There is a great program that matches active duty Service Members with guitar builders here: http://www.cigarboxnation.com/group/cbgsforsoldiers

The idea is that a lot of people serving our country would like to play an instrument in their time off away from their families. Right now I have 2 Ukuleles and 4 Cigar Box guitars in progress to donate to the program. If you build, I encourage you to build something to send over. If you Don’t build why not buy one for a service member?

If this is something you would like to do, write me and I’ll work something for cost or pretty near it, I’ll continue to donate my time.

While guitars are a rewarding hobby for me I do have a day job that pays the bills. I work as a consultant on HR related issues and Human Performance. I also write a blog that supports that business and I recently published the following blog that draws some parallels between guitars and my day job. You can find my business blog at www.media1.us

My biggest hobby outside of work is building musical instruments. I don’t have a woodworking or lutherie background. In fact, I’ve never taken a single class on either, and my dad is more shade tree mechanic than wood worker. So my instruments are generally pretty primitive.

I started building instruments out of cigar boxes. The practice of building instruments out of found objects is nothing new, in fact there is a long history of improvising to create something that you couldn’t afford for less than the cost to acquire that item. If you don’t have anything good to work from, then use what you have and improvise.

While this is a rewarding hobby for me, and it keeps me sharp in a lot of areas in my business life, my HR clients are not dealing with “found objects”. They don’t need to, and can’t afford to improvise on their talent to meet the needs of their companies. They are more mature at the practice of HR than a proverbial cigar box guitar.

The thing about learning slowly through experience alone is that while it takes a while, the journey is fairly rewarding. But the costs to get the experience are astronomical. Part of that cost is time, some of it is materials, tools have been a major expense, and some of it is lost to mistakes made.
As my skills have improved, the instruments I build take more time,
and the cost of materials I used have escalated rapidly.

Measure twice, cut once is an over-used cliché, especially when we are talking about ruining a 99 cent 2×4 that is part of the unseen interior hidden by drywall. But when I’m using a $100 set of spalted curly maple (as seen in the picture to the right), that over-used cliché suddenly means something. I measure multiple times from multiple directions because there are real consequences if I make a mistake. But it’s more than the cost of wood. That piece of wood directly determines how the instrument sounds, how it plays, and how attractive the end result is. It also determines, if I choose to sell it, how much I can sell that finished instrument for.

Companies spend more on their people than any other expense on the balance sheet, yet too many of them treat people like a 99 cent 2×4 and not like a beautiful set of unique one-of-a-kind wood that directly affects their profitability. That’s not to say that they treat those employees poorly, it’s that they fail to measure, let alone twice, what the real value of that person to the organization really is.

This is also more than a “cut” metaphor; this isn’t about “staff reduction” as much as it’s about being smart about how people are applied to the end result.

I want to build better guitars. If you want a better HR function, measurement that means something
needs to be part of your approach. You will never improve without it.

Truth is that guitar string manufacturers and guitar manufactures have been lying to us, the thing is really there is no good reason for it. Most prepackaged guitar string sets are all wrong because they are not optimized for the notes and scale lengths that they are intended for.

The fact is that for every string gauge (thickness) given a fixed scale length, there is an optimal tension range where good sustain is achieved and fretted notes still sound good and feel good. Then there is a range of notes above and below that optimal tension that will work, but the note will sound increasingly floppy or lose sustain on the upper end.

For example, let’s take a look at a “standard” D’addario exl110 electric guitar set:

Diameter         Tension     Note Inches lbs E 0.0100 16.200 B 0.0130 15.400 G 0.0170 16.600 D 0.0260 18.400 A 0.0360 19.500 E 0.0460 17.500

Notice no two strings have the same tension very few are even within a half pound, and there is no rhyme or reason as to why. Some notes will sing, While others will sound flat and muddy. This wasn’t lost on D’Addario so they have now introduced “Balanced” string sets. This is the exact same nickel steel wound string in a balanced configuration. The exl110BT set:

Diameter

Tension

Notice that in this set, everything is in the 16-17 pound tension range? If you compare this set to the “standard” set only the high E and the high G where in an optimal range. ( Note: I have no idea how they magically reduced the tension of a .046 from 17.5 in standard set, to 16.9 on a balanced set, but for now let’s assume they’ve figured this out)

So what does all of this mean to people who build and play guitars, especially in open tunings? It means that prepackaged sets of strings are an exceptionally poor choice as a starting point for our homemade instruments.

To begin with, D’ Addario uses a 25. 5 inch scale to calculate all of their string tensions. This is the scale that fender uses on Stratocasters and Telecasters. However, Gibson uses a 25 inch scale  on most of their instruments. While the low E (.046) on the above set yields a tension of 16.91 on a 25.5″ scale, on a 25″ scale that tension rises to 18.44 (calculated using http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html). That’s a pretty dramatic difference. Scale length is a critical component in achieving optimized tension. (Note: this doesn’t make sense, shorter scale tension should decrease tension using the same scale, some thing smells funny with the data from the string companies and the calculators)

So let’s take a look at what a 25″ scale GDGB tuned cigar box instrument should have for strings shooting for a 16.5 pound tension.

Diameter

Tension

B          .014                                                        17.01

G          .017                                                       15.86

D          .022                                                       17.16

G          .036                                                       16.32

Using commonly available strings this is really as close as we can get, but no pre packaged sets include the four gauges that I am aware of. Also notice that the “balanced” D’Addario set comes with at least one not so common gauge for the high B, .0135.

You are much better off assembling your string sets together from singles if you are using alternate tunings or non traditional numbers of strings.

For a very “colorful” explanation of string tension see: http://www.zacharyguitars.com/Strings.htm

D’Addario publishes a string tension guide that you can find here: http://daddario.com/upload/tension_chart_13934.pdf

And the string tension calculator I used, can be found here: http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html

Thanks to Penny Nelson for this handy tension calculator as well http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_guitar_string.htm

I’ve been playing with zero frets a bit lately and I’ve decided that I like them.

So what is a zero fret?

A zero fret is a fret in the position that a nut normally would be and the concept is that an open note will have the same character as a fretted note since both notes are created from the same string to fret intereaction. I’m not really sure that I buy that, or that it makes that big of a difference, but it sure makes nut making and setup a lot easier.

When you use a zero fret configuration, the zero fret sets your action height at the end of the fretboard, the nut simply controls spacing. This makes intonation better at the lower frets and allows me to get a consistent reasonably low action.

The downside, if there really is one, is that the bridge height needs to be at a sufficient height to have an angle greater than that of the fretboard. This means that the higher up the neck you go the higher the action will be and the more compensation will be required at the bridge. Conceptually with a traditional nut you should be able to have lower action across the entire fret board, but it’s still very difficult to achieve.

I may change my mind tomorrow, but for today i can get excellent results using a zero fret and I’m going to stick with it for a bit.