Semi-Hollow... to f-hole or not to f-hole...

bl28

Tele-Meister
Joined
Jul 5, 2017
Posts
154
Age
45
Location
San Diego, CA
7C97EF40-AB5F-4EE0-8D57-43DC138D36EE.jpeg
65DAC5BB-C626-407F-BAF8-AC065A881F7C.jpeg
6594038D-4B20-437C-ABF7-D4EBEBE1DDEB.jpeg
I’m building an acoustic-styled Tele now. Guts, back, and neck from African mahogany. Top is European spruce. Body will be a little thicker than a normal Tele at close to 2”. If it goes according to plan, as I’ve never bound a guitar before, it’ll have herringbone purfling and an old school 45 backstrip. Haven’t decided on pickup configuration yet. Neck is almost done, with an angled Martin-esque headstock, volute, and will have carbon reinforcements along with the truss rod. Ebony fingerboard.

The broad question I have... do f-holes make any difference in electrics, or is it purely aesthetics? Then aesthetically, would purfling and f-holes be too busy? Decisions, decisions... open to any and all
useful input. Thanks!
 

Jupiter

Telefied
Silver Supporter
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Posts
27,742
Location
Osaka, Japan
Having made one with f-holes, I am firmly in the been-there-done-that club. :D

I don't think f-holes are going to make any noticeable sound difference in your build.

What kind of treatment for the f-holes? Binding or none?
 

bl28

Tele-Meister
Joined
Jul 5, 2017
Posts
154
Age
45
Location
San Diego, CA
Having made one with f-holes, I am firmly in the been-there-done-that club. :D

I don't think f-holes are going to make any noticeable sound difference in your build.

What kind of treatment for the f-holes? Binding or none?

I did just make a dual f-hole Tele (unbound), so that’s a good point.
 

brookdalebill

Tele Axpert
Ad Free Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Posts
117,122
Age
65
Location
Austin, Tx
I’m in the no F Hole camp.
They look cool, but I think hollow guitars sound better
(electrically) without them.
I’m basing my opinion on the sound of my fully hollow Chet.
It has the painted on F holes, and is my all time (so far) best sounding electric guitar.
 

Freeman Keller

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Aug 22, 2018
Posts
9,056
Age
77
Location
Washington
I'll give you my opinion, but you know what they say about opinions. F-holes or some variation looks correct on guitar based on classical Gibsons and other traditional designs. They look wrong on Fender. It looks even sillier with one f-hole on one side and not on the other. OK, now I'll put on my fire proof underwear and get ready for the flame throwers.

Saying that, I put them on guitar that are based on traditional designs - ES175 and 335 and L5's and F5 mandolins. When I built my personal tele I chambered it much as you have done, but I left the silly f-hole off. I think it looks much better and it sounds fine.

Some things to remember, however. F-holes make the guitar more prone to feedback, which is why BB had them left off of his Lucilles. If you don't put them in your semi you will need to provide an access hole for the electronics. However it is also a total PITA to fish electronics thru f-holes, I build them in during construction. If you are making your top close to acoustic thickness you should consider reinforcing the holes - they often split at the sharp points. They are a hassle to bind, but look elegant when they are. In a true acoustic instrument they are critical to the air chamber sound and need to be tuned as part of voicing the top, not an issue for you. They can be used to show off your design ideas - look at all the cool archtops - but some of them just look dumb.

That said, I would leave them off of any fender inspired guitar. YMMV

Ps - I did a little write up on installing binding and purfling, let me know if you would like the link.
 

Mongo Park

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Posts
1,343
Location
Winnipeg
Binding the F holes is about the most work out of the whole guitar build. So Ya gotta really like what it adds to do it.
 

Deeve

Poster Extraordinaire
Silver Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Posts
9,912
Location
Ballard
The f-hole is one of the places I've seen distinctive design - personally, I'm for it, w/o any idea how much harder I've just voted to make op's project. You're welcome. . .
Peace - Deeve
 

blowtorch

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
May 2, 2003
Posts
38,531
Location
Wisco
F-hole, because:

when you play a guitar with an f-hole at high volume, at that perfect spot just before feedback, it is an organic experience, the top vibrates and pushes air through the f-hole, you feel that against the inside of your forearm, and the guitar becomes a living breathing thing :cool:
 

nathanteal

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Posts
1,054
Location
Rochester, NY
I'm squarely in the almost always F-hole camp. Of course I tend to be partial to Thinline Teles, all else being equal. I don't think they belong on every type of Tele or Fender shape, but on a traditional Thinline or '70s HH Thinline, I say they complete the look. So if you're putting a pickguard on it or anything, yes. F-hole. No pickguard, then forego it.
 

bl28

Tele-Meister
Joined
Jul 5, 2017
Posts
154
Age
45
Location
San Diego, CA
I'll give you my opinion, but you know what they say about opinions. F-holes or some variation looks correct on guitar based on classical Gibsons and other traditional designs. They look wrong on Fender. It looks even sillier with one f-hole on one side and not on the other. OK, now I'll put on my fire proof underwear and get ready for the flame throwers.

Saying that, I put them on guitar that are based on traditional designs - ES175 and 335 and L5's and F5 mandolins. When I built my personal tele I chambered it much as you have done, but I left the silly f-hole off. I think it looks much better and it sounds fine.

Some things to remember, however. F-holes make the guitar more prone to feedback, which is why BB had them left off of his Lucilles. If you don't put them in your semi you will need to provide an access hole for the electronics. However it is also a total PITA to fish electronics thru f-holes, I build them in during construction. If you are making your top close to acoustic thickness you should consider reinforcing the holes - they often split at the sharp points. They are a hassle to bind, but look elegant when they are. In a true acoustic instrument they are critical to the air chamber sound and need to be tuned as part of voicing the top, not an issue for you. They can be used to show off your design ideas - look at all the cool archtops - but some of them just look dumb.

That said, I would leave them off of any fender inspired guitar. YMMV

Ps - I did a little write up on installing binding and purfling, let me know if you would like the link.

all great input - thank you.

I’ll be adding electronics routs before glue up. I’m also planning on removing more to make it more-semi-hollow. Maybe. Last one I did, I forgot the electronics routs and had to drill them with the footlong bit, which I despise.

And yes please, I’d love the link to the binding/purfling!
 

bl28

Tele-Meister
Joined
Jul 5, 2017
Posts
154
Age
45
Location
San Diego, CA
F-hole, because:

when you play a guitar with an f-hole at high volume, at that perfect spot just before feedback, it is an organic experience, the top vibrates and pushes air through the f-hole, you feel that against the inside of your forearm, and the guitar becomes a living breathing thing :cool:

Now that sounds delightful.

I'm squarely in the almost always F-hole camp. Of course I tend to be partial to Thinline Teles, all else being equal. I don't think they belong on every type of Tele or Fender shape, but on a traditional Thinline or '70s HH Thinline, I say they complete the look. So if you're putting a pickguard on it or anything, yes. F-hole. No pickguard, then forego it.

My plan was initially dual f-holes and no pickguard. I hadn’t even thought about a pickguard. But a black guard could look fantastic. Thanks for putting more thoughts in my skull!
 

Freeman Keller

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Aug 22, 2018
Posts
9,056
Age
77
Location
Washington
all great input - thank you.

I’ll be adding electronics routs before glue up. I’m also planning on removing more to make it more-semi-hollow. Maybe. Last one I did, I forgot the electronics routs and had to drill them with the footlong bit, which I despise.

And yes please, I’d love the link to the binding/purfling!

Here is the insides of a semi hollow (335 style). The f-holes are taped to prevent cracking and will be bound. I install all the electronics with the back off so I can get the wiring perfect. This is the full length kerfed 335 style center block - this guitar got a ToM with a Bigsby


IMG_3301.JPG


Binding the holes with the old wicked CA trick

IMG_3309.JPG



Here is the link, hope it helps

https://www.tdpri.com/threads/binding-101.1002709/
 

nathanteal

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Posts
1,054
Location
Rochester, NY
Someday when I have the wherewithal to build guitars from scratch, this will be my "f-hole"...
image%3A10690.jpg

I drew it up for a guy who was supposed to build me a custom LPB Thinline a few years ago. He totally bombed on follow through and it never came to fruition (come to think of it, he still owes me $1000 from that deposit), but I'm still itching to get it carved into a top someday.
 




New Posts

Top