads are down angled is to reduce deflection, honestly the post will pull more toward the wall of the hole than pull up on the head.
_________________
GeorgeBoards S8 Non Pedal Steel Guitar Instruments
Maker of One of a Kind Works of Art that play music too.
Instructional DVDs
YouTube Channel |
|
|
|
Brian Evans
From:
Nova Scotia, Canada
|
Posted 5 Aug 2021 6:22 am
|
|
| Broken headstocks are virtually always a guitar drop to a stage and lands on it's head injury. string tension pull in an upward direction on a 10 string head stock with say a 10 degree down angle is around 13 - 25 lbs, a lot depends on nut height over the plane of the headstock. A rough calculation is (string break angle over the nut minus the headstock angle) times the Sine of that angle, times string tension. |
|
|
|
John Sims
From:
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
|
Posted 13 Aug 2021 9:48 am
|
|
| I don't think you need to increase the headstock thickness but you can/should increase the neck thickness based on the pic you posted. I would consider making the headstock as thick as possible though as long as the tuners will fit properly. You may get some ideas from my new build (25" scale) at https://youtu.be/_4wT47G_hi0 |
|
|
|
Jim Pitman
From:
Waterbury Ctr. VT 05677 USA
|
Posted 23 Aug 2021 12:37 pm
|
|
Many Les Paul guitars have had the head the headstock break where it joins the neck. This was primarily due to the headstock angle as the grain would continue straight while the wood drops in angle. The truss rod route also weakened the area as noted.
The Les Paul headstock was angled to increase the deflection which is not necessary on a lap steel because the nut height is much greater achieving the deflection. |
|
|
|
