Updating the Selmer/Mac

[jeffhigh]

Well one of these is in my sights for my next build.
I have ordered the Michael Collins book and it is on the slow boat from Canada.

I have never actually played one of these myself, but I am looking at modifying the design slightly to suit my preferences.

- any need for the zero fret, I really dislike them and prefer to have a compensated bone nut.
-$300+ for a set of repro tuners, whats wrong with open backs
-I'd really rather have an adjustable trussrod than the original aluminium bar
- I like the oval hole design but probably want it big enough to get my hand in for maintenance and fine tuning

Any other suggestions or comments

[Nick]

Well one of these is in my sights for my next build.
I have ordered the Michael Collins book and it is on the slow boat from Canada.

I have never actually played one of these myself, but I am looking at modifying the design slightly to suit my preferences.

- any need for the zero fret, I really dislike them and prefer to have a compensated bone nut.
-$300+ for a set of repro tuners, whats wrong with open backs
-I'd really rather have an adjustable trussrod than the original aluminium bar
- I like the oval hole design but probably want it big enough to get my hand in for maintenance and fine tuning

Any other suggestions or comments

- No need for a Zero fret at all Jeff, it's only included on models today for historical reasons, it's what was done on the originals. I suspect more from a production point of view, Mario Maccaferri really streamlined production by making jigs & molds so that anybody could step into another's place on the line & knock out identical parts/assemblys. Zero fret reduces the setup time of cutting nut slots to accurate depths.
- I use the Schaller Hauser style (open back) tuners that StewMac or many others sell. The repro tuners are just that, you are paying for the authentic look if that's what you are after, nothing to do with functionality.
- Again it's what they did on the originals, it was Durallium (aircraft grade ally) they used. I use adjustable rods on all of mine.
- No reason you can't expand the soundhole dimensions Jeff, not sure how it would affect the Heimholz tho? You could go the Grande Bouche "D" hole route which has a soundhole that almost takes up the whole waist area. No worries with getting your paw in there!
I use a dual pickup system in my Heinz signature petite bouche model which means trying to wire up two systems! Awkward through that small soundhole but fortunately I managed to get hold of an old pair of disposable surgical forceps that are about 500 mm long bit it's still fun trying to hold the back of a pot while you tighten up the nut from outside!

Micheal Collins book is a useful resource, it lacks a few points of construction & a couple of dimensions but is a valuable book during construction. I also bought Micheal's DVD series which filled in the construction gaps and managed to work out the dimension problem from the book even though they weren't given. I'm sure Mike Thomas or myself would be able to help with any questions you may have also Jeff.

[jeffhigh]

Thanks for the reply Nick.
I really want to catch the essence of the sound and feel without being too slavishly bound to some of the original details.
Any idea what resonance frequencies are typical or desirable?

[Nick]

I couldn't give you specific frequencies (although I could tap the one I have & chart it) but the Petite Bouche was typically a thinner, more cutting sound designed (by accident) to be dominant in the mix but these also had a longer scale length as well so had those characteristics in the mix too, whereas the Grande Bouche (D hole) was thought more of as a mellower & fuller sounding axe and was used more for the rhythm section.

[jeffhigh]

I received the book about a week ago. Whilst it is certainly a good resource, as you say Nick there are dimensions missing and unfortunately a lot of inconsistent dimensions.

The first I have to resolve is the neck width at the heel, so I can set the cutaway location before I finish my master pattern.

At various places in the book it is called up as 60.3mm or 63.5 and the oval hole string spread at the bridge is nominated as 50.04 with a nut width of 46m
This to me would imply a width at the 14th fret joint of more like 51mm

I am used to 54mm string spread on my Gibson archtops and 56 on my steelstrings at the bridge.
What is normal on these?

[Nick]

Fortunately I had my Petite bouche here at work Jeff so I run a rule over it & came up with the following dimensions:
String spread @ Bridge (& tailpiece) = 56mm
Neck width @ 14th Fret = 55mm
Neck width @ nut/zero fret = 42mm

This gives both the high & low 'E' strings a 3mm parallel spacing from the edge of neck. I seem to remember now that Dim missing (after you mentioned it) & I had to draw it all out on a sheet of paper to get the right width as I had the same problem. The other one I distinctly remember missing that could have been useful was the dimension from the neck/body join to the centre point for the soundhole, which I worked out at 176mm. I did email Micheal about the missing Dims but didn't hear anything back but that was before I found out he sometimes visits "that American" site OLF, I could have contacted through that but I'd already built two of the suckers by that stage.

[Mike Thomas]

Sorry I haven't responded before Jeff, but I have been plagued by a very bad internet connection for the last month or so. Like Nick, I am happy to give whatever help I can, but you have much more experience as a builder than I have. My experience is solely that of someone who is building a Selmer/Maccaferri using the Collins book and DVDs. Personally, I found that the book alone wasn't sufficient, I needed the DVDs as well. Also, I have found the full size drawings by Charles/Alexander very useful, in fact indispensable. However, my initial aim was, and still is, to build as close as is practical to the originals, at least in the first instance. This means, of course laminated backs and sides, and a "proper" pliage, and the Collins material is helpful in this regard, particularly with the laminating, less so with the pliage. I have posted a fair bit in the forum on the laminating process particularly, but a lot of it got lost when the site was hacked. I still have the photos I took, and am happy to post them again if they would be useful.

[Nick]

Sorry I haven't responded before Jeff, but I have been plagued by a very bad internet connection for the last month or so. Like Nick, I am happy to give whatever help I can, but you have much more experience as a builder than I have. My experience is solely that of someone who is building a Selmer/Maccaferri using the Collins book and DVDs. Personally, I found that the book alone wasn't sufficient, I needed the DVDs as well. Also, I have found the full size drawings by Charles/Alexander very useful, in fact indispensable. However, my initial aim was, and still is, to build as close as is practical to the originals, at least in the first instance. This means, of course laminated backs and sides, and a "proper" pliage, and the Collins material is helpful in this regard, particularly with the laminating, less so with the pliage. I have posted a fair bit in the forum on the laminating process particularly, but a lot of it got lost when the site was hacked. I still have the photos I took, and am happy to post them again if they would be useful.

Hows progress going on this one Mike? Sorry for the diversion Jeff But Mike's build was looking really meticulous & interesting seeing as how he was trying to stick to the original design/methodology.

[Mike Thomas]

As far as tuners are concerned, the open backed Schaller three-in-a-line are used a fair bit by makers, including Dupont, but a few are shifting to Schaller "Golden De-Luxe" Selmer style tuners, which are more expensive, but look more the part, for those who like the aesthetics of the originals. I got a couple of sets from Paytons, the Schaller importer/wholesaler in Australia. They cost, if I remember correctly, around $150 a set trade price. There was a thread about these in the forum a while back, with photos.

[Mike Thomas]

Nick, nothing at all has happened for quite a while, but not through lack of enthusiasm. We decided to move house a bit more than a year ago, so pre-selling renovations fully occupied me for several weeks. and then we moved to a new place, lovely location, but no workshop, and everything had to go into storage. I finally got a shed built, connected to electricity etc. a few weeks back, and I have now got most of my stuff out of storage and into the shed. So, the Selmer will be getting some attention again soon. First job, binding, and then fit the neck.

[jeffhigh]

Thanks for the replies guys

Now..... pliage or not, hard or soft, uniform all the way across or tapered to nothing at the edge.

I am leaning towards a fairly sharp fold, tapered.

[Mike Thomas]

The pliage on the originals was definitely a bend, but slightly radiused rather than really sharp; i.e. not like a Neapolitan mandolin. On the originals, each side of the top was heat bent in a steel jig, prior to joining. As far as I know, rarely, if ever were the tops scored to facilitate bending. The pliage tapers to nothing as it approaches the sides. The top looks domed when you eye it from the tail block, and when viewed from the side is a straight line rising from neck to bridge, and a straight line going down to the tailblock. If I remember correctly, the angle of the bend is about 6 degrees.

[jeffhigh]

Located just behind the bridge?

[Mike Thomas]

I had a quick look at my Charle/Alexander full size plan for the oval hole, and these were the dimensions:-

width of fingerboard at nut/zero fret = 45mm
" " 14th fret = 58mm
string spacing at bridge = 50.5 mm
" " at tailpiece = 55mm

I think that these measurements off the plan are pretty accurate (i.e. the drawing is dimensionally accurate). Some dimensions are stated on the plan e.g. string spacing at the bridge is stated as "about 50mm", and measurement supports that. It is a quirk of the Selmers that the 14th fret is not precisely where the neck joins the body, but (again from the plan), about 4.5mm closer to the soundhole.

The angle of the pliage on the plan is 6 degrees. And yes, the pliage is directly behind the bridge.

[Nick]

I heat bend my pliage using the tighter radius on on an Ibex/Stewmac style bending iron and usually bend from the centre out to about 2/3rds the width of the soundboard half. I do tend to overbend slightly from the specs Micheal gives in the book, I felt it 'preloaded' the top a tad more and makes it easier for the strings to set it in motion. Haven't proved that theory up to Trevor's level of measurement but my endorser (who's played various Selmer style guitars over the years) felt that it did make the top a bit more responsive & that you didn't need to dig into the strings quite as much to produce the same volume typical of traditional Selmers.