Phil Stevens

Benedict Bosco wrote:A few of things I've learned:
- it's a good idea to exercise all shutoff valves (open and close them), both the whole house and at individual fixtures, on a regular basis, probably at least once a year. If they don't move, they tend to corrode internally and stick, and may not work when you need them. I had a valve handle I was trying to close break off because it was too badly stuck - thankfully it wasn't something I needed off urgently, but would have been bad otherwise.
- have shutoff valves at each fixture. This isn't necessarily an emergency thing, but if you're trying to fix or replace a faucet or appliance and you can't shut off the water there and have to shut off the main, it's a bigger production that has to be done now, instead of being able to take your time with the fix. Exterior faucets especially should have their own independent shutoffs.
- if you shut off the main for any reason, you probably want to go through the house and remove aerators and run the faucets until they run smooth (i.e. once the air is out, run a bit longer). The pressure drop/rebuild tends to knock sediment loose in the pipes, which clogs up the aerators and makes them flow poorly.

I learned a trick from a veteran plumber years ago: Most shutoff valves are the "gate" type with the handle that you turn to open and close. Since they spend years, even decades, in the open position, it's very common for them to corrode in place...then when you really need to turn them off RIGHT NOW you can't. His trick is to open it all the way, then back off about half a turn from the fully open position. This keeps the surfaces from mating and gives you some wiggle room when you need to free things up quickly.

You can also replace a gate shutoff with a high quality ball valve. These are very resistant to seizing up, but more costly.

Anywhere we harvest runoff from roadways we need to have a way to filter out some of the nasties that motor vehicles leave behind. The main things we don't want getting into our food-growing systems are the petroleum products, like motor oil and hydraulic fluid, and the particles that result from tyre wear, especially the anti-degradants that are mixed in to prevent rubber deterioration and have some really toxic effects on aquatic life.

I'm a fan of biochar bunds or sediment traps placed in the path of the water flow, periodically replaced so that the "used" biochar can be dealt with safely. Unless heavy metals are in the picture, this treatment can be as simple as re-pyrolysis of the used biochar at high enough temperatures to destroy the bad stuff, after which the biochar can go back into the sediment trap or some other beneficial setting.

Or you could exit from the bottom, with a short riser to get above the inevitable sediment layer. Then you're not disrupting the coil of tubing.

If you get a really good population of fungi in there, the mycelium also have a tremendous capacity to hold and move water.

r ransom wrote:I would also like to learn more about the bridge and tail piece.  Why is it like that?

Is it designed for specific music style?

What is the advantage over a regular acoustic bridge we have with pegs to hold the strings?

It's a design that puts the tension of the strings onto the shell of the guitar via the tailpiece instead of depending on a bridge affixed to the top. This means the top doesn't need as much bracing because the forces are applied to a structure that can take them relatively easily. The downside is the angle or deflection of the strings as they pass over the saddle is very slight compared to a top-mount bridge. This transmits less of the vibrating energy of the strings into the top and makes for a quieter tone with less "attack" or definition. One way to make up for this is with an arched top, which borrows some tricks from the physics of violins and similar instruments.

I also like the two-bucket system, plus if you fill the liquids bucket with biochar you solve the smell issue and end up with fantastically charged biochar when it's time to empty it.

r ransom wrote:
What would we look for to tell if the problem is with the neck and not the body?

I tried taking the tension off the strings and observing.  It all goes flat with the tension off.  With tension on, the body sinks in at the bridge/nut (is it still a bridge if the strings don't attach to it?)  Above the sound hole where the neck is, everything appears to stay flat (the same as without tension) , but I didn't know how to measure this except by looking.

I couldn't see any curvature to the neck with or without tension.  But maybe there is a better way to check.

I'd recommend checking it out with a straightedge that's at least as long as the guitar. With the strings tuned up, place the edge along the top and fretboard, and note how close everything is to being flat and true. Ideally, the saddle and nut should touch and the distance to the frets should be consistent with the tiniest bit of a concave profile. Repeat this with the strings loosened.

It sounds like the bridge caves in under tension and creates the dished out area in the top. If the neck set is bad, you would probably see the improper angle whether or not the strings are at pitch. So what the guitar most likely needs is some remedial bracing, like an X under the bridge.

It's certainly possible that this guitar does not have broken or popped braces and that the problem is with the set of the neck. If there's a truss rod, it might be able to be adjusted. If there's not, the only thing for it is to remove and reset the neck to get a better angle. Have a look at the heel joint. That's where the neck is fixed to the body. You might be able to see if it's coming apart there.

This is almost always a symptom of broken (or insufficient) bracing. If you can get a mirror in there, or a little USB endoscope with a light on it, you can look at the underside of the top in the area of the bridge. Sometimes it's just a matter of regluing a popped brace. If it's broken, then replacement is on the menu. If the top is dished in front of the bridge (or bowed up behind it) and you're certain that the bracing is firmly attached, then they're just not up to the task and replacement is the only long-term fix. You can always try lighter strings that exert less tension, but the tradeoff will be higher action since the bridge sits up more than it should.



This video shows how a luthier does it, using a clear top so you can see what's going on. He's got some cool ninja tricks like the special saw blocks he uses to clean out the old glue, and the steel pieces held on with magnets to keep glue from going where you don't want it.

Every time I see examples of the rock and gravel at Wheaton Labs I just get jealous. All that beautiful, angular shattered material that interlocks and knits together when it's put in place. I'm on what used to be the riverbed and everything here is rounded. It's good hard rock, but it packs about as effectively as ball bearings :-(