Custom D-18 Question

[Jed C]

I am getting a guitar from a guy based out of Kansas who builds custom guitars. It is basically a D-18 Golden Era. Tone woods - Honduran Mahogany and Adorondak Spruce. Forward shifted x-bracking.

I have the option to get a large sound hole at no extra charge. Would this be a wise choice? Clay Hess told me in person that every large sound hole guitar he had ever played was "muddy".???

Here is an Honduran/Adorondak guitar that he built with a regular sound hole. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNqBUOtXu54

Your input is really appreciated!
Thanks!

[Dave Engel]

Hi Jed,

Get a Takamine Bluegrass, otherwise I'd go with a traditional hole on a Dred. If the big hole thing worked worth a hoot, all the big boys would have that sucker bored out on all their models... but they don't. Just my .02.

Dave

[L.J. Mattingly]

Well, the larger hole seems to work for Tony Rice on Clarence's old D-28 and on the Tony Rice model Santa Cruz. I have played some TRSC guitars that were wonderful but not everyone sees and hears things the same way.
The ideal thing would be to side by side compare the two but with a custom job, that may be hard to do since he won't have extra guitars sitting around.
Talk to the builder about what he feels the advantages would be and try to play a guitar or two with the larger soundhole to see if you like the sound and the looks of it before you make up your mind. Their are a lot of guitars out there with larger soundholes, so some people must like them a lot.
On this forum, Dudley Murphy plays a Tony Rice Santa Cruz, so you might want to ask his opinon of the large soundhole and see what he thinks. I know he loves that guitar and he sounds wonderful on it.
If it is something you are really not sure about, sticking with the standard shape may not be a bad idea since this is something you are going to have for a long time.


LJ

[John Bauman]

This has long been a perplexing question for which nobody seems to have a totally objective answer. I have recently come across some research that shows what I believe to be evidence that the crux of the large soundhole matter has basis in mathematical calculation.

Here's the truth (as finally concluded through scientific research and mathematical calculation): The larger the soundhole, the more sound escapes it. Here's the equation:

So, following this logical progression, if a larger soundhole allows more sound to escape, then the largest soundhole = the loudest guitar. And this -- now having been proven beyond reasonable doubt -- means that if the guitar was entirely soundhole, the volume of that sucker would be AMAZING!

Need for amplification? ....obsolete

So now I can already anticipate the next obvious question(s)...

So, if the guitar is all soundhole, then where would I attach the strings?

And if I ever accidentally left my all-soundhole guitar out of its case.....how would I find it again?

Well, my friend, you have stumbled upon what we scientist-types call "The law of diminishing return". That is -- some compromise is called for. You can't string or find the ALL soundhole guitar, as loud (and inherently inexpensive) as it may be. So you're going to have to find some middle ground. Maybe a small stick with a couple of strings on it?

We all have to find these compromises for ourselves. Hope this helps.

[L.J. Mattingly]

John, I think I see a mis-spelling in your diagram but I am not sure since I don't know a lot of those words to begin with (or, with which to begin, if you want to be proper, English-wise).
My original advice stands and even looks better now.

LJ

[Jed C]

Dude, I am lost. I have no idea what you are talking about. Sorry, this stuff is way over my head.

[L.J. Mattingly]

Don't worry about not understanding John. He was just having a little fun. Half the time he does not understand himself!

LJ

[Bob Minner]

Well, the big sound hole thing is overrated. You have Clarence White (God rest his soul) for that. The D 28 'bone' that Clarence modified was an exceptional guitar to begin with, and it was rosewood - that makes a difference. And on an old herringbone like that, that rosewood is old and dreid and really punchy, so a bigger soundhole may have helped some. But that is the exception.

I agree with Clay on the muddiness factor. New guitars, in general, are nowhere near old vintage Martins in tone, projection, and punch (there are exceptions on both sides though). So I can see where guys want to enhance the volume with a bigger soundhole. I say be happy with what God gave you! :-) Soundhole envy is a biatch.....

Now, I will say this: for what you will spend on a new custom guitar, save your pennies and get a real vintage D-18. You will probably find everything you are looking for in that vintage guitar. You can get into a mid to late '40s D-18 pretty reasonable considring the market, and more importantly, their increase every year in value. That's why I took the dive and bought my '46 herringbone. Yeah it costs alot, but the tone was there, the projection was there, and the investment was there. And it just gets better on all those levels the more I play it.

The bigger soundhole thing is a rarity caused by Clarence. It may have seemed like a great idea to him at the time, and it sure has helped Tony, but I would avoid it myself. Btw, if you want a real vintage D-18, my buddy Frank Ray is THE vintage guy (imho), without the price gouging so common in that circle. His e-mail is: [e-mail] He has some good D-18s at good prices. You won't regret it.

[L.J. Mattingly]

Clarence's guitar soundhole was enlarged to get rid of some chewed up wood and probably he was just thinking it would look better cleaned up rather than having any ideas about improving the sound. There was a great write up about that guitar in Fret Board Journal a few issues back and once you read it you will be surprised the guitar survived at all.
He probably could have played a cigar box guitar and made it sound good.

LJ

[Jed C]

The standard size hole is starting to look like the way I need to go. Has anyone watched this guys video?

[John Bauman]

Sorry for the fun. Didn't mean to confuse the issue.

Chalk me up on the side of "no gain from the enlarged soundhole". It is, at this point, a cosmetic homage (even if well deserved) to the most famous guitar in flatpicking, and serves little, if any other purpose.

Yes, I listened to the video and thought the guitar sounded as wonderful as it looked.

[Dudley Murphy]

Hi Jed,

My Santa Cruz Tony Rice model has a large sound hole and is not muddy sounding ... however, I decided not to enlarge the sound hole on my 1958 D-28 after Richard Hoover convinced me that I probably wouldn't notice any change in the sound of the guitar with the enlargement. I think he was right ... the old D-28 sounds great. What would it have sounded like with with an enlarged sound hole? Of course nobody knows and I don't really care since it sounds so good as it is.

While I am capable of some minor guitar repairs my main interest is playing ... so maybe I'm not the guy to best answer your question.

Listen to Rice & Grisman on the Tone Poems album ... those guys make a wide range of instruments sound wonderful. They also make an important point: the player makes the biggest difference, not always the guitar and what may have been done to it. Of course that's Rice & Grisman ... the rest of us might want to hedge a little on the side of a better than ordinary guitar.

My suggestion is, when possible, to always buy an instrument that you've played and enjoyed. Guitars can be a little unpredictable and after one has spent good money, it would be tragic to not like the way your new guitar sounds.

Take care.

Dudley

[L.J. Mattingly]

I watched the video, too, and thought the guitar sounded wonderful.
Looks like you picked a good builder!

LJ