What are the build factors that impact on the sound?

onlyablur

onlyablur

Active member
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Location
Europe
Hello all, I've been playing for a couple of months only, and didn't play any string instrument before. I'm interested to know what are the build factors that affect the sound of an uke? the tonewoods, body shape, soundport position, top thickness etc etc? Could you please list the major factors, and I can read more about them?

Thank you!
 
I am moving this post to the Luthier's Lounge for you, where you will probably find more knowledgable answers as the builders are most likely to be better able to answer.

For my limited knowledge, I have two instruments from the same builder. Both sound and look great, but one definitely sounds richer and fuller than the other, even in blind sound tests with a professional musician friend of mine. It has a slotted headstock and an offset soundhole, which I have heard allow for better sustain and a larger portion of the soundboard to vibrate. I think you will find tonewood definitely affects the sound as well - with most of what I have seen saying plainer wood often sounds better than curly wood. I am sure the luthiers will be able to better answer your question though than my anecdotal response.
 
The problem here is that the question is too broad. It is like asking: How can I be happier in life or what is the key to peace in the Middle East? Making a good sounding ukulele is an art and a science and depends on many complex factors coming together as a whole. Plus, what makes a good sounding ukulele is a point of endless discussion (and yes, heated argument sometimes) among luthiers and people who listen to ukuleles.

I guess if you wanted a soundbite it would be: Build them light, but build them strong. But this is a gross oversimplification of an extremely intricate and delicate operation. Another sound-bite: It's the top stupid. Another gross oversimplification, but perhaps closer to the truth. The variables are many and there is no one answer short of a book that might make a good door stop it is so heavy and even then it would fall short. Title: The Complete Book of Ukulele Building: Simplified.

For instance the moderator posted a reference to a slotted head-stock and an eccentric sound hole. The uke sounded great. But that sound might have had nothing to do with the method of winding the strings or the position of the sound-hole. As a matter of fact, those two factors might have had nothing to do with the sound. What had to do with the great sound was how the whole was assembled. The sum of its parts so to speak and not any one specific feature. So basically the question is impossible to answer. However, that won't stop me or other's from putting in their opinions....
 
best thing is to look at youtube. ukulele and guitar makers go on about their soundboards and bracing schemes, and the way they test them as they adjust things to maximize resonance and response. it is as has been stated a matter of the builder's skill and knowledge as the instrument gets put together. we are here talking about one-off crafted instruments. with mass produced ukes you have to play a dozen of a particular model to find one that is special.
i hope you are not sorry you asked the question.
 
O
sequoia said:
The problem here is that the question is too broad. It is like asking: How can I be happier in life or what is the key to peace in the Middle East? Making a good sounding ukulele is an art and a science and depends on many complex factors coming together as a whole. Plus, what makes a good sounding ukulele is a point of endless discussion (and yes, heated argument sometimes) among luthiers and people who listen to ukuleles.

I guess if you wanted a soundbite it would be: Build them light, but build them strong. But this is a gross oversimplification of an extremely intricate and delicate operation. Another sound-bite: It's the top stupid. Another gross oversimplification, but perhaps closer to the truth. The variables are many and there is no one answer short of a book that might make a good door stop it is so heavy and even then it would fall short. Title: The Complete Book of Ukulele Building: Simplified.

For instance the moderator posted a reference to a slotted head-stock and an eccentric sound hole. The uke sounded great. But that sound might have had nothing to do with the method of winding the strings or the position of the sound-hole. As a matter of fact, those two factors might have had nothing to do with the sound. What had to do with the great sound was how the whole was assembled. The sum of its parts so to speak and not any one specific feature. So basically the question is impossible to answer. However, that won't stop me or other's from putting in their opinions....
Click to expand...

I built the ukes the moderator mentioned and I do indeed believe that the additional weight of the slotted headstock and the offset sound hole contributed favorably to the tone of that uke. Everything else on those two ukes were similar.
 
What Chuck said, both times.

To answer the OP, just for conversation, the answer is yes to your variables, except the soundport position. I have no comment on that, and not many will, but I would venture an educated guess the answer is yes.

More variables?
Grain orientation, runout, etc
Glue
Neck material, neck stiffness, Carbon Fiber rod,
Headstock weight, including tuning machine weight, size of headstock, etc.
Back thickness
Side thickness
Linings (solid, kerfed, reverse kerfed, etc)
Heel block
Tail Block
Top bracing
Bridge patch
Back bracing
Side bracing
Soundhole size, shape, location
Fretboard thickness, material
Bridge height, material, location
Saddle height/action, shape, compensation, material
Fret height, shape
Nut height/action, material
Strings
Tuning
Finishes
Pickups

Build processes that affect the player, which affects sound:
Neck shape
Fretboard width
Fret dressing
Headstock shape
Body thickness
String spacing
Nut shape
Saddle Shape

I think I hit most of it, save for inlay location I guess and some other stuff.
 
Last edited:
Kekani said:
More variables?
Grain orientation, runout, etc
Glue
Neck material, neck stiffness, Carbon Fiber rod,
Headstock weight, including tuning machine weight, size of headstock, etc.
Back thickness
Side thickness
Linings (solid, kerfed, reverse kerfed, etc)
Heel block
Tail Block
Top bracing
Bridge patch
Back bracing
Side bracing
Soundhole size, shape, location
Fretboard thickness, material
Bridge height, material, location
Saddle height/action, shape, compensation, material
Fret height, shape
Nut height/action, material
Strings
Tuning
Finishes
Pickups

Build processes that affect the player, which affects sound:
Neck shape
Fretboard width
Fret dressing
Headstock shape
Body thickness
String spacing
Nut shape
Saddle Shape

I think I hit most of it, save for inlay location I guess and some other stuff.
Click to expand...

This is a great reply to an open question.
(It is a perfect check list to help me improve my building)
I have 'a few' variables to play with now! :biglaugh:
I'll start at the top!
 
Thank you all for your replies! You have certainly helped me look at the bigger picture here, ie it's not just each particular element, but how all of the elements are put together (luthiers' techniques) that matters.
Thank you again!
 
Kevs-the-name said:
This is a great reply to an open question.
(It is a perfect check list to help me improve my building)
I have 'a few' variables to play with now! :biglaugh:
I'll start at the top!
Click to expand...

Admittedly (some may disagree), a question like this is better asked in the Lounge (which it hasn't until now, unless I missed it), than assumed elsewhere (which it usually is).

Realize that these are just variables of the equation. Some will hold greater value than others, and some so infinitesimal that measuring tools may not catch it, especially when there are no two EXACTLY the same builds factored in.

I'd go on to say some (most) won't be human ear decipherable. Add in that there is no true control instrument to compare against, all we have is statistics and time. Even that process can be flawed because if more than one variable is changed over time, you can't statistically measure a trend as there are some (most) variables that affect others.

Caveat: this is the internet, and I could be completely wrong :cool:
 
Last edited:
Moore Bettah Ukuleles said:
O

I do indeed believe that the additional weight of the slotted headstock and the offset sound hole contributed favorably to the tone of that uke. Everything else on those two ukes were similar.
Click to expand...

If the added weight of a slotted headstock contribute favorably to the tone, I don't understand why you poo poo heavier neck woods and heavier tuners if you think the added weight at the end (slotted headstock) makes a better sounding uke???
 
Last edited:
Titchtheclown said:
How about
the way it is played.
How it is miked
How it is mixed
The place the listener sits
The size of the room you are playing in
The song you are playing
What the other members of the band are doing.
Click to expand...

Absolutely variables, including what you are playing through (proper PA, or battery powered Roland), and all that the amplification threads in Tech cover.. But I wouldn't consider those part of the build process.
 
There are a couple variables not mentioned in the two instruments WW11 is comparing. The one described as having a richer and fuller sound, in addition to having a slotted headstock and an offset soundhole, has a wider lower bout and a string-through bridge (as opposed to tie-on).

I think it is generally accepted that having the sound hole offset up towards the player's ears will give them the perception of a louder instrument, but makes little difference to the listener in front.

On a joking note, do you think the weight of the inlay on the standard headstock (plus the upper fingerboard) could compensate for the difference in weight of a slotted headstock? :rolleyes:
 
geetee said:
There are a couple variables not mentioned in the two instruments WW11 is comparing. The one described as having a richer and fuller sound, in addition to having a slotted headstock and an offset soundhole, has a wider lower bout and a string-through bridge (as opposed to tie-on).

I think it is generally accepted that having the sound hole offset up towards the player's ears will give them the perception of a louder instrument, but makes little difference to the listener in front.

On a joking note, do you think the weight of the inlay on the standard headstock (plus the upper fingerboard) could compensate for the difference in weight of a slotted headstock? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right, I forgot about the wider bout and different bridge. As for the offset soundhole, I thought maybe the same thing, but when I did the blind sound test with my friend (who is a professional musician), he had his back turned to me, and I literally played two notes when he shouted out, "That one!" I still don't know why, be it the headstock, soundhole, different wood, bridge, etc. but it does sound different. Don't get me wrong, the other sounds fantastic too, good enough for me to have sold all my other ukes. But the new one has a certain special resonance that gives it the tonal edge.
 
I've since come to the understanding (since the last thread on side sound ports) that :
Side sound ports raise the pitch of the tone (of the air and top resonance) and as higher pitched tones project further then lower tones, it gives the impression of, and therefore is, a louder instrument.
 
wickedwahine11 said:
Yes, you are right, I forgot about the wider bout and different bridge. As for the offset soundhole, I thought maybe the same thing, but when I did the blind sound test with my friend (who is a professional musician), he had his back turned to me, and I literally played two notes when he shouted out, "That one!" I still don't know why, be it the headstock, soundhole, different wood, bridge, etc. but it does sound different. Don't get me wrong, the other sounds fantastic too, good enough for me to have sold all my other ukes. But the new one has a certain special resonance that gives it the tonal edge.
Click to expand...

Good point. These changes come so subtly I often forget about them. I've also changed my bracing a little too. Your slotted uke is made of blonde koa which I have found gives a more "open" sound than the darker, denser koa (that your other uke is built from.) There are hundreds of little things that go into making a fine instrument, many of them I'm not even aware of and in hindsight are discovered when I remember I changed something. I'm an intuitive builder, rarely taking notes anymore (I couldn't find them if I did anyway.) if you build enough of them and keep making changes that you hope are improvements, you're bound to make a few good ones.
 
Bearing in mind he was in his 70's when Hokusai, the great Japanese print maker publish his 36 Views of Mt Fuji that started with the spectacular 'wave' print he said this:
At the age of five years I had the habit of sketching things. At the age of fifty I had produced a large number of pictures, but for all that, none of them had any merit until the age of seventy. At seventy-three finally I learned something about the true nature of things, birds, animals, insects, fish, the grasses and the trees. So at the age of eighty years I will have made some progress, at ninety I will have penetrated the deepest significance of things, at a hundred I will make real wonders and at a hundred and ten, every point, every line, will have a life of its own
Click to expand...
- I'd say we got a ways to go eh Chuck?
 
Last edited:
Kekani said:
More variables?
Grain orientation, runout, etc
Glue
Neck material, neck stiffness, Carbon Fiber rod,
Headstock weight, including tuning machine weight, size of headstock, etc.
Back thickness
Side thickness
Linings (solid, kerfed, reverse kerfed, etc)
Heel block
Tail Block
Top bracing
Bridge patch
Back bracing
Side bracing
Soundhole size, shape, location
Fretboard thickness, material
Bridge height, material, location
Saddle height/action, shape, compensation, material
Fret height, shape
Nut height/action, material
Strings
Tuning
Finishes
Pickups

Build processes that affect the player, which affects sound:
Neck shape
Fretboard width
Fret dressing
Headstock shape
Body thickness
String spacing
Nut shape
Saddle Shape

I think I hit most of it, save for inlay location I guess and some other stuff.
Click to expand...

Good list Kekani. Well thought out. A couple of more variables I might add which might (or might not) be important:

Body taper (height of sides head to tail and how much)
Degree of radius of back
Degree of radius of top (a top secret)
Type of wood used in bracing (mahogany/spruce/?)
Humidity
Luck
Magic

Ok, maybe the last is a bit hard to quantify and some might not believe in it. There are no blue prints for magic after all. I also might add that the sound of an ukulele might be inversely proportional to the level of the player's/audience's degree of intoxication. It is a factor as any player/audience member knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jerryc41
"Build a Ukulele"
2
Replies
29
Views
979
BuzzBD
BuzzBD
K
Stew Mac Concert Build
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
3K
kowgiirl.up
K
1bad914
2 Baritone Ukulele build
Replies
5
Views
424
1bad914
1bad914
Doc_J
Yet another build started, .... a de Houtwinkel baritone
2 3
Replies
47
Views
2K
thegadgetfish
thegadgetfish
EDW
Uke build in 4 days?
Replies
17
Views
754
sequoia
sequoia
Top Bottom