PlayJazzGuitar.com Forum

[randyc]

A subject simple as the binding on an acoustic or semi-acoustic guitar shouldn't require more than a few paragraphs to discuss. But there is a history to the evolution of any musical instrument, however simple, that becomes more complex as one considers how the instrument came to its present form.

Each time I write about topics like this one, I find that I become bogged down by detail - that's the disadvantage of internet communication. Face to face discussion and the nuances of body language quickly establish the level of experience and knowledge of the participants. But when one writes for internet consumption it's safest to assume that the audience will range from those with far more competence than me to those who have little knowledge of the topic.

If I have made a relatively simple discussion overly complex, I apologize. I'm proceeding under the presumption that too much information is better than too little information.

Much of what a guitarist perceives as visually "attractive" in an instrument is a result of conditioning and experience. Tradition drives our perceptions of the music and the instruments that produce the music and tradition is based on practicality: form follows function, life imitates art and other expressions that we have come to accept as truths.

I like binding on guitars, especially the elaborate abalone trims that were used on some acoustic instruments such as those produced in the 1930s. Typical examples would be high-end Martins. Custom builders still incorporate this style of body binding and even some mass-produced instruments other than Martin. This is a photo of a 1976 Ovation Custom Legend that illustrates this type of body binding (there are eight plies if the abalone layer is included):



Body and neck binding, during the era of hand-crafted guitars were often representative of the quality of the instrument produced. Inexpensive instruments had no neck binding and only a single ply body binding. Substantially priced guitars manifested the time and craftsmanship invested in them by the usage of multiple-ply bindings and pick-guards.



Five and seven-ply body bindings were common in top-grade professional instruments while single, two and three-ply bindings decorated workman-level instruments. Neck bindings were typically limited to a single ply material except for the higher cost guitars which were decorated with three to five-ply bindings, sometimes incorporating a "sculpted" appearance at the end of the neck like this L-5CES (note the five-ply binding on both neck and pickguard):



Here is an example of an unbound guitar body (not recommended for reasons that will be discussed later). This is a 1928 Weissenborne guitar, valued for lap steel and bottleneck styles. The upper area of the photo depicts the side of the guitar and the lower section is the top of the instrument. A careful examination can distinguish the joint between the top and side of the instrument.



Although I am not very familiar with classical guitars, it's my impression that body binding - unlike most American and European archtop guitars - universally consists of single-ply wood (rosewood, typically). The following photograph depicts an inexpensive classical guitar of customary construction (cedar top, rosewood sides) but with plastic body binding - the color match between binding and sides is very good and the binding seam is apparent only in strong light.



There are several practical manufacturing (and structural) reasons for the application of binding materials around the perimeter of a guitar body and none are related to the appearance of the instrument. One might think that this is a simple subject but it's not. Experienced woodworkers will grasp the concepts immediately but those without that experience may have to consider the reasons for a few moments.

The interface between the top and sides of a guitar is a critical area. The top must be free to resonate freely when excited by the plucked string and yet be securely attached at the edges to a fairly rigid structure. Because the materials involved are quite thin, there is not much gluing surface available for securing the top/bottom to the side. The traditional solution to this problem is to employ a thicker section of wood, usually triangular in cross section that is called the "lining". The lining is first glued to the sides then the top and bottom are attached.



Various styles of lining have been used to allow the internal strips to follow the contours of the guitar sides closely. The most common technique is that of "kerfing" the lining wood. Kerfing consists of making thin saw slots spaced at close intervals along the triangular-shaped lining strips. If the slots are spaced appropriately, the strip can easily be bent and glued to follow the curves of the side. After clamping in place, the glue joint is allowed to cure. After curing, the lining is leveled (usually by sanding) and the top is then glued and clamped to the sides. After attaching appropriate internal top bracing (if this has not already been done) the bottom is glued and clamped to the sides.

One might expect the process to be almost done at this point but there are a few problems. For one thing, the top and bottom of the guitar has exposed "edge" grain (or "end" grain). This is the part of any piece of wood that is the least attractive (it has no "grain") and is difficult to work because of splintering. The edge grain can be visualized by imagining a large number of drinking straws that are glued together along their sides. The edge grain presents a series of very small tubular openings that are difficult to glue and difficult to finish.

In fine furniture and cabinet work, the deficiencies of edge grain are usually hidden by design or "edged" with solid wood trim. The same technique can be used to hide the exposed edges of the guitar top and bottom. The joint described above is first "rabbeted" (usually with a router) which cuts through the top and part of the sides, removing a small amount of wood and leaving a "ledge" cut away from the assembly. This is the space required for the binding.





As shown in the second sketch, the binding is glued into the rabbets at the top and bottom of the guitar. The thickness of the individual binding strips is determined by the desired number of plies and the rabbet dimensions.

The binding solves an unattractive problem resulting from exposure of the edge grain of the top and bottom of the guitar. But there is another reason for binding - of especial importance to the individual guitarist. We've all accumulated the requisite amount of dents and scratches on our instruments (the first one is the one that really hurts)!

The tops of high-end jazz and acoustic guitars are usually made from spruce which is NOT a hard wood. Spruce deforms easily and the edges of the guitar are susceptible to damage since these are the areas that usually come into contact with other (harder) surfaces in an undesirable manner. The binding is the first-order protection of the fragile joint between the sides and the top/bottom of the guitar. This protection is afforded by materials selection, either plastic or sometimes a hardwood like ebony or rosewood.

Many guitars do not have neck binding. It has traditionally been applied to more expensive models because the binding process is hand work and therefore costly. With the huge influx of Asian guitars into America and Europe, we see binding applied on even budget guitars - there is almost no cost impact because factory labor is about one hundred times less expensive in Asia.

There is no edge grain to disguise on a guitar neck but there is an interface between the fingerboard and the neck materials on most guitars. Depending on the consistency of the manufacturing process, the appearance of the joint might be enhanced by edge binding. (Note that solid maple neck guitars, such as some Fender models, rarely have neck binding because there is no separate fingerboard.)

However there is an argument for including neck binding if one is concerned about protection. The edge of the fingerboard is an area prone to damage - it's likely that this area will come into aggressive contact with microphone stands and the like. On a crowded stage, a brief body rotation could create one's worst nightmare: a confrontation between guitar fingerboard and a cymbal.

The more durable plastic binding is better able to withstand this type of contact while permanent damage would be likely to occur with an unbound neck (in the form of a gouge or dent). In the worst case, where the binding is seriously deformed, it would be far less expensive to replace the binding than an unbound, complete fingerboard.

Installing frets on an unbound neck is a very simple process. One simply taps the end of a length of fret wire into the pre-cut slot on the fingerboard then snips off the excess. This procedure is repeated until all frets are installed. Then the excess at each end of the fret is filed smooth and flush with the neck.

For bound necks, this simple process becomes a complex one. As with body binding, the process requires rabbeting the previously glued neck/fingerboard joint to create a ledge for the binding material. The binding material is then glued into the rabbet and scraped or sanded flush with the neck and fingerboard.

Unlike the unbound neck, where a length of fret wire can be tapped into place into the fingerboard slot, snipped off, the remainder of the length tapped into place in the next fingerboard slot and so on, the bound neck requires that each individual fret be cut to length.



The "tang" of the fret wire (the portion of the fret that is forced into the fret slot of the fingerboard) must be snipped off the fret at each end. In the above photo, a close look reveals that the tang has been removed from the two ends of the fret wire so that the tang will not interfere with the four-ply neck binding.

The fret has been snipped to rough length and will be filed and sanded so that it is just slightly greater than the neck width. Each fret will have a different length due to the gradual taper of the guitar neck. It's important to leave a slight excess so that after the fret has been installed it can be carefully filed/sanded flush with the binding. This is a very finicky operation and explains why bound necks are uncommon in budget-priced instruments except in guitars made in Asia, where labor cost is not a significant contribution to the selling price.

Some guitarists consider bound necks to be indispensable - I always thought that I did until I realized that many of the guitars that I play frequently do NOT have them. Here are a few of my instruments that suit their purposes just fine and do not have bound necks: 1928 Weissenborne Style 1, 1965 Gibson SG Junior, 1973 Fender Stratocaster, 1979 Carvin DC-150, 2001 Martin Backpacker, 2002 Gibson ES-135 and 2006 Heritage H-575.

There are two reasons for preferring bound necks over unbound necks: appearance and the protection binding offers to the edge of the fingerboard.

[Generic Sobriquet]

[planetguy]

painted on binding...yep, i've got a '58 Alden archtop (Harmony made) w painted on binding....from two or more feet away you'd never know.

i own several instruments that are bound...consider me a fan!

one of the coolest has to be an old KAY N-3 ac/el mando w checkerboard binding!
_________________
just groove baby!

[randyc]

The application of binding to the headstock of a guitar is a protective measure, to prevent the sharp edges of the headstock from inadvertent damage, as described previously. However this is probably secondary, the primary purpose being an indication of the quality and workmanship presumed to be applied to a high standard instrument model.

Here are two examples, the first is a Heritage "Golden Eagle" and the second is a Gibson "Wes Montgomery" L-5CES. (Note that the curves are intricate and of small radius - an implication of the skill required to fit the binding plies to the headstock with no visible joints.)





Note that some of the decorative aspects of binding (e.g. the abalone inlays shown in the first illustration of body binding) are not noticeable from more than a few feet of distance from the guitar. Although this might seem to be an application of considerable effort for very little reward, embellishment of costly instruments was never really intended to impress an audience visually.

The main reason for these visual features was to provide an intrinsic reward to the artist that purchased the instrument: pride of possession. It is an indisputable fact that better work is achieved with finer tools. Part of this is the functional aspect - the "utility" of the tool. But much is also attributable to the value and pride that the musician takes in his/her instrument.

This may not even be detectable by an audience; anecdotally it's frequently said that great artists can make junk instruments sound like those costing many, many thousands of dollars. I wouldn't care to argue this point as a listener but as a guitarist, I can state without equivocation that my best efforts are concurrent with the quality of the instrument that I am playing. That has been my consistent observation from age 15 to age 65.

[sunflower]

Thanks so much for doing this Randyc

I've always wondered about binding

[Jazzy]

Wow, thanks a lot for the interesting read Randy

[randyc]

My pleasure, gentlemen, and thank YOU for the statements of appreciation.

Randy

[MangoTango]