GIBSON MK-35 Advice/Thoughts

[Gary Fried]

Hi, 

I currently have this Gibson MK-35 in my shop for some intonation issues.  It also has a worn bridge plate that could use replacement or reinforcement.  The problem is that this guitar evidently used some odd construction techniques that complicate the potential repair. I have attached some pics of the bridge plate and the bridge area of the guitar. It appears that someone has already re-glued the bridge and didn't take the time to position it correctly.  I appears that the bridge was re-glued about 1/8" closer to the nut than should have been. I was wondering if anybody on this forum has had any experience with these guitars and if so what advice you can give. I am honestly thinking that this repair will be more headache than anything else. And yes the bridge plate is smothered with glue.

 

 

Thanks

[Thomas James]

Lowatter - My perception is that Gibson did a poor job executing the design. The quality control on the ones I have seen is underwhelming at best.

fyi: There are a couple of excellent articles in American Lutherie about Kasha and Schnieder, if you haven't discovered them already.

[Ned Knepp]

Take a look at Steve Klein's guitars. His translation of Kasha's design are unique. 

[lowatter]

Yes Klien's guitars are phenominal I especially like his ergo electrics. It must be soo satisfying to design/build for a living(if you are making a living at it).

[Ned Knepp]

Yeah, ... I think that "making a living at it" may be the trick.

[Jeff Highland]

Actually Kerry,  as far as I am aware, Kasha was not a Luthier at all, let alone a "Master Luthier".

He did not actually build instruments himself, but proposed a number of changes to the design of the guitar to improve it's efficiency.

The most recognizable of these is the impedance matched bridge.

He also proposed a "heavy neck" to avoid energy loss through neck motion. This is not particularly unique as Overholtzer had been doing this with his solid brazillian rosewood necks. It was however considered ergonomically unacceptable by many players.

His concept of confining the "treble area" of the soundboard had also been used by some of the Spanish luthiers.

[Kerry Krishna]

 Jeff, I bow to your superior interlect. I should refresh my memory before writing stuff like that, and I will remember this little lesson!

 I just remembered the long ago articles that I read at the time in FRETs magazine and such.  And I got Klien and Kasha mixed up is all, so I hope you all understand?

And I  would guess that when he found out that the Gibson models with partly his design were all starting to fall apart within a year or so of being built, he must have been pretty horrified. 

[Jeff Highland]

No  offence or implication of superiority intended Kerry, it just did not sit well to see that much abused term "Master Luthier" applied to Kasha.

Now Klein, he did some interesting stuff,,,,,,,,

[Peter Poyser]

Quote: "I hope you all understand?"

 

 

It's all to the good.

As one realise's more Facts about the History of this and the Design, NEED to be shared.

It's very easy to presume a lot of knowledge and understanding, and thus leave out  many Details that would otherwise be interesting and helpful.

There's just so many Facets involved in the History and Development. Whilst for me, the Business Politics and Commercial Economics are as fascinating as the Guitar Design.

 

 

Quote: "Actually Kerry,  as far as I am aware, Kasha was not a Luthier at all, let alone a "Master Luthier"."

 

 

Quite.

He was a Scientist and a Distinguished One.

But Kasha Designed his System, specially to be utilised on Nylon Strung Classical Guitars, the Strings of which, Segovia Made Acceptable.

One of my Friends is an Enthusiast of Great Flamenco Guitars and has Seven of the Rarest Flamenco Guitars fabricated by the Historic, Great Makers.

The Characteristic Hallmark Distinctions we accept Today as Distinguishing Flamenco Guitars and Classical Guitars simply did not once exist, and that point lies not too deeply in the Past.

The Young Andres Segovia shaped a Classical Repertoire favouring a Santos Hernandez built in Manuel Ramirez Workshop and Established the Classical Guitar as a Concert Instrument to the great surprise of many Music Professionals.

But one of the Problems of Performing in Orchestral Sized Concerts Halls he severely Battled Against, was the Ability of the Instrument to Powerfully Project its Sound. And spent the rest of his Life, bothering and critically playing off Great Luthiers against each other, to Compete for Improvement, along with his Endorsement.

But what he was after, was a Better Sounding (More Even throughout the Compass, with No Wolf Notes Whatever) and Volume of Tone Projecting Instrument, capable of Delivering a More Compellingly Captivating Voice, to larger Audiences in Greater Spaces. So he was asking quite a lot really, and being Very Demanding. And although he used Other Makers Guitars, eventually, he Finally Gravitated towards José Ramirez Martinez.

Reporting back on the Quality of the Instrument made for him by José Ramirez, Segovia praised the Instrument, but said he had to drop a Couple of Pieces from his Repertoire, because they Exposed Wolf Notes inherent to that particular Guitar. Almost driven to relative madness by this most Renowned Authority, of the still Emerging Classical Guitar World.

José Ramirez came up with an ingenious New Design that completely Eliminated Wolf Notes and Improved Projection. It was the De Cámara Guitar and featured an Additional Soundboard Internally, with a Large Hole in it. The Design, Completely  Eliminated Wolf Notes, and Provided Greater Overtones so giving More Clarity and Projection in the Concert Hall. Segovia's Response to this in private was, "Why has it taken it so long for him to come up with this?", "Why couldn't he have made it sooner?"

The Salient point is, Segovia, The Classical Guitar World's Greatest, Most Toweringly Dominant Figure, was entirely Open to New Innovation in Guitar Design that could help him Sound Better, Fill the Concert Hall with Tone, and Properly Balance His Instrument against the Sonorities of the Orchestra, for Music in the Guitars Repertoire.  Much later. Schneider spent a lot of time and energy, seeking out and badgering Segovia, on a great many occasions, to Validate and Endorse the Design. Producing Six Different iterations of Kasha's System, none of which Segovia Liked or Used, with Schneider sometimes following him about for Weeks at a time. It was wearying and wearing down, for the Great Master.

 

 

So here's the point.

Kasha Designed his System, specifically for Nylon Strung Classical Guitars.

Although Kasha and Schneider signed up to Produce both Nylon and Steel Strung Guitars for Baldwin.

Originally, the Science that underlay this Guitar Design was Never Formulated or Intended to be used on Steel Strung Guitars at all.

Just Imagine what Gibson's Commercial Reaction to That Full Realisation would have been, as Everyone in the Company came to be aware of that, as they Funded and Supported this Research Effort.

 

 

In another Context.

It would make a Good Plot for a Farce.

I could write a Comedy Play involving all the Main Characters.

The Dynamics of the Business Politics and the Relationships involved are the Stuff of Hilarity.

 

 

I mentioned earlier that The Systems Science was Dependent on a Different Style of Neck.

I love Gibson's with Electric Guitar Type Fast Necks and Actions, so do most of their Customers. But here we have a Scientifically Devised Design that included..

 

Greater Mass and Weight in the Headstock.

A Far Thicker than Normal Neck to Transmit Vibration.

A Shorter than Normal Neck meeting the Body at the 12th Fret.

Because the System was Designed Specifically for Classical Guitars.

An Aluminium Fixing at the Base of the Headstock for Material Stabilisation.

The Addition of a Counterbalancing Weight imbedded into the Guitars Tailpiece Block.

This allowed the Extra Weight in the Headstock, to be more Unobtrusive to the Handing Characteristics.

Quite apart from the Crazy Gluing, Bracing, Bridge Plate, Bridge, Sound Hole Rosette, and Headstock all Mentioned Earlier.

You should will note that most of the Main Ingredients, The Science Demanded, are indeed Completely Missing from the Final Iterations of Series Production Guitars. 

 

As I wrote.

In another Context.

It would make a Good Plot for a Farce.

Environmental Chamber Testing implied Improved Temperature and Humidity Stability.

But the Basic Problem was that the Pioneering Concept had been Completely Misapplied, to the Wrong Instrument Altogether.

Gibson make Steel Strung Acoustical Guitars in a Soft Tooling Environment, so they kept this Quiet for Commercial Reasons,  but perhaps my Earlier Comments regarding the Ethos of the Then Management.  Suddenly have become, Incandescently Luminous.

Furthermore, whilst I would not wish to negatively disparage the memory of any Decent Individual for any Reason, let alone the Accomplishments of the Fine Authorities Involved in their Respective Fields of Expertise. It is none the less, Starkly Apparent that Pecuniary, Monetary Realities, and Prickly Issues of Real Life Business Politics, Enforced Remarkable Expediency and Incredibly Compromised Accommodation from the Main Proponents and Advocates of the System.

 

 

In an Earlier Post.

I mentioned the matter of Trust and Belief.

 

And in the Final Analysis, Good Guitar Making is Not a Science.

Where Researchers, Technocrats, Technologists and Engineering Expertise Rule.

 

The Skill Involved in simply Evaluating and Optimally Selecting the Basic Raw Material itself.

Puts Great Guitar Making, beyond Science and Technological Advancement, as we all widely understand it.

 

It is First and Foremost an ART, it is a CRAFT,  a Highly Skilled Practice  where Experienced Artisans and Craftsmen are KINGS.

They take Inconsistent Varieties of Centuries Old, Formerly Organic Material, and Fabricate it into a New Form. One that Lives and Breaths Again with a New Voice that Speaks.

 

Long May it Remain So!

 

 

 

But here's the thing.

Could a Great Luthier, utilise any, of a Wide Variety of Construction Methods?

And using his Great Skill, MAKE the Structure Work?

I believe for an Exceptional Artisan.

That is entirely Possible.

 

 

 

P

[Peter Poyser]

Correction.

In my last post I wrote.

"An Aluminium Fixing at the Base of the Headstock for Material Stabilisation."

 

What I meant to write, but was in a hurry, is.

"An Aluminium Fixing at the Base of the Necks Heel and the Front Block for Material Stabilisation."

 

Yes!

My First Point.

Headstocks. Were on the Brain.

And I did Drink a number of Delicious Liqueurs.

As well as Eat a lot of Wonderful Food at the Family New Years Day Party.

 

Have a Nice Day!

 

P

[Peter Poyser]

I've got a few moments.

So here is some more background information to think about.

 

Kasha, having formulated his Scientific Theory in regard to Guitar Acoustics, took his Ideas to Present to Scientific Experts working in the Relevant Body, The Acoustical Society of America, featuring Top Scientific and Engineering Specialists involved in Recording, Industrial and Military Projects. The Best in the Field.

Out of hand, they accused him of having No Real Scientific Basis for his Theories, and that he Provided No Proof to Support and Substantiate them. This is perhaps unsurprising, for as was earlier mentioned, Kasha was not a Luthier, so in fairness, was not in a position to Practically Test his Theoretical Ideas on an Actual Instrument at this point.  

But Significantly, Kasha provided No Proving Trials of the Principals, Underlying the Theories Whatever, during his Presentations. It was Entirely Reasonable of his Peers and Betters to expect some Form of Demonstration to Confirm and Illustrate the Innovative Notions, Kasha was Placing before them to Scientifically Evaluate. But Kasha Didn't! Why was this? Overconfidence?

Now I am completely aware that there will be those amongst us, that are Intrigued and Fascinated by the Construction Methods involved, and Possibly Hugely Admiring of the People themselves. To such, I write that none of the above is written to disparage them in any way as Individuals or even Pour Cold Water on their Courageously Novel Assertions. Rather, it is just that in the interest of Historical Accuracy. This FACT, is a significant missing element. From virtually ALL discussion of this Subject.

 

 

Meanwhile.

Schneider had been Reading a Book.

A seemingly harmless pastime, one might normally, safely, conclude.

However to my way of thinking that is not so. For to me, The Book, Set Schneider Up, to be beguiled by the Ideas of Kasha.

Now the Book was all about how Creative Forces Work, and attempted to explain the Intersection of Energies involved in Such Processes.

Put, extremely simply, in a most basic form. The Author that Captivated Schneider so, suggested that Originality, Emphasis and Economy are Universal Features of Creative Thought.

The Notion portrayed was that in regards to Emphasis, the process can be subdivided into three components: Selection of the Relevant Stimuli; Simplification Through the Removal of Non-Essential Elements; and Exaggeration of the Important Elements.

An Obvious Seeker. Now with such Ideas, already Firmly Implanted in his Mind. Kasha's Designs for a New Type of Guitar, with Emphasis On Fundamental Stimuli, Simplification by Removal of Seemingly Unneeded Material, and Powerfully Strong Exaggeration, Impedance Matching the Most Important Elements. Appear in Direct Concord and to Absolutely Coincide and Confirm, Schneider's fundamental preconceived notions, of how Great, Dynamic Creativity, made New Ideas Happen.

Furthermore, the Book suggested that the Greatest Innovation Occurred, where Two Significant Forces Intersect. Did he see, the two men themselves, as those Forces?

Can you see, the Symbiotically Converging, Coincidences, Metal Processes and Creative Ideas?

 

 

P

[Hesh Breakstone]

Peter my friend your posts are always a treat!

[Kerry Krishna]

I certainly did not take it that way Jeff!