Where is that bouzouki Marty?

  1. Nick Gellie
    Nick Gellie
    Marty where is that bouzouki that has been spoken about? No pressure mind you.

    Here is my B-1 Crump bouzouki.

  2. Markkunkel
    Markkunkel
    Hi, folks. Isn't Marty doing some cool and creative work? I play #17 MkII every day and it is finding such a rich and complex voice. Wow.

    As a fellow fan of the longer-scale instruments, I have also been curious to see how some of Marty's ideas might flow into a bouzouki or cittern design. I know he's working on some stuff... we should keep in mind that another builder mentioned recently a $35000 start-up cost to modify an existing process to include a 2-pointer, so retooling for new body shapes, top/back profiles and bracing and sound holes, scale and headstock and neck join (oh my)...that's something. So I'm inclined to be very patient as Marty finishes his magic with this batch (and the next) and along the way brings some of the ideas he's working on to fruition.

    MK
  3. dusty miller
    dusty miller
    I was kidding about Marty having a bouzouki line in the future, in the summer batch thread.
  4. bruce.b
    bruce.b
    >>As a fellow fan of the longer-scale instruments, I have also been curious to see how some of Marty's ideas might flow into a bouzouki or cittern design. I know he's working on some stuff.<<

    Yup.
  5. Marty Jacobson
    Marty Jacobson
    Hehe, Mark is right. When I saw that comment about the $35,000 startup cost for instruments which retail at over $3,500 each, I wondered what the problem is. That's a sweet deal. I wish I could just solve the thousands of problems associated with developing a new instrument by writing a check.

    Actually, I don't wish that. As I tell my students on a daily basis, each of the problems encountered during the development process are opportunities to innovate, or opportunities to learn. Why would you want to outsource that, or relegate it to an automated process, as in the case of 3D printing?

    I actually am working as time permits on two families of longer-scale instruments. I am adapting my externally-applied sides technique to a mid-size body style, which will cover everything from mandola through 22" short scale octave mandolins, banjolas, etc. The larger scale "guitar octave mandolin" style is able to cover the range from 23" OM's and tenor guitars up through 26" mandocello scales.

    I have several people (over a dozen) interested in some variant of these, so if the prototype is a success, then I think I will do a full batch of longer scale instruments as the early 2014 batch.

    I will be cutting a mockup of the larger body style to test the ergonomics and aesthetics this weekend. I hope I can get some feedback from you all, as there are a few variations I would like to test before finalizing the form.

    Thank you all for the interest and encouragement. Thanks especially to Mark K., who has been a great sounding board as I've been studying these instruments over the past six months or so.
  6. bruce.b
    bruce.b
    Hmmm, so which build type does a 21" scale length tenor guitar fall into? I'm not even sure which body type I'd prefer.
  7. Marty Jacobson
    Marty Jacobson
    Well, I had assumed it would be on the guitar-scale body, Bruce, but you've got me thinking. There is a precedent, such as this Loar-era Gibson Tenor Lute:

    At that point, it's basically a long-scale, 4-string mandola. Which could be a very cool thing, depending on how you look at it. You could add a fifth string, too. FCGDA (mandola/tenor guitar range) or GDAEB (octave mandolin range) are possible at that scale, but CGDAE is not.
  8. bruce.b
    bruce.b
    Hi Marty,
    I wasn't sure if you were basing body type on scale length or instrument. I thought maybe the bracing pattern might impact the scale length and with the guitar body it made it difficult to go below 22". If it's a choice I don't know which I'd choose. One consideration is I tune GDAE ("Irish tenor" tuning) and I don't want a G string that is less loud then the rest. I love playing a lot on the lower strings and often choose tunes because they go down to G or use that string a lot. Also, I'm wondering how these two different bodies will effect tone and volume. I'm sure both will look very cool and be beautiful.
  9. Marty Jacobson
    Marty Jacobson
    Bruce, I know what you mean. Regardless of the instrument, I like to play tunes that "live" on the G and D string (or C and G as the case may be), as I find the lower end of an instrument usually reveals the most about its character. And it just sounds cool.
    One of the first instruments I'll build of the new smaller body style will be a short-scale octave mandolin. From there, it's just a matter of leaving off half the strings to see what a tenor guitar version might sound like. Though I would probably lighten up the structure of the top if there are only going to be four strings, so it won't be a perfect comparison. Since you already have an excellent archtop guitar in the Herb Taylor archtop, perhaps the one I make for you should be more of a tenor lute. It's something we can consider, anyway.
Results 1 to 9 of 9