What a great guitar!! I'm with TX that the back looks like stained Maple, but when you look at the inside, that's mahogany. Did they laminate maple to mahogany ever?
I've never seen an example of it here, that I can remember.
But, "Sure, why not?"
***
You may be on to something there davisman. It is supposedly a prototype ............ ain't it?
Yes I think it really is a prototype as ad said, based on the bookmatched construction and/or use of maple.
I'm thinking maybe it was built for a NAMM Show, thus the maple veneer for visual appeal?
Also we've seen several Guild prototypes come up for sale from that source in the last couple of years, as TX mentions, that were originally NAMM pieces.
Why they did a Book matched Flamed Mahogany back and sides is a mystery to me but luckily I ended up with it.
I'm guessing that if it wasn't for purely aesthetic reasons, it's because finding or using a blank that would have been big enough for a one-piece outer layer would have been prohibitively expensive?
I'm thinking primarily aesthetic though, as it has a certain elegance not usually seen on arched backs.
Also thinking maybe not
too much more expensive to build that way than the typical "3
one-piece layers" method?
Traditionally they just glued together the layers and then steam-pressed 'em to make the arch.
I
assume they're using the same technique in China, now that they have arch-back capability, although it's possible the guitar was built in Oxnard where they still have the press that dates all the way back to Westerly at least.
I seriously doubt they're pressing backs here and sending 'em to China, though.
***It occurs to me that maybe the 2 different woods would behave differently in the press, maybe why it's not common to laminate differing woods that way, and maybe why they bookmatched the maple?
To make sure the back
stayed in one piece?
Also assuming that when they use the same wood for outside layers the center layer wood is compatible with the process as long as the outer woods are the same?
Anybody?
congrats