Zouk in the making

[fox]

I though I would have a go at making a Zouk with carbon fibre sides & cypress back & top.
I first make a basic shape for the body (top left) & then went on to making some molds to produce a final item. I must say it was not a two minute job.....



I used the mold to make a first prototype but use fiberglass to test it out (carbon is very expensive) The design include a removable neck...




I hand planed down some of my Cypress, that is a full size dustbin full of shavings!



That is a far as I have got so far... you might notice the neck was from a Martin guitar as I had it lying around.
So this prototype will be a six string but if it all comes together the next one out the mold will be a carbon Zouk..

[NotMelloCello]

So will Modulus Graphite come after you for copyright infringement, or are you planning to pay them a cut of your profits?

[fox]

Never heard of them!
Anyway bracing done & top fitted with internal tailpiece ....

[NotMelloCello]

Never heard of them!

Modulus Graphite (a division of Hughes Aircraft) owns the patent on graphite musical instruments. They vigorously enforce their patent.... I'm sure you'll be hearing from them. (they sure got hold of me decades ago....)

[fox]

Wow that is quite a broad patent! I don't think I need worry though as this one has no carbon in it ( fiberglass & polyester resin) but as I don't intend to sell any, I can't see an issue. Perhaps I could barter a carbon version for some food and not get sued?

[Lord of the Badgers]

surely it's only an issue if Fox tries to sell it as a production item (and yeah, that's pretty wide patent wise, bet they wish they'd patented other things eg cars...)

[NotMelloCello]

Wow that is quite a broad patent!

You have no idea. I have a copy of the patent application, and it's obvious to me merely using graphite for musical instruments is NOT an invention. But the goober who approved it these many years ago wasn't aware. And since Hughes Aircraft has an army of highly paid lawyers - no one has ever won a court case to prove otherwise. Consequently, all instrument makers who construct even parts (like necks) - not just whole instruments - pays a hefty licensing fee to Modulus. Last time I checked it was 40%, which is highway robbery. I was just a little guitar repairman in Wichita, KS making graphite necks for Strats and they chased me down and hammered me. I had to destroy my necks, my molds, and promise to never attempt such foolishness as challenging the mighty Hughes Aircraft ever again. There ARE other companies who pay the fee (like Moses), but I couldn't swing it. Oh, well. Good luck with your project and stick to unprotected materials.

[Lord of the Badgers]

does that apply outside the states? that is frankly unbelievable... except... that in the states it does seem that such things are possible!

[Explorer]

Modulus Graphite (a division of Hughes Aircraft) owns the patent on graphite musical instruments. They vigorously enforce their patent.... I'm sure you'll be hearing from them. (they sure got hold of me decades ago....)

Don't patents expire after 17 years?

BTW, where can I see the granted patent? I couldn't easily find a copy.

[Tavy]

Don't patents expire after 17 years?

BTW, where can I see the granted patent? I couldn't easily find a copy.

Here's one: http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US4145948

Some of the more recent ones that reference this are pretty shocking too - including one for a fretboard that's cantilevered over the soundboard!

The CF one looks to be long expired though.

[NotMelloCello]

Don't patents expire after 17 years?

BTW, where can I see the granted patent? I couldn't easily find a copy.

They can be renewed for an additional 17 years. Remember DuPont's R-12 Freon? When the patent ran out after 34 years suddenly they couldn't make anymore, and brought out R-22....

I got my copy by request from the US Patent Office. Had to pay a small fee. This was back in the 80's - it might have gone up.

By the way, there are over 20 patents for a humbucking pickup. In my mind, they can only be invented once, but apparently you have to be a dolt to work in the Patent Office (it's gubmint, after all).

[fox]

Hey NotMando, that sounds like an awful experience you had! Thanks for the warning!!

I don't feel particularly intimidated though as I live on a small island far away from the states of America & more to the point, is the fact I don't intend to go commercial.

I made the moulds for fun, as for me, it is an easier option than constructing the sides from wood.

[Explorer]

I own a few carbon fiber guitars, and the major manufacturer doesn't pay any licensing fees to Modulus. I have a friend who know someone working at their company, so he's going to ask if this was ever a thing.

I suspect that ovation also never paid a licensing fee, as they first sold a guitar in 1966, and the composite top Adamas made its first appearance in 1977, two years before the Modulus neck patent.

Any support for the claim that Modulus fully patented carbon fiber and graphite guitars will be appreciated, because it's seeming unlikely. I think they just had the neck patent.

[NotMelloCello]

I own a few carbon fiber guitars, and the major manufacturer doesn't pay any licensing fees to Modulus. I have a friend who know someone working at their company, so he's going to ask if this was ever a thing.

Oh, so I'm a liar?

I suspect that ovation also never paid a licensing fee, as they first sold a guitar in 1966, and the composite top Adamas made its first appearance in 1977, two years before the Modulus neck patent.

What Ovation was doing would not fall under the patent.

Any support for the claim that Modulus fully patented carbon fiber and graphite guitars will be appreciated, because it's seeming unlikely. I think they just had the neck patent.

On the patent application drawings was a drawing of a complete mandolin. It's true that Modulus only made necks.

[Explorer]

Modulus Graphite (a division of Hughes Aircraft) owns the patent on graphite musical instruments. They vigorously enforce their patent.... I'm sure you'll be hearing from them. (they sure got hold of me decades ago....)

I own a few carbon fiber guitars, and the major manufacturer doesn't pay any licensing fees to Modulus. I have a friend who know someone working at their company, so he's going to ask if this was ever a thing.

I suspect that ovation also never paid a licensing fee, as they first sold a guitar in 1966, and the composite top Adamas made its first appearance in 1977, two years before the Modulus neck patent.

Any support for the claim that Modulus fully patented carbon fiber and graphite guitars will be appreciated, because it's seeming unlikely. I think they just had the neck patent.

Oh, so I'm a liar?

What Ovation was doing would not fall under the patent.

On the patent application drawings was a drawing of a complete mandolin. It's true that Modulus only made necks.

I stated that it seemed unlikely they did in fact patent all graphite instruments, and that all manufacturers pay them a license fee. The one patent granted which i saw was for a neck. I also gave a few examples which would seem to be counterexamples to your claim, including the graphite Adamas guitars. If Modulus truly owned a patent on graphite musical instruments, then the Adamas graphite guitar would be one such instrument.

There's also companies besides Ovation and Rainsong, like Composite Acoustics guitars, New Millenium mandolins, and bowed instruments from Elixir or Luis and Clark. Since Modulus went out of business when there were successful companies supposedly paying licensng fees, it just seems strange.

From my point of view, you just took a strange turn:

"Here's some counter examples. Can you support that claim?"

"Here's your proof... I'm going to get indignant that you asked for support, and make it about you calling me a liar!"

"Err...."

I'm just asking for support of that initial broad claim, and I'm still happy to receive such.

[fox]

In the mean time..... I strung her up with some .11s & to be honest I am extremely pleased with the sound!
I will get someone who can play well to do a sound check but it is load and clear....

[Lord of the Badgers]

indeed. let's look at the instrument and maybe take some of the unnecessary heat out of this!

looks great Fox!!! Why wait? don't be shy!

[fox]

Ha Ha shy is something I am not!
I need to adjust a few things but I will try to get her singing tomorrow (off the Proms night now - big screen, fireworks & local bands by the beach) However the Cypress seems to work so well, I had quite a few negative comments about even attempting to use it as a soundboard but ... well it just sounds so sweet!

[NotMelloCello]

Since Modulus went out of business

Modulus DID NOT go out of business. They reorganized under Chapter 7, and are still in the market.

and make it about you calling me a liar!"

For some reason, since I found this forum, I am frequently called a liar when I am telling the truth. It gets a little old. I chalk it up to amateurs not having the full story. I have been in the music business since 1977, selling, repairing, and building stringed musical instruments. I have written over 100 "how-to-do" articles published in American Lutherie, Guitarmaker, and String Instrument Craftsman. I have been quoted (about my work) in publications by notables such as Dan Erlewine and Greg Rule. But here, I ain't squat. You don't have to polish my butt - and I am sometimes wrong - but not on this subject.

I must say I'm sorry to the original poster. I inadvertently hijacked this thread, and I'll say no more about it.

[Wes Brandt]

…I've never seen that idea for a tailpiece… interesting…. Seems like the top would need extra strength and …radius? You wouldn't want it to become "concave" I would think.

[hank]

I haven't either but I sure like it. Is this your tail piece design and soundboard bracing to accommodate it? What kind of cypress are you using? Can you post some sound bits?

[fox]

Hi guys, I did add a slight radius to the top and used a double X directly under the bridge however the top has indeed sunk but only very slightly ... so far !!

I dont really know what i am doing, I did ask on several guitar building forums but All I got back was .. That wood won't work as a soundboard!

This one was always intended as a prototype, I have a great idea for the next one, to use an adjustable tailpiece that will only require a very small hole in the soundboard.
It will be attached to a carbon tube that runs directly below the bridge but fixed about 2" below.
It seems that the tree in question was planted in 1838 under the name of Cupressus lambertiana, but was later classified as Cupressus macrocarpa! I don't know what that means though?
It was planted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_S...on_de_Saumarez son on his private estate.
Cool - so my wood has some history

[NotMelloCello]

Good job, Fox. I like your tailpiece - most unusual. As for cypress, I believe it is the top of choice for quality flamenco guitars.

[Graham McDonald]

I think you might find that cypress is used for the backs and sides of flamenco guitars, rather than the soundboards.

There are multiple examples of big and small instrument builders using carbon graphite composites in their instruments, I suspect totally unaware of possible patent infringements and a threat of lawyers letters from whoever owns Modulus Graphite these days. A Google search suggests a that the current owners are a guitar shop in Minnesota. I would imagine their interest is in making moulded CF composite bass necks, not annoying someone in the Channel Islands making the sides and block assembly of an instrument out of the material. Maybe back in the late 70s or early 80s when the technology was new patent owners were more aggressive in protecting their ideas with CF, but these days it would be totally ignoring the countless industrial uses of CF composites. Things as music related as instrument cases or as unrelated as bumper bars on motor vehicles.

A very interesting idea making the whole side/block assembly from CF. Visually it might work better with a CF back as well, and I would argue that cypress would be a little heavier than optimal for the soundboard. At the same time it would not be any heavier than mahogany and that gets used. In any case cypress grown (?) in the Channel Islands might well be quite different from that grown in a different climate and it is always good to know about your tree 8-) I look forward to your bouzouki.

Cheers

Good job, Fox. I like your tailpiece - most unusual. As for cypress, I believe it is the top of choice for quality flamenco guitars.

[fox]

Hi Graham, your response is very similar to others who have commented on the wood for soundboard use!

However I have yet to find anyone who has actually used it!

Yes it does seem quite a bit heavier than spruce but not as heavy as mahogany or at least not the type of mahogany I have!

I knew the tree very well as it stood prominent in the old Admirals garden only a few miles from my house.
The sad part is the tree was cut up for fire wood & I was very lucky to be gifted the pieces I have.
I have already told the story elsewhere on the forum but briefly ... I came across the tree surgeon who had cut down the tree & he happily cut me out a few 2-3" planks, quarter saw with a hand held chain saw.
It was amazing to see it being done as the guy stood on the log & plunged his saw down vertically & then plunged it in from waist height, a few wedges were inserted & a 4' long quarter fell out!