I'm digesting The Book in pretty good detail and beginning the process of creating FRCs for some unhappy guitars in preparation to zip off the backs and rebrace to falcate with live backs (I use a removable tilt neck which has a huge advantage for radical re-dos), in order to learn what I can (before/after tests) before building all new from scratch.
Trevor is very clear on his reasoning that all the components and air chamber should be tuned in between note frequencies so as to avoid wolf notes. As this section is about The Book, I presume we all are pretty much in agreement on that.
However, the preeminent authority on tap tuning (at least until The Book), Roger Siminoff, claims otherwise - that everything should be tuned onto a note to avoid beats between the played note and instrument response. That is the path I've been (attempting to) follow for a decade or so, but quite truthfully am finding Trevor's approach much more user friendly as:
1. It's very hard to tune to a very specific note - it addition to the preciseness required for jigging, measuring and adjusting, when you change one thing, everything else changes...it's chasing a moving target and the results haven't seemed to prove out.
2. It seems to me that beating on a grand piano with very long sustain (and in fact are sometimes intentionally are "off tuned" a hair between the same strings to create color), or on a bowed instrument (which I don't know much about other than the forces generated by a bow are entirely different from a pluck), is one thing, but on a relatively short duration sustain like a guitar, it seems to be hardly a factor in real life.
3. And it's just so much easier to tune off a note and avoid the dreaded wolf note, which even if on a rarely played note have diminished otherwise very nice instruments.
I'm just ruminating here, but found it interesting to find such a disagreement between the two authorities on the subject. If anyone has a thought, do tell. If not, I'm sticking with The Book (other than all my own quirks)
