| Pages:
1
2 |
oudde
Oud Admirer
Posts: 9
Registered: 12-9-2009
Location: Greece
Member Is Offline
Mood: Creative and taqsimius
|
|
Angle between body - neck? Please help
Is it necessary to make an small angle (downwards) between the neck block and the neck, so when the strings apply their pressure will straighten the
whole oud structure (like the long neck bouzoukis), and if yes, how many degrees would that be? Please help!
I was making arabic neys since now and i want to make my own oud
|
|
|
Dr. Oud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1370
Registered: 12-18-2002
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: better than before
|
|
The oud neck is much shorter than a long neck lute like bouzoikis or saz, so it does not bend with string pressure. There is negligable change in
action before or after tuning the oud. The best way to check the angle of the neck is with a string through the bridge, over the top nut. There should
be a clearance at the neck joint between 1/8 inch (4mm) and 3/16 inch (6mm).
|
|
|
oudmaker
Oud Junkie
Posts: 220
Registered: 12-23-2004
Location: Philadelphia-USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
As far as the behavior of the neck on oud Dr.Oud is correct. But 1/8 inch=3.175mm and 3/16 inch = 4.76 mm. I would prefere 2.5 mm. max.
Dincer
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The 3mm action I have on my oud is the maximum I would accept ... I would prefer 2mm. 6mm are an absolute no-go in my opinion, though I often read,
what Richard reported.
I vaguely remember, that I read anywhere, that the neck's end at the nut should be around 3mm lower than the top of the soundboard, when no strings
are attached.
Is that correct?
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
oudmaker
Oud Junkie
Posts: 220
Registered: 12-23-2004
Location: Philadelphia-USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
It is wrong. Make your oud such a way that the neck will hold on its original posture under normal standard tuning. I consider to expect any movement
on neck is not acceptable. That is the most important part of the oud building next to the sound of course.
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Good to know, thanks.
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
Dr. Oud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1370
Registered: 12-18-2002
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: better than before
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Aymara  | | ...I vaguely remember, that I read anywhere, that the neck's end at the nut should be around 3mm lower than the top of the soundboard, when no strings
are attached. Is that correct? |
Actually, the height of the strings passing through the bridge will determine the angle of of the neck relative to the body. Without any strings, the
top nut end of the neck will locate between 1mm and 3mm below the plane of the face. Without this setback, the height of the strings at the bridge
will result in a high action. However, that is not the best way to measure the action, as the string holes in the bridge can change the result. Use a
string tied on the bridge, preferably the first string so you can check the height as well as the side edge of the fingerboard.
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Dr. Oud | | Without any strings, the top nut end of the neck will locate between 1mm and 3mm below the plane of the face. |
I thought, this might be something like a rule of thumb, but the real action will also depend on the strings tension, which differs from one set to
another.
I also read, that this neck angle is neccessary, to avoid the action rising too soon by a warping neck caused by the string's tension in combination
with temperature or humidity changes.
At first sight, that sounded logical to me.
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
oudde
Oud Admirer
Posts: 9
Registered: 12-9-2009
Location: Greece
Member Is Offline
Mood: Creative and taqsimius
|
|
Thanks to all for replying.
So, the ouds soundboard with the fingerboard are aligned in a perfect line.
Correct or wrong??
|
|
|
Dr. Oud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1370
Registered: 12-18-2002
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: better than before
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by oudde | ...So, the ouds soundboard with the fingerboard are aligned in a perfect line.
Correct or wrong?? |
If the fingerboard and face are in a perfect line, and you wish the action to be low, the strings at the bridge will be too close to the face to allow
plucking without hitting the face. Raising the strings at the bridge for plucking clearance requires a set-back of the top of the neck to align the
fingerboard with the string plane.
The neck rarely warps, it is usually the body bending.
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Richard,
So we are back to the problem of how to adjust the "lean-back" of the neck, which Alfaraby says is no big deal.
Meanwhile most of the ouds I have played in the last few months would be perfectly usable ouds if not for the neck leaning too far forward causing a
> 4.5 mm action or the strings being very low above the sound board. It's a rare oud that sounds good and plays well with that kind of action! !
Something like 8 out of 10 ouds are usable only as flower pots or student demoralizers right out of the gate or within a short time! That's absurd!
If anyone can tell us how to quickly adjust that neck angle, they can really do some good!
|
|
|
sabbassi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 570
Registered: 4-28-2008
Location: Morocoo
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy
|
|
Oudde,
Assuming that everything is in perfect line, soundboard, neck and neck join.
When opening the neck join (where the neck will fit), the opening must be lower at the front and higher at the back side , the difference could be
between 0 and 1mm. this way when glueing the neck it will lean forward just a bit and after the strings are in place, the pressure line up everything
to 0. but this always depends on many factors of courses, the wood used for the neck and neck join, is it quarter sawn? humidity etc...
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
There are two subjects here. Richard is pointing out that expecting the neck to flex is wrong. He is also recommending an action height that is a bit
higher than several here present members find acceptable. I too prefer 2.5 mm.
So the big question is what to do if the oud has a high action, minor adjustments are insufficient, and there's not enough clearance above the
soundboard to lower the bridge holes?
Alfaraby says he adjusts the neck angle routinely, and that it's "as simple as putting a coin into a machine". Can Alfaraby please help and explain
briefly how he does it, so we can all have the action we want?
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by fernandraynaud | So the big question is what to do if the oud has a high action, minor adjustments are insufficient, and there's not enough clearance above the
soundboard to lower the bridge holes?
|
I thought, the standard routine would be to let a luthier exchange nut and bridge to achieve the desired action ... or am I wrong?
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Unfortunately, you are wrong. Sketch it and you will see.
I have one oud that I have been scratching my head over for months, because I don't like its 4.5 mm action.
Lowering the strings by drilling new holes in the bridge has limits, as you can't work the risha comfortably too low over the soundboard. There is a
limit and I'm trying to understand the limits of the compromises. It seems like if I really wanted a 2.5 mm action, I'd have to be whippin' my
Faridism a couple millimeters above the soundboard!!!
Some bridges also have other structural or geometric limits. On my Syrian, for instance, the bridge is sloped, so lowering the holes shortens the
scale, thankfully not significantly in this case.
Raising the nut goes hand in hand with raising the whole fingerboard. I had found a suitable Brazilian rosewood board to glue over the existing
fingerboard and then realized that long fingerboards, like on my Sukar, are mounted a special way so as not to dampen the vibration of the soundboard.
I think it was Sazi who told me about his bad experience gluing on a layer of soundboard: the tone changed.
Not using a loop but just tying a knot in the string, like a ball end, drops the action a little bit, and I'm doing that on another oud where that's
sufficient.
So what else can we do? Show me! What can your luthier do by swapping bridges and nuts?
So here's the pattern: 1) many ouds have a tendency to high action 2) there is no way other than re-setting the neck angle to lower the action a
couple millimeters without causing other problems and 3) unless we learn how to easily loosen and re-set a neck, an adjustable neck like on a Sukar is
a necessity.
Oy
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by fernandraynaud |
Is there a pattern here?: 1) many ouds have a tendency to high action 2) there is no way other than re-setting the neck angle to lower the action a
couple millimeters without causing other problems and 3) unless we learn how to easily loosen and re-set a neck, an adjustable neck like on a Sukar is
a necessity.
|
I'll just re-arrange those first words... There is a pattern here... Which is why people like Ibrahim Sukar with his low-tech wing-nut system and Fadi
Matta with his (only slightly) more complex locking system, have come up with, or utilise these solutions in the first place. Solutions that have
almost become standard in guitar design over the years, and I'll stick my kneck out here... hopefully will become more common on ouds. And to those
who complain about changes to the oud ...- if we were to be stuck in tradition we would all be playing 4 course gut strung ouds, there'd be no
floating bridges or 7 courses , and Naseer Shamma might be out of a job! 
Selaam
There is no simple "coin in the slot" method (yet) you either slice off the neck
with a razor saw and adjust the face angle very slightly, and then re-drill the hole for the new angle of the dowel, yoiks! it sounds drastic!, but I
have done it before and was happy with the result, it made an unplayable instrument very satisfying to play, and was done in a day.
Hmm, it doesn't have to be quite that drastic... I loosened the joint with heat and steam and only had to cut off the dowel... but if you have a
dovetail joint it may be harder to loosen the neck as it would be glued right through the neck block and to the soundboard.
Or you come up with some form of adjustment, the simplest perhaps being the "knockdown" fitting of a threaded rod embedded in the neck with a
corresponding bolt threaded into it from the inner face of the neck-block.
Not quite as simple as putting a coin in the slot but perhaps worth
the effort on an otherwise perfect oud, THEN the adjustment would be as simple as putting a coin - allen key into a slot
.
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Sazi | | if we were to be stuck in tradition we would all be playing 4 course gut strung ouds, there'd be no floating bridges or 7 courses , and Naseer Shamma
might be out of a job! Selaam |
Great argumentation 
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
If what traditionalists say were true, the landscape wouldn't be littered like the aftermath of Waterloo with ouds unusable only because of high
action and/or bad pegs. If hiding 3 small pieces of metal in the neck joint can do so much with such discretion, I vote for it. Maybe someone cares to
design an all-wood resettable neck? Like using a little sloped wedge?
And the pegs? Here too, discretion. We leave gears to robots. Planetary Invisibly-geared Perfection Pegs cost $250 for 12. Ouch!!! Gotoh pegs are
friction-based (you regulate with a hex screw), use non-tapered holes (huge advantage), cost about $100 for 12. And hard to get. Beautiful rosewood or
ebony violin or viola pegs can be found at $4 for 4. They have a 30:1 taper while typical oud and lute pegs aim for 16:1. It seems many modern oud
makers already use 30:1 pegs. Am I mistaken? Can someone send a container full of reamers to Aleppo, Cairo, Damascus, etc?
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
And Aluminum Pegs?
About the reamers I was being sarcastic, as i can't fathom why most oud pegholes don't fit their pegs at all.
We had collectively wondered about Gotoh aluminum pegs a few months ago. I just spoke to the man who was going to distribute them. These are less than
half the price of Perfection Pegs, look great, and .... don't hold. By the time the Japanese had improved them the damage to their reputation was
done, so the distributor gave up. I'm going to try to get a set of the latest design from Tokyo to try.
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
Just a quick 2.2 cents worth... aluminium pegs could be worse than you think ebony pegs are, unless the oud never leaves a controlled environment, as
it expands and contracts quite a lot with temperature fluctuations... (the reason why you don't see aluminium tuning forks) ...if they got cold they
would slip, and if they got hot... I'd hate to come home to a split pegbox.
Oh that's right y'all say aluminum, sorry, we spell it different here...
|
|
|
Luttgutt
Oud Junkie
Posts: 578
Registered: 1-10-2009
Location: Norway
Member Is Offline
Mood: Curious
|
|
Tony, I am no oud maker. But I have lowered the action on some of my previous "performance" ouds.
p.s. That is one reason why I "converted" to Sukar 
What I did is simply to sand down the finger board "AT AN ANGLE"! that is, I sand more the closer I get to the nut.
And it works PERFECTLY! I am sure you can do it better than me
Of course, there will be a limit as to how much you can do it, but with your 4,5mm, I don't think there will be a problem!
And of course, you will have a big problem if the fingerboard has inlay. But luckily for me, I love SIMPLE ouds
What do you think?
The wood might be dead, but the oud is alive.
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Sazi: the aluminum pegs have their own friction mechanism. They look like normal pegs but sit in untapered holes. You drill out the tapered holes with
a normal drill (I think 10 mm), and insert the bushings with the pegs. An allen screw adjusts the pressure on each peg's slip-clutch. Nothing moves
against the pegbox walls. The Perfection Pegs use a planetary gear mechanisms hidden in what looks like ebony pegs, and the Gotohs use an adjustable
slipclutch (and are much cheaper). I am in touch with the manufacturer and hope to test some soon.
Luttgutt, you sneaky oudomaniac! That's probably a VERY good way to gain a millimeter or two if we have the "spare neck material". There are two ouds
on which I would like to lower the action, one has inlays and edging, I can't imagine a way to shave the neck without ruining it. The other has a
veneer fingerboard that likely I can unglue and then put back on, or glue on a new one. Let me do the sketches and look into it. Adjustable necks seem
better, we agree, but this fix is definitely worth knowing about! Did you do this best with sandpaper, a file, a plane, a sanding block, what?
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
Ahh, ok, thanks, that sounds really interesting, are they 1:1 ratio?. I'd be keen to hear your opinion of them, they sound like a Good Thing!
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
No question the Perfection Pegs with their 4:1 invisible gears are nicer, but they cost $80+ for 4. A luthier quoted me $600 to upgrade an oud.
Apparently many high end violin-makers are adopting them.
The Gotohs are 1:1 but 12 (3 sets of 4) should cost under $100 and they are easier to install. They have recently redesigned them. I'll let you know
if/when they reply, I'm luring them with a big new market.
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Luttgutt you saved my Syrian Sleeper! It is so happy it is jumping up and down making Ajam ! 
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
