I'm not in a great possition to comment, having only made one violin, and just starting my first guitar, however, I think it's an aspect of luthiery that is more important at the higher end (ie: the top of the range constructions)

Also, fixating on getting specific areas to a specific tone is very commendable but the important thing is to get the tap tone to sound musical.
As long as it sounds a clear tone that's a good indication that the wood has been evenly contoured and is allowing the sound to move through the wood.

If the tap tone is dull and thin it may indicate uneven contouring which interfers with the sound transfer.

Just a theory from a luthiery neophite!

regards

Steve

Hi, I'm new on here so will go, in a bit, and introduce myself properly in the relevant section. I felt though that I should leap in here and, on the one hand, defend the Siminoff approach having read his book (the Luthiers Handbook) fairly thoroughly. But first a qualifiction:
Having looked at a lot of U.S. forums I would be the first to say that the practice of American Luthierie is probably over scientific. I think there is a school of thought that says you can quantify just about anything and that the more maths and physics you apply the better the instrument - which I cannot say I agree with. Our activity is as much art as science after all.
BUT, Siminoff explains his ideas at great length and has acted as a consultant for Gibson et al. He also tests his theories by building testing jigs and by other empirical means. One good example is where he proves that a neck made from horizontal cut grain is actually stronger than with the grain vertical, which went against the wisdom of the time. His ideas on tap tuning seem to make a lot of sense.
I am about to build a simple Model A mandolin with close reference to his book in order to test his ideas for myself. I'll keep you posted.
Mark Shiner.
www.selkiestrings.co.uk

Hi mark,

Welcome!
I've read the Siminoff book and it's clear that he's not only passionate but also methodical exaustive in his exploration of the principles.
I don't doubt that his assertions are correct, but my view is (and this is speaking purely from a personal, amature luthier point of view) that unless one is a top level luthier supplying top level musicians (who's ear is sensitive enough to pick up the subtle improvements in tone produced), all that extra work will be for nought, as the average joe (myself included) would be hard pressed to notice the difference between a Siminoff-style approach, and a simply well constructed sound board, with only limitted attention to tap tones.

I'm really interested in hearing how you get on with the mandolin (you don't say how much experience you've had in luthiery, but I'm assuming it's more than me so I'll probably be hounding you for information if that's ok!)

Look forward to hearing from you again

Steve L

Hi Mark,
just had the presence of mind to check your web link...... you are my guru! Great web site! love the Norse intruments.

Steve L

You are very kind Steve. Thanks!
I think that initially the ideas in Siminoff look like a lot of hassle. However, the book is not just all about tap tuning and there are a lot of other useful ideas in there. I tend to feel that even just grabbing a few and applying them is going to make whatever instrument you are working on a little bit better.
For example, the neck of this mandolin I am doing has a flat grain section in the neck and a slice of rosewood vertically through the centre Both Siminoff ideas. I am not about to spend £540 on a strobe tuner so will juse use a really good digital tuner and hope!
This mandolin is going together fairly slowly as I try to apply the prnciples from the book to each component,
Is that worth its own thread? Not sure.

Absolutely worth it's own thread, with images please!