|
|
#17
03-08-2007, 01:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"I think Ryan and Olson build flat."
Kevin builds the soundboard flat and arches the backs. The pictures that I received with the nightingale show quite a remarkable fixture for machining the side radii before attaching the back. I believe the increased volume leads to the incredible sustain he achieves. Regards, Jack 
|
|
#18
03-08-2007, 01:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 Ryan and Olson do huh? Maybe that's why I'm not fond of the sound of their guitars...
|
|
#19
03-08-2007, 03:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Sustain is a simple principle in engineering terms. Do you remember your physics labs? The factors that determine sustain are stiffness and rigidity. The more stiff/rigid the guitar is, the more it will sustain. Volume is not relevant.
__________________
“Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all.” ― G.K. Chesterton
|
|
#20
03-08-2007, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The dome
Part of the purpose of the dome is to increase the strength of the top so you can thin the soundboard out more -- thus giving a more responsive top.
True, more arch means a "higher resonate frequency" but that doesn't necessarily mean less bass response. Changing the bracing or voicing approach can compensate for variances in the dome. I understand (and agree with) Tim's point where "all things being equal", but they rarely are. In the end, I think you need to figure out how to build a great sounding guitar your way. Part of that comes via experimentation, experience and learning from the masters. Certainly I think Ervin's class is a "must do" for any modern guitar builder, but even with this class under your belt you will still develop your own style.
|
