Guitarbench Magazine Issue 3. Luthier Interview with Kris Barnett. by Terence Tan

T H E I N T E R V I E W: K R I S B A R N E T T

Keith Calmes turned us onto Kris Barnett who has been quietly making waves in the Classical community for his innovative ideas and unusual construction techniques. We are really fortunate to have Kris taking the time out from his building to speak to us.

Photos courtesy of K. Barnett

GUITARBENCH P LAY E R S | LU T H I E R S | C O LLE C T O R S

ACOUSTIC&CLASSICAL

Issue Tree 2012

GUITARBENCH EDITOR: Terence Tan CO-EDITOR: Jessica Pau SALES/MARKETING: Jessica Pau PROOFREADER: Doug Shaker Contributing Writers: El McMeen, Ken Bonfield, Jose Bernardo WEBSITES: guitarbench.com Our Online Magazine: www.guitarbench. com

The information and advertising set forth herein has been obtained from sources believed to be accurate. The publisher, however, does not warrant complete accuracy of such information and assumes no responsibility for any consequences arising from the use thereof or reliance thereon. Publisher reserves the right to reject or cancel any advertisement or space reservation at any time without notice. Publisher shall not be liable for any costs or damages if for any reason it fails to publish an advertisement. This publication may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Copyright ÂŠ. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is prohibited.

WE HOPE YOU ENJOYED THIS ARTICLE! Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Just $8 for all 4 full Issues in 2013 EDITORSNOTE Thank you for viewing our free article from Issue 5 of Guitarbench! Our magazine focuses on acoustic & classical guitars with the odd ukulele and lap slide.

Issue 5 Published by: T.TAN

We have an emphasis on gear features, and in depth interviews with luthiers and players.

Photograph/ Art Work: T.Tan, J.Olson, D.Wren, M.Doolin, SCGC, E.McMeen, B.Virts, D.MacCubbin, F.Alberico, L.Robinson, E.Skye, K.Bonfield, J.Bernardo, A.Green. H.Emerson, A.Miller.

Our lessons section is maturing with many professionals contributing tab and articles. Weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d love to keep producing content like this, and would like to appeal for your help. By subscribing, we can keep these articles coming! Just click on this link. Warmest Regards and happy reading, Terence Tan, Editor.

HERE’S WHAT WE HAD IN ISSUE 5 OF GUITARBENCH MAGAZINE! Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Just $8 and you’ll get all 4 full Issues in 2013, in higher quality and without so many adverts in an article.

Thank you for taking the time to speak to us, Kris. To start off, I was wondering if you could maybe relate to us how you got started in lutherie?

My first building experience was at a short seminar in which a very well known luthier quickly went over some processes he uses for his own guitars.

Lutherie was a very natural and almost certain progression for me. I have played guitar since I was a child and it is the one hobby that has endured for all of these years. The guitar has always intrigued me. The sound is very alluring and almost enchanting. It is weird because I always knew I was going to build at least one guitar in my life, but I never dreamed it would be my lifeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work or that I would embark at such an early age.

This was definitely the motivation I needed to get things moving. I practiced building for several years part time and have moved to full time for the past 2 years or so. I have never worked in a guitar shop and have never really done repairs. I am completely self taught which definitely has its pros and cons. I had to reinvent the wheel many times Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m sure, but I learned a lot through the process of trial and error and was very free to find my own way.

I had it in my head that I was going to build my first guitar in retirement, after my career as a mental health therapist came to an end. I have always enjoyed building things, taking stuff apart, working with my hands, and I have always been very inquisitive about how and why things work the way they do.

I am sure the process would have been much smoother if I had previous woodworking experience or if someone could have shown me techniques that I was having problems with early on. It was definitely very challenging at first, as can be attested by my earlier instruments, but I am improving on each and every instrument and constantly experimenting with new ideas.

I have to say that I noticed a few unusual construction techniques you use- especially for nylon stringsâ&#x20AC;Ś maybe you could let us in on your build philosophies and comment on the tailpieces and sound portsâ&#x20AC;Ś. My main focus for the instruments is to have a very strong voice, but they must remain lyrical and maintain the nuances generally associated with a great concertlevel guitar. I am not solely interested in volume, but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nice that lattice bracing gives me a head start as far as projection is concerned. I am able to focus on more intimate details of the voice, such as evenness, dynamics, sustain, etc. since the bracing naturally gives me ample volume from the start. It is interesting to see a lot of builders trying to get more volume from their instruments and this sometimes minimizes the importance of other aspects of their instruments. I use ideas that make sense to me intuitively and from a physical perspective. If the idea does not turn out in practice, I will try something else. I am very careful to only change one thing at a time when I build a new instrument so I can monitor what effect it is having on the tone and sound of the instrument.

If something works well, I will continue with it on the next guitar, but maybe change something else to see what happens. With the exception of two instruments produced for a duet, I have never made two identical instruments. I am always changing something.. The tailpiece made a lot of sense from a physics standpoint and I have never heard of a classical guitar with this type of setup. The weight of the bridge can be reduced significantly because I do not need a large gluing surface since the pulling force on the soundboard is greatly reduced. The soundboard has less mass and can therefore vibrate more efficiently. The result is a more immediate sound and a more robust tone. I am not sure what the physics say should happen with the tailpiece, but these are my own observations. I maintain the traditional break angle of the strings so it still sounds like a classical guitar. Brazilian Rosewood headstock veneer

Youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re missing a lot of great content in Issue3 Click here for the full ISSUE! INTERVIEWS

David Wren 52-65 Kris Barnett 66-79 Megan Slankard 80-82

LESSONS Celtic Guitar Masterclass with Anton Emery: Celtic Backup 40-44

FEATURES Guitar Anatomy 6-7 Honduran Mahogany 9-10 The Tree Mahogany 12-13

SPECIAL FEATURE All instruments featured in this issue are feature highly figured Mahogany from “The Tree”

Kostal Modified Dreadnought 14-22 Ryan Dragonfly 24-29 Wells The Atlantic 34-37 Elliott Steel String Model 30-33 Breedlove OM Revival 38-39 Mauel McCloud 45-48 Miller Dreadnought 49-51 Kraut Modified Dreadnought 84-85 Saville Small Jumbo 86-90 McElroy Standard 94 Shimo Sugilite 95 True North Guitar Model 1 96-99 Fleishman 100-102 Woolson Ukulele 103-104

REVIEWS Little Man 91 Songs About Something 92 Acoustic Bossa Nova 93

ARTICLE CONTINUED OVERLEAF

The soundports are very good for monitoring what is being played. It basically allows the soundwaves to be directed more at the player. Lower frequencies travel more efficiently in air so the further it has to travel the more bass heavy it will sound. Having the soundport located close to the ear allows the player to hear the higher frequencies more easily and hear the nuances of the music. I have not built a guitar without soundports for the past 3 years or so. Customers are generally sold on it as soon as they are able to hear the difference for themselves. I use a lot of newer ideas in my guitars, all of which have a great impact on the sound and/ or playability. I have a lot of information about other aspects of the instruments on my website explaining the processes and ideas behind the concepts.

Concert model with a European Spruce top over 100 yrea old Brazilian Rosewood back and sides. This guitar has several custom features such as snakewood appointments such as the headstock veneer

“Sometimes rationality and reality are two completely different things.”

I would never build a guitar using a concept that I didn’t agree with 100% or couldn’t see, feel, or hear the result for myself. I like trying to reinvent ideas and challenging myself with new concepts. Some things I try work unexpectedly well and some don’t. There is a bit of mystery involved to be quite honest. Sometimes rationality and reality are two completely different things. That is why I love getting more experience. I can rely less on physics and science and more on my own intuition. It is a great thing to not have to weigh things anymore and get stiffness to weight ratios. I am getting closer to the point where I can just tell how to treat a particular soundboard to get it to react the way I want.

Neck to headstock joint becomes an aesthetic highlight

Your choice of tonewoods is quite “traditional” from what I have seen so far… is that intentional? Wood selection is really important to me and becoming increasingly so as time goes on. I have been doing a lot of research on some of the historic builders and getting ideas from their instruments and trying to understand their building philosophy. It seems so simple but I think for a while I was getting too caught up in the next new thing and largely overlooking tradition. I am interested to see where this takes me in the future.

I guess each builder must find his or her own way because science, intellect, and theory is not a substitute for experience. As the saying goes, “that works in practice, but will it work in theory”. Some builders rely so much on their design that the wood selection becomes secondary, like having a very thin soundboard that loses the sonic quality of that particular type of wood because it is so thin, or using very non-musical woods for the bracing like balsa.

I was using balsa for a while, but when I actually took weight measurements the difference So many things are happening now with between spruce bracing and balsa/graphite was composite tops, double tops, double backs, triple negligible. Granted the graphite is stiffer, but I backs, lattice, carbon fiber, etc. and many of the think that amount of strength is overkill for my ideas are contradictory to what used to be held as design. true.

Snakewood binding with Brazilian Rosewood back and sides

It really stopped making sense because I realized I was basically gluing sponges to the bottom of the soundboard. I think that using spruce and/ or cedar for bracing really brings out richness in the sound that was absent with the balsa design. I always thought my balsa/graphite guitars were good, but there was something missing from the sound. The newer design has definitely put the guitars into a better realm. But, these are just my opinions and observations and do not necessarily carry over for other people or other builders. There are many different ways to obtain great results I suppose. I mainly use cedar and spruce for the soundboards, but I am fairly sure that Redwood and Port Orford Cedar are in my future at some point. I have heard really good things about these woods but havenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t had the opportunity to try them yet.

About 80% of my guitars are cedar, which have some very sprucey characteristics that a lot of customers enjoy. I have actually been working on some new bracing ideas using Phi as a starting point. It is still somewhat lattice braced, but more like overlapping fan bracing. All of the dimensions are based on the Golden Ratio, like spacing between the struts, strut length, angles, etc. This really made sense to me as almost everything in nature is based on this ratio, the way that trees grow, our musical scales, harmonic overtones, etc. Stradivarius used this proportion a lot, as did many great architects, sculptors, painters, stock investors, and even doctors. The guitars have been very well received so far and I think this is going to be the direction I pursue indefinitely. I have only made three guitars with this design but they were very special instruments indeed.

Hand made American guitars

theacousticmusicco.co.uk 39, St Jamesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, St Brighton, UK. 01273 671841

Handmade American guitars Over 50 in stock from ÂŁ1595

Hamblin GC

Bashkin Placencia OM

And how about wood for the neck, backs and sides? I have always used Spanish cedar for my necks because it is a bit lighter than Mahogany which is helpful because of the added weight of the truss rod. The back and sides are usually Brazilian Rosewood, but I can really use any type of wood that is available in veneer form. For example, I am building a stunning Macassar Ebony guitar now for a customer. It has some very striking features and will likely be a very interesting guitar. Since it is a pressed back I can use very highly figured wood without worrying about longevity issues. It is nice using the arched back and laminated sides because I never have to worry about splitting or checking. When everything is assembled the back and sides are nearly indestructible. I thought for sure that the laminating process would take some of the tonal qualities of the wood out of the equation, but it seems this is being discredited. I can hear a distinct difference in the tone of the back when it is glued up. The Macassar Ebony is the same design as the Brazilian backs, but the tone is much lower with a strong fundamental. The Brazilian backs have a very strong belllike quality, and Indian rosewood is somewhere in between the two. It is always interesting for people to hear such a wonderful sound from a laminated back. It has a lot to do with the glue used and the methods of construction. My idea is to get the back and sides as stiff as possible. The sides maintain the motion of the soundboard and the back to reflect sound waves efficiently from the top. The doming on the back is functioning like a parabolic reflector which will send the waves in a different direction than where they originated from thus eliminating wave interference which will make for a much more even tone. It also helps a lot with projection and volume. When you talk about laminating the backs how do you go about it? I have been experimenting recently with how that backs are made. I have been altering the number of layers to see how this affects the tone, using different types of woods for the interior, and using different brands of adhesives. I will use anywhere from 4 to 7 layers, depending on what type of sound I am trying to get from the guitar. The laminates are stacked on top of one another with a very strong two-part glue that is formulated specifically for structural lamination. This reduces veneer creep and distortion that would be caused using other types of glues.

These layers are placed in a mould that has a very pronounced compound arch. The whole assembly is then placed in a vacuum which uses atmospheric pressure to press the substrates into the shape of the mould. It is left in the press for at least 8-10 hours. The whole process is much more labour intensive and difficult than using a traditional solid back. Working with veneers is difficult because they are so fragile and getting everything lined up properly while in the mould presents its own set of difficulties. Then there is actually making the mould, finding the right vacuum press, researching different adhesives, and figuring out a process that will yield satisfactory results. Despite the increase in time, energy, and money, I really don’t think I will ever go back to solid woods though. The results are too rewarding.

So there’s no lattice work between the layers?

Not yet. It is something I have thought about, but have not tried. The laminate process keeps the back and sides pretty stiff. My guitars are somewhat heavy, but nowhere near some of the other lattice guitars. I think the main advantage of the lattice system is to decrease weight and maintain rigidity. I am not so concerned with weight on the back because it is not moving like the soundboard. If I were to try something like this I would probably use Nomex and layer it similar to a double top. I have read some interesting things about Nomex and its tendency to break down under certain circumstances so this may not ever happen. I guess it is a good thought experiment though.

Maybe it’s time to talk about finishes?

Yeah… I have tried a lot of different things, primarily because I have not been entirely happy with any one of them until recently. I think my days of experimenting with finishes are finally over! That is a really great thing to be able to say. Finishing is an art in itself and can be very finicky and challenging. It makes sense that a lot of luthiers are commissioning their work to professional finishers because the process can be so labour intensive and frustrating. I have used many different types of varnishes, oils, shellac, lacquer, urethane, qualasole, and have used them in different combinations on different parts of the guitar. I think it is safe to say that until recently I have not used the same finishing methods on any two guitars.

I really used to like using urethane because it is very resilient and easy to care for, but as I worked with other finishes I realized it was a little too glossy and looked a bit out of place. There were certain things I liked about different finishes, but all of them seemed to have some negative qualities which would deter me from using it in the future. My newest method has been used on about 5 guitars now and everyone who has seen it absolutely loves it, including myself. I first use a type of epoxy to fill the pores and seal the wood. After that has settled I French polish the entire guitar, with the exception of the neck which is oiled, until I have built up a good base. I then spray 2-3 really thin coats of satin nitrocellulose lacquer over top. After that has cured properly I will then go over it with 0000 steel wool to eliminate any remaining sheen. The finish is extremely thin and has a very organic appearance. I really prefer the look of these new instruments over their shiny counterparts, even if it is entirely French polished. I used to use this same process, but use a high gloss urethane instead of lacquer. The results were okay, but urethane is naturally very thick and does not evaporate or shrink like lacquer. Urethane cures by chemical reaction so what you spray on is exactly what will remain. Lacquer cures by solvent evaporation so it will actually get thinner as time passes. It is possible to get urethane very thin, but it is very difficult to get perfect. I recently posted new photos of a recent guitar on my website. I have been doing a lot of research, as I normally do, and it looks like these types of â&#x20AC;&#x153;hybridâ&#x20AC;? finishes are becoming more commonplace. I think it is a very good alternative to French polishing, both acoustically and aesthetically.

With the hybrid finishes, would repairs be more challenging than say a straight French polish? Not necessarily. If I used urethane the repairs would be much more difficult because urethane does not amalgamate like shellac and lacquer. It is also nice that lacquer and shellac are very comfortable with one another so you donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t get any adhesion issues. Repairs can be done just like if you were repairing a guitar finished with only lacquer. How about something which folks donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t tend to talk a lot about: scale lengths? Scale length is really important. My typical instrument has a 653mm string length with compensated nut and saddle. A shorter scale means less tension is needed to bring the guitar to concert pitch which can have adverse effects on the instrumentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sound. It is possible to offset this a bit during the building process, but not entirely. Some guitars will be affected more by changes in scale length than others for whatever reasons. I feel like there are a lot of ways to make a guitar easier to play for someone rather than changing the scale length, like reduced neck thickness, neck width, neck profile, string spacing, etc. Working with the builder directly is very beneficial because you have the opportunity to discuss issues that were problematic with previous instruments and really find out what the customer is looking for in the guitar, sonically, visually, and mechanically. After talking with the customer about the pros and cons of a shorter scale they almost always opt for the standard scale and are very pleased with the results. I really like using 660 scales because of the tonal benefits, but it is fairly rare that I get an order for a longer scale.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;There is no consummate sound because everyone has their own preferencesâ&#x20AC;?