Gibson soundhole diameter?

[retrorod]

I just noticed the other day,while I had my '72 J100 out and next to my Guild jumbo JF-30, that the soundhole in my Gibby looked smaller than the the one in the Guild. It is quite noticeable as they both have jumbo body shapes.

For kicks and curiosity, I broke out the 6" rule and measured the diameter of both. The J100 measured a full 3-7/8". The Guild measured almost 4-1/8". For comparison, I checked my CF100E(smaller LG shape). It measured 4". I don,t have a dread-shape Gibson at this time to check its measurement.

For those of you with Gibson jumbos(J100,J200), I am curious what the soundhole diameter is on your guitars? Is 4" diameter standard on J45,SJ's etc. and jumbos slightly smaller?

This may be trivial....but it has my curiosity up.

 

My Early 70's J100 is a rather obscure Gibson. Other than the brief description in Gruhns guitar ID book, I don,t find much info on it. It has 70's features but has the orange oval label(from '60,s and is X-braced.Plus a smaller than 4" soundhole! I often thought it may have been a prototype or employee guitar.

Heres a pic of the body(mahogany B&S and spruce/maybe cedar top)

[AnneS]

Soundhole on my 2000 J-100xtra is exactly 4".

 

The plot thickens...

 

 

[retrorod]

Soundhole on my 2000 J-100xtra is exactly 4".

 

The plot thickens...

Oh yes, it does thicken. As Columbo would say...."Oh yes Anne S...just one more thing. Was said measurement taken with a steel ruler or a tape measu.......?" Bwaa-ha-ha .

Thanks a lot for checking yours. Hopefully others will weigh in and I can reach a consensus.. :huh:

or not Rod

[onewilyfool]

I guess size DOES matter.......even if we are talking about our holes......

 

Has anyone ever "Clarence White-d" their hole????

[retrorod]

I haven't......Yet! I firmly believe this J100 would be a candidate. I just feel that a little bigger soundhole would really open the sucker up tonally. It is a fairly loud guitar when strummed hard,but I can,t help but think that it could be better...Rod

[E-minor7]

I've Clarence White-d the grammophone all my life, but never the guitars. Is it worth doin ?

[passthej45]

I'm in the uninformed club....what is "Clarence White'd"??????

[E-minor7]

Is it true we no longer can insert videos - I've had problems twice. . .

[E-minor7]

Clarence White was the excellent guitarist in the later incarnation of the The Byrds and the inventor* of the Telecaster B-bender (try to look that up).

What he did to his sound holes is new to me. Better leave that one to vily.

 

 

 

My linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9cINH9yob4

 

 

* with Gene Parsons

[onewilyfool]

Clarence White enlarged his sound hole on his D-28 guitar. He is famous for it.....Tony Rice now has this guitar and it is considered the "holy grail" of D-28's. Here is a modern reissue at Elderly....NOTE: the larger sound hole........for those of you who are into size....

 

http://www.elderly.com/new_instruments/items/D28CW.htm

[E-minor7]

Aahh yes, makes the board stick out. Is this extended diameter louder speaking. . .

[eltonwce]

You can see Clarence and his brother Roland on some of the old Andy Griffith show. if not for a drunk driver possibly would have been one of the best known guitars players of all time. Check out the Byrds Untitled double album.

[rar]

Aahh yes, makes the board stick out. Is this extended diameter louder speaking. . .

 

The effects of having an enlarged sound hole are controversial. In theory, it raises the Helmholtz resonance of the box (by a semitone or two), and thus enhances the mids and trebles. That would help explain the popularity of this mod for bluegrass, as enhanced mids and trebles equates to more cut when playing in an ensemble. But that's not what some people report hearing. Some claim to hear more bass, exactly the opposite of what theory predicts. Plus, a lot of fans of the large sound hole (luthier Bryan Kinsey, for example) like them because they feel it changes projection -- more spread out, rather than sharply focused in front -- not the tone. In particular, the player can hear the guitar better. (Which might explain why some dread players report that the change made their guitar bassier.)

 

My only guitar with a large sound hole definitely has stronger mids than its nearest small sound-holed cousins -- which is good, because that's why the guy who choose the specs went with a large sound hole -- but this isn't a model for which there is an exact small sound hole counterpart.

 

By the way, part of the reason the fretboard sticks out so far on the CW/TR D-28 is that the original fretboard was swapped for a longer Guild Gretsch [correction courtesy JT] fretboard back when Clarence owned it. (That poor ol' guitar has been through a lot!) Tony thinks that the extended fretboard partially mitigates that effects of the larger sound hole, and also that the larger sound hole doesn't make much difference in the first place. Like I said, it's controversial.

 

-- Bob R

[onewilyfool]

On the hole, I don't think we will every really know. Like playing ten J-45's, you would get different sounds from each, change the sound hole on each of them.....and you may get different effects too......we are dealing with wood, and it is not a uniform material......probably all soundhole changes would be subtle and like "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" the differences would be subjective too......

[retrorod]

Okay, Nice dissertation on the Clarence White'd soundhole effect RAR. I would say that size would make a difference.... especially to the extremes.

I think we can safely assume that the 'standard' Gibson soundhole is 4"? I did some googling and found that the the Robert Johnson L1 has a 3-3/4" soundhole. The vintage 'Century of Progress' small bodied Gibson has a 4-1/8" soundhole.

Thinking on the lines of 'standard templates' for building different models of Gibsons, I would think there is a 'rhyme to the reason'....??

Now get them measuring sticks out.... ;)

[E-minor7]

Just had to do some measure tool math (not my strongest side). If I'm not too far off, 4 inches is supposed to be 101,6 mm. That's what I find on my 45 and 2 60'ties SJ's.

Imagine Clarence removed approx. 4-5 mm's.

rar does a good job digging into the theme, but soon bumps his head on the ceiling of contradiction.

vily isn't willing to believe there is an overall logic to trick.

I'm not that sure.

Would have been nice to hear from Mr. White himself.

Does that rare J-100 sound as convincing as it looks ?

[rar]

Would have been nice to hear from Mr. White himself.

 

I'm not sure he could help. Here's the story of how it was acquired, from Bryan Kimsey [slightly edited by Yours Truly]:

 

Eric [White], Sr., with Roland and Clarence in tow, bought the guitar, SN 58957, at McCabe's guitar store in Los Angeles [actually, in Santa Monica (on Pico) -- still around and still a great shop, except for the fact that it doesn't carry Gibson] for about $25-35 (Roland recalls $25 and Rice recalls $35, but whatever it was, Roland said they bought it because it was the only one they could afford). The guitar had been previously owned by a woman with polio from UCLA and traded in on a new guitar in about 1959. The soundhole had already been enlarged and Roland thought it was done as part of an attempt to clean up the looks of the guitar. Evidently, the soundhole was pretty beat up and so someone just sliced out the offending section, resulting in the big hole.

 

-- Bob R

[E-minor7]

Allright then, we're gettin' wiser : The B-bender - a scientific landmark. The enlarged s-hole - pure coincidence.

 

Have to rotate my beloved Byrdmaniax album and listen up.

 

[jt]

The Spring 2007 issue of Fretboard Journal contains a long, very interesting dissertation on Tony's #68957. It covers virtually every detail about the guitar, including that Gretsch fingerboard.

[Hogeye]

Okay, Nice dissertation on the Clarence White'd soundhole effect RAR. I would say that size would make a difference.... especially to the extremes.

I think we can safely assume that the 'standard' Gibson soundhole is 4"? I did some googling and found that the the Robert Johnson L1 has a 3-3/4" soundhole. The vintage 'Century of Progress' small bodied Gibson has a 4-1/8" soundhole.

Thinking on the lines of 'standard templates' for building different models of Gibsons, I would think there is a 'rhyme to the reason'....??

Now get them measuring sticks out.... ;)

We all know that Clarence White damaged the soundhole on his guitar. The pick hit the bottom of the sound hole and just plain wore it out. To cover up the damage a bit they just enlarged the soundhole to remove the damaged wood. The same for the Guild fretboard. He wore out the old one and the only thing they had laying around was the Guild so..... No big mystery here. The secret in his sound was in his fingers. The guy could play..It's all sorts of fun and I bet that someone will gouge a hole in a classical and try to get the Willy Nelson magic next.

 

Gibson uses many specs to get the desired sound. Long scale/ short scale. Mahogany/Rosewood. Square shoulder/round shoulder. They have different sizes of soundholes for X braced and ladder braced guitars. The Arlo Guthrie is only 3 1/4 inch. I guess Arlo has a little one. Yikes. Sorry Arlo...

I would encourage you to get out a saw and attack the J-100 and report back. You may be on to something. There is a point in diminishing return and you should be careful. Probably void the warranty.This debate has gone on for many years so the only way for you to resolve it is to start sawing.

 

Like most things in life you may want to leave it alone and get one of the many copies of Clarence's guitar.

 

I was amused by the plastic gadget that folks were buying. It's a piece of rubber that fits into the soundhole? Hmmmmmm Well if someone were to want his equipment smaller he could just get one of those.

 

OK.. Let me see the flames now. This should open up a real debate. It's alright I'm a big kid and can take it.

[E-minor7]

I would encourage you to get out a saw and attack. . .

He he he, guess you are the type that will also encourage a decent round of Russian roulette after a few hours of poker and 3 bottles of booze on a late 'guys without wives' night. Not sure I'm with you. The thought is exiting, but the risk is too high. Like trying to revoice a good, but not excellent guitar with sandpaper and scalpel, then finding it has got insane the next morning.

 

Then again, , , maybe the old cheap one from the attic could be the dummy. Still it takes a touch of carpentry.

[retrorod]

This debate has gone on for many years so the only way for you to resolve it is to start sawing.

 

Like most things in life you may want to leave it alone and get one of the many copies of Clarence's guitar.

 

No flames necessary! Just chill a little Hogeye! I haven,t got the 'debate' out of my system and not ready to get the Dremel and router out quite yet!

First off ,we were talking Gibson Jumbo....Not some dead man,s 'wallowed-hole' D28!(although it turned to that)....

And yes EMinor7, The J-100 is 'rather persuasive'

Rod

[E-minor7]

Not seldom I feel as turning deaf when tuning in on this alive and kicking board : All those guitars with no sound to them.

 

Your J-100 is one those one would like to actually hear. There is a Martin seriousness to it, but I believe the guitar rings GIBSON all the way. Maybe a cedar top, you say - It would mean a sensible very responsive and tender tone, I am told. James Taylor chooses cedertops for his Olsons.

 

Surely the threads can take odd and interesting turns - people tend to get inspired and adventurous. Remember some time ago when I commented on a huge artists Gibson-model. That theme ended like several pages of heated political discussion - a bit dramatic, but kind of funny in the rear mirror.

[rar]

... that Gretsch fingerboard.

 

Oops!

 

Thanks,

-- Bob R

[retrorod]

Not seldom I feel as turning deaf when tuning in on this alive and kicking board : All those guitars with no sound to them.

 

Your J-100 is one those one would like to actually hear. There is a Martin seriousness to it, but I believe the guitar rings GIBSON all the way. Maybe a cedar top, you say - It would mean a sensible very responsive and tender tone, I am told. James Taylor chooses cedertops for his Olsons.

 

Surely the threads can take odd and interesting turns - people tend to get inspired and adventurous. Remember some time ago when I commented on a huge artists Gibson-model. That theme ended like several pages of heated political discussion - a bit dramatic, but kind of funny in the rear mirror.

Hey,Its all good! You are 'spot on' with your words. Its all about the guitars, anyway.

I have also turned some threads in my time! My new signature could be.....

"I use to turn heads.....now I turn threads"... <_< Sometimes accidentally and other times intentionally, just to get the excitement of "hitting a hornets' nest" .

 

 

I realize that this post was a bit of a stretch..(about as exciting and subjective as a discussion of bridge pin materials) .....But it has been enlightening.....Now hmmmmm...where is my saw