1970 Guild F-512 Brazilian Rosewood w/ F-612 Inlays

davismanLV

Venerated Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
19,201
Reaction score
11,829
Location
U.S.A. : Nevada : Las Vegas
Guild Total
2
Al, from the article I got the idea that since they were custom orders that some were arched back and some were not. Did I read that incorrectly?

"[FONT=&quot]By the end of ’67, they were being sold as the F-412 Special, a small batch of which were given Brazilian-rosewood back and sides – some solid, others arched and laminated like the F-512. There were also examples of the F-412 with maple back and sides. At this time, the rosewood-bodied jumbo 12s were renamed F-512s. Until 1974, the F-412 and F-512 were available only by special order, and Guild did not keep records of special orders."[/FONT]
 

Cougar

Enlightened Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2015
Messages
5,323
Reaction score
3,016
Location
North Idaho
Guild Total
5
In the meantime, here are the links to Imgur.....

Yeah, the links work. If you right click on the image in imgur and "copy image location" then come back here, click on the "insert image" button, and paste into the "url box," the photo should show up here....

SWsbWv7.jpg
 

awagner

Senior Member
Platinum Supporting
Joined
Oct 18, 2012
Messages
1,722
Reaction score
2,106
Location
Westchester, NY
Guild Total
40
I was able to view the pictures by copying and pasting the links in Imgur.

Beautiful guitar. Do you have any pictures that show the inside of the soundhole and the label? What is the serial #?

Thanks.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,791
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
Al, from the article I got the idea that since they were custom orders that some were arched back and some were not. Did I read that incorrectly?
Didn't actually read the article but sounds like you read it correctly.
And forgot to check "the Bible" last night for clarification if there.

"By the end of ’67, they were being sold as the F-412 Special, a small batch of which were given Brazilian-rosewood back and sides – some solid, others arched and laminated like the F-512. There were also examples of the F-412 with maple back and sides. At this time, the rosewood-bodied jumbo 12s were renamed F-512s. Until 1974, the F-412 and F-512 were available only by special order, and Guild did not keep records of special orders."

I think that hi-lit phrase is a typo, though.
I think it's supposed to read "Like the F50R", because obviously both types were destined to become F512's and they were built both ways.....like the F50R.
It does correlate with the arched back F50R's from the same period, though: Chazmo's "Cap", was one of those, like Bobby Weir's special orders.
"IIRC", in the Bible Hans quotes plant manager Jim Deurloo as saying they "experimented" with arched rosewood backs. (I know somebody said it but I might be wrong about who it was)

Wow what a cool guitar. The article reveals that the arched back was made with laminated woods likely using the same approach as the maple Guilds. Now I assume that all layers of this laminate would be rosewood, and not just a rosewood veneer over a different core wood (like most laminates are done)?
I can't think of a compelling reason to do that, and in fact Chaz's '67 F50R "Cap" also had the softwood "core".
Those veneer sheets were supplied by a furniture veneer maker and I suspect were fairly costly, even the instrument grade rosewood was becoming scarcer and costlier by '67 due to Brazil curtailing export.
Guild was already using EIR by then although my memory of 12-string listings and sightings up through '69 at least is that they've always been confirmed as Braz when Hans was asked.
From which I guess that they reserved it for high-end builds like this one (and F50R's and D55's) would be.

Beautiful guitar. Do you have any pictures that show the inside of the soundhole and the label? What is the serial #?
Thanks.
Yes please, I'm very curious if there's a seam on the inside of the back or not, myself.
Not that it makes much difference, but I suspect one reason those backs have 2 sides is that rosewood veneer in a size that would allow a "one-piece" look wasn't available or simply too costly.
It's also been a subject of debate as to whether those were regular flat back pieces glued together and then put in the archback press or if they were simply the standard process of veneer over a core but using "half sheets" of rosewood instead of a whole piece like the maple and mahogany archbacks.
I think it has to be the latter, and that the whole thing keeping it all together is a whole sheet of "core" wood.
If there's a seam inside the back that would also tend to confirm that's all they had to work with, for whatever reason.
For once I'm gonna ask Hans for help!
Do you know, sir?
 
Last edited:

richardp69

Enlightened Member
Gold Supporting
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
6,007
Reaction score
5,965
Location
Barton City, Michigan
I don't know nothin' 'bout nothin' except to say that is one exquisite looking guitar. I think it needs to live with awagner.
 

FNG

Enlightened Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Messages
5,961
Reaction score
1,516
Location
Planet Earth
Guild Total
596
We need a popcorn eating emoji, dagnabit!
 

awagner

Senior Member
Platinum Supporting
Joined
Oct 18, 2012
Messages
1,722
Reaction score
2,106
Location
Westchester, NY
Guild Total
40
Difficult to justify owning 2 1970 Brazilian F512s with special inlays, although this one is archbacked and braceless, which is pretty cool.

The existence of this guitar make me wonder about several things.

Is there is a Brazilian archback F612 out there?

Are archbacked 12 strings like the F412 stronger than braced 12 strings like the F512? Both can handle standard tunings, but which one is sturdier?

Is a maple archback sturdier than a rosewood archback? I assume yes, since it appears that archbacked rosewood was experimental, and there must be a reason why it was never employed in standard production models. Of course cost must have been a consideration as well.

I would love to A-B this guitar with mine.
 

fronobulax

Bassist, GAD and the Hot Mess Mods
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
24,708
Reaction score
8,836
Location
Central Virginia, USA
Guild Total
5
This is an experiment. I copied the thread out of FS and will delete the extraneous conversation there in hopes it continues here.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,791
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
This is an experiment. I copied the thread out of FS and will delete the extraneous conversation there in hopes it continues here.
Yep, thanks, I was getting "nervous" about that but suspected it was being allowed in this case for a very special instrument and for which the veering was only about the instrument itself.


Of course there is a seam! However there is no center seam reinforcement because it was not necessary for obvious reasons!

Sincerely,

Hans Moust
www.guitarsgalore.nl

That's all I needed, thanks!
 
Last edited:

chazmo

Super Moderator
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
25,472
Reaction score
7,131
Location
Central Massachusetts
Fro, the original thread was polluted with a bunch of delete messages because I think you did soft delete. I went through and did hard delete on everything you'd already moved. Thanks.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,791
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
Difficult to justify owning 2 1970 Brazilian F512s with special inlays, although this one is archbacked and braceless, which is pretty cool.

The existence of this guitar make me wonder about several things.

Is there is a Brazilian archback F612 out there?

Are archbacked 12 strings like the F412 stronger than braced 12 strings like the F512? Both can handle standard tunings, but which one is sturdier?
By definition laminations are stronger than a solid sheet of same thickness, especially if they're set up "cross-grained" as they normally are.
It was the whole reason the "invention" was adopted to widespread use (plywood) in the first place.
It's also crack-proof, and the arch itself has crush-resistance properties much like an egg: you can't crush one by squeezing because the force gets distributed over the whole surface of the shell, same principle that gives arched entries their strength, indeed, the root of the word "architecture".
Is a maple archback sturdier than a rosewood archback? I assume yes, since it appears that archbacked rosewood was experimental
As explained above, it's the laminated/arched back itself that's "sturdier", and don't think it's anything to do with inherent strength of one wood over the other.
Note that arched maple back F50 was Guild's first flat-top so was no longer "experimental" by this time, and D50's had been around since '63, so they knew how to do rosewood flatbacks too.
Note also that Paul Simon's F30 "Specials" (rosewood body) came about in '67 as well, but don't recall if those were arched, think they were flat.
Making 12-strings out of F50s at all likely was "experimental" too, though.
Their first 12's in '64-'65were based on the ('hog body) F47: F212 ('hog)and F312 (rosewood), but both always flatbacked at that time (that I ever remember seeing, LOL!).
and there must be a reason why it was never employed in standard production models. Of course cost must have been a consideration as well.
I would love to A-B this guitar with mine.
Actually there was at least one model that got arched rosewood back as standard production:
the DCE-5 is the one that always comes right to mind.
Think there's a couple of others I'm forgetting but in any case yes very rare.
AS for cost, barring correction from Hans, I'm thinking that in fact making an arched back is less labor and materials costly than making a flat back:
Just glue up the sheets and put 'em in the press, instead of setting up and gluing the halves of a flatback and then gluing in bracing (which also had to be fabricated at some cost of labor and material); and materials cost is probably lower than using solid sheets, too.
Consider that the archbacked D25 was able to be offered at a price that made it Guild's "entry level" dread for around 20 years, think at least some of that some of that had to be due to the lower cost of using the arched back.
From which I deduced long ago that if there's actually a cost advantage, there must be some reason arched rosewood back is a very rare configuration even for other makers, and can only come to one conclusion:
Rosewood's overtone and sustain characteristics might be "overkill" for an arched back, the sound probably only appeals to a narrow niche of players.
Might be "OK" when used primarily in strumming as 12's often are.
 
Last edited:

merlin6666

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2014
Messages
1,173
Reaction score
305
Location
Canada .... brrr
From which I deduced long ago that if there's actually a cost advantage, there must be some reason arched rosewood back is a very rare configuration even for other makers, and can only come to one conclusion:
Rosewood's overtone and sustain characteristics might be "overkill" for an arched back, the sound probably only appeals to a narrow niche of players.
Might be "OK" when used primarily in strumming as 12's often are.

I doubt that the type of decorative veneer of a laminated back can contribute much to the vibrations, resonance, and sound of a guitar. Is it possible that the nature of rosewood with its figuring may not be amenable to arching, and maybe they had some technical issues with this wood such as separations along the figuring? I suspect that maple behaves very different and is therefore preferred for the arching process.
 

awagner

Senior Member
Platinum Supporting
Joined
Oct 18, 2012
Messages
1,722
Reaction score
2,106
Location
Westchester, NY
Guild Total
40
I meant archbacking rosewood was experimental (not sure the word "archbacking" exists, but I am using it anyway). I am aware that maple archbacks were made by Guild since the 1950s. And since flatbacks have bracing, I was wondering if a braced flatback is as sturdy as an unbraced archback.

And I also meant the cost of archbacking rosewood vs. archbacking maple. And if cost was not a determining factor, what was the reason this process never became a commonplace construction method for rosewood guitars?
 

GardMan

Enlightened Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
5,359
Reaction score
959
Location
Utah
Guild Total
5
I doubt that the type of decorative veneer of a laminated back can contribute much to the vibrations, resonance, and sound of a guitar.
I'm not so sure on that... At one time, I owned an arched back G-37 (maple B/S) and arched back D-25M (mahogany B/S), both built a few months apart in 1974. They sounded VERY different... more so than I could attribute to just being two different examples of arched back dreads.
 

adorshki

Reverential Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
34,176
Reaction score
6,791
Location
Sillycon Valley CA
I doubt that the type of decorative veneer of a laminated back can contribute much to the vibrations, resonance, and sound of a guitar.
Backs themselves are primarily reflectors, it doesn't matter if they're solid or not.
There is the issue of how a back is "coupled" as Chris Cozad mentioned once, but that's still not as big an element of "tone color" as the frequency responses of the basic tonewoods: what frequency ranges they tend to reflect and how.
Explaining why 2 different archback veneers produce perceptibly different "tone" as Gardman notes in post #36.
I meant archbacking rosewood was experimental (not sure the word "archbacking" exists, but I am using it anyway). I am aware that maple archbacks were made by Guild since the 1950s.
Right, was just making the distinction as to what the experiment was: the material or the process, didn't mean to belittle your knowledge of the history, primarily said it because there's bound to be others reading sooner or later who may not know it (new members)
(PS I applaud your inventive creation of the term "archbacking", it's perfectly suited for the discussion at hand. :smile: )
Is it possible that the nature of rosewood with its figuring may not be amenable to arching, and maybe they had some technical issues with this wood such as separations along the figuring? I suspect that maple behaves very different and is therefore preferred for the arching process.
Gluing the veneer to the substrate is the first element of construction that would prevent that.
For your convenience I'll copy what I said below in response to one of Awgner's related questions:
The glued up sheets were put into dies according to the body shape of the back being made and then into the archback press:
stage1_insideguild_6.jpg

Once those puppies come outta that ain't nothin gonna break or split 'em short of a sledgehammer.

And since flatbacks have bracing, I was wondering if a braced flatback is as sturdy as an unbraced archback.
Didn't I answer that?:
"By definition laminations are stronger than a solid sheet of same thickness, especially if they're set up "cross-grained" as they normally are.
It was the whole reason the "invention" was adopted to widespread use (plywood) in the first place.
It's also crack-proof, and the arch itself has crush-resistance properties much like an egg: you can't crush one by squeezing because the force gets distributed over the whole surface of the shell."
OK, you did ask about strength to stand up to 12-strings but that stress is only minimally borne by the back (if at all), it's the top that has to deal with the stress and the 12-strings did get special 12-string bracing:
We saw an F30 once that Hans confirmed had an F-112 top because he could identify the bracing.
Figured they simply used what was readily available when they needed an F30 top, it is after all the same size.
The other areas of stress focus are the bridge, the neck joint and the neck itself:
Guild's dual trusses were designed to compensate for the large inequality of string tensions between treble and bass sides of the neck.
And it seems like it's always the neckset that gives way first in a 12-er, if not the bridge.
And I also meant the cost of archbacking rosewood vs. archbacking maple.
Can't believe there'd be any cost difference other than materials.
The glued up sheets were put into dies according to the body shape of the back being made and then into the archback press.
I doubt very much the press had any trouble with either wood and am quite certain the "cost per stamping cycle" was the same for all.
And if cost was not a determining factor, what was the reason this process never became a commonplace construction method for rosewood guitars?
Didn't I answer that as well?:
"From which I deduced long ago that if there's actually a cost advantage, there must be some reason arched rosewood back is a very rare configuration even for other makers, and can only come to one conclusion:
Rosewood's overtone and sustain characteristics might be "overkill" for an arched back, the sound probably only appeals to a narrow niche of players.

Might be "OK" when used primarily in strumming as 12's often are. "
If anybody's got a better answer I'm ready to listen, but nobody's offered anything in ten years.


EDIT: One thing I think tends to support my conjecture is that the DCE-5 mentioned earlier only has about 50% owner appreciation rating, something that struck me when I first read the 3rd "underwhelmed" owner post ten years ago, out of maybe 5 or 6 owner reports at all over the years.
That's compared to a 15% "underwhelmed" rating for new Corona owners way back then, and a maybe 5% overall for all new Guild owners over the years.
It's when I first started wondering if there was something inherent in the sound of the configuration that just didn't appeal to a wide audience and made me aware that the configuration itself was very uncommon.
Which itself tended to support my hypothesis.
Guildedagain loves his DCE-5 though, and he's got a lot of experience so perhaps his ear's more sophisticated than the average player.
 
Last edited:

dreadnut

Gone But Not Forgotten
Gone But Not Forgotten
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
16,082
Reaction score
6,442
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
Guild Total
2
Dare I inquire about the asking price on this guitar?
 
Top