My passionate focus is to produce the best sounding musical instruments I possibly can.

Since the perception of perfect tone, projection and sustain is a very personal taste, being able to tailor an intstrument to the individual is something I take very seriously.

My approach to deisgn is grounded in playability and longevity - believing that the starting point for perfect form is perfect function.

Classic lines, smooth transitions and meticulously finished surfaces are what define the look and feel of my instruments.

When designing a bespoke instrument, it all starts with the shape and size - critical determinants of tone and volume, playability and aesthetics.

Starting with the soundboard: all other things being equal, a soundboard with less mass will vibrate with more amplitude for a given amount of energy from the string - generating greater volume than a more massive soundboard. In this regard, smaller instruments have a bit of a head-start when it comes to achievable volume.

However, for an equivalent density and stiffness, smaller and less massive soundboards (and correspondingly lower volume air chambers) have higher resonant frequencies - favouring a brighter sound; larger and more massive soundboards (with bigger air chambers) can bring out more of the low frequencies. Since steel strings have a brighter sound than nylon strings, the general approach with a streel-string guitar is to try to bring out as much of the low end as possible, whilst carefully controlling the treble to avoid an overly harsh sound.

Whilst this is only part of the story, finding the right balance of volume versus resonant frequency is an important starting point.

Size is also important from a practical perspective - influencing how the musician is able to interact with the instrument.

My personal experience is that the classic OM shape and size feels great to play and it is possible to produce a wonderful warm tone with the right construction. I also enjoy larger-bodied guitars for the dpeth of tone and balance that they can produce, though I like to add an arm bevel to improve comfort, otherwise they can feel a bit awkward.

Whatever size of guitar, I generally like to make the tail flat, so that it will stand upright on the floor by itself. Subtle, but convenient.

It is wood, after all, that does all of the work to transform the oscillation of the string into sound.

And not all wood is created equal.

Many woods are stiff, and many woods are light. But some woods are unusually stiff for their weight - this means that it’s possible to create a structure which is just as strong, but with less mass. And with less mass to move, the same energy from the string creates bigger vibrations in the wood, and therefore more sound.

Traditionally Spruce has been used for soundboards, because it creates wonderful volume, adds tone and lasts well over time. I agree, and so generally prefer tight-grained Spruce for soundboards in order to get the crisp tone and longevity that I am looking for.

If warm tone is the order of the day then Cedars or Redwoods are excellent alternatives, though they are both generally much easier to damage than Spruce, and don’t offer the same longevity.

The requirement for sides are somewhat different. Contemporary opinion is that sides for steel-string guitars should have significantly higher density than the soundboard. This acoustic impedence mismatch reduces the amount of energy lost from the soundboard into the rest of the structure. Using dense hardwoods on the outside surface of the sides has the added benefits of looking great and improving durability of the instrument.

Backs are traditionally matched with the sides, largely for aesthetic reasons. Whether this is the best choice for acoustics is perhaps debatable, but having a hard-wearing back is generally appreciated by people who use their instruments in the real world.

The priority feature for necks is stability - succesfully counteracting the pull of the strings for many years, without warping over time or moving with changes in humidity and temperature in a way that would affect the action.

Sadly, some of the typical (and excellent) species - such as Brazillian Rosewood and Honduran Mahogany are now considered to be endangered after many years of exploitation, but many other excellent species of wood are more responsibly managed and easy to get hold of.

Trying to find a compromise between sound, aesthetics and environmental considerations, I commonly use European Spruce or Sitka Spruce for soundboards, African Mahogany or East Indian Rosewood for backs & sides, African Mahogany for necks.

On a standard acoustic guitar, 6 steel strings are typically suspended low to the soundboard, exerting a horizontal force in the region of 700N at the bridge - the equivalent of 70kg hanging on the strings. This requires some serious structural strength for the guitar just to stay in one piece.

Finding the sweet spot between structural integrity, efficiency of sound production and tonal balance is not particularly easy.

The most common approach for steel-string guitars is to take a Spruce soundboard of between 2.5-3.0mm thickness and brace it from behind with a ‘x-bracing’ pattern made with carved spruce battens. Ladder bracing is applied to the inside of a hardwood back. The sides may either be a single ply of hardwood, they may be reinforced with battens, or they can be made up as laminates of wood and other materials.

Personally, I believe that there is value and charm in using natural materials well and avoiding synthetic compounds wherever possible. I believe in allowing the back and sides to resonate. And through experience, I know that different bracing patterns can produce vastly different-sounding instruments.

I love to employ my understanding of these variables to produce an instrument with the correct tone, volume and sustain for different musical needs.

For my own playing style, I lean towards a moderate-thickness soundboard with a proprietary bracing pattern that favours a warm, open sound. I love how a thin back with light but traditional bracing opens up the sound and gives feedback to the musician. And I love to use hand-bent single-ply sides without any bracing - keeping the overall weight down and open up the tone further.

Admittedly, an instrument built this way is not the most resistant to rough treatment, but has a tone that I personally adore.

A popular alternative approach is to use a thin soundboard with tall braces, which can generate a big, loud sound. Separately, it is possible to create a stiffer and more resilient structure in the rest of the instrument by using a thicker back and epoxy-laminated sides. Pair these together (how many well-respected contemporary fingerstyle guitars are built) and you can achieve amazing projection and much better resitance to rough treatment, but also less tactile feedback to the player and a much heavier instrument.

There is absolutely no right or wrong, just the preference of the musician. Tailoring to the specific need is something I enjoy deeply.

At some point, it became ‘normal’ for steel string acoustic guitars to place the neck-body junction at the 14th fret - affording better access to the higher frets than the traditional 12th-fret junction of a nylon-string classical or flamenco guitar.

And at some point, it became ‘normal’ for steel string guitars to place the nut and the saddle approximately 25 inches (635mm) apart.

Both of these features work well for most musicians, but they’re not the only way it has to be.

Placing the bridge closer to the tail of the guitar and matching the neck-body junction with the 12th fret results in the musician playing the strings closer to their midpoint (increasing the fundamental harmonic) and increasing the longitudinal dipole action of the soundboard. Depending on how you play, and how the soundboard is braced, this might be good or bad. It’s personal.

Similarly, it’s ‘normal’ for frets to be parallel. Whilst the tension of each string in a standard set should be similar (~100N each), the low string, being thicker, is significantly less stretched than the high string. What if the low string was significantly longer than the high string - a ‘multiscale’ fretboard? This increases the stretch of the lower strings, giving more clarity to the bass, without impacting string action too much. It also results in a ‘fanned fretboard’ which matches how the angle of the hand naturally changes as you move up and down the neck. Some people love it. But it’s not for everyone - it’s personal.

Choosing the right scale, getting the action perfect, putting the bridge in the correct position and choosing the most appropriate fret system is part of making a personalised instrument for a specific style of playing.

Anyone who has played a guitar for more than 10 minutes at a time will be familiar with the sensation of the sharp edge digging into their forearm. It’s not particularly comfortable.

The larger the body of the guitar, and the longer you play for, the more uncomfortable it becomes.

The solution: a chamfered edge!

It’s not exactly straightforward to achieve, which is why you don’t see it on mass-production guitars, but it’s a lovely feature that makes a real difference to playability.

My personal preference is for the ‘Laskin’ style arm bevel. This is a 45 degree bevel extending most of the lower bout, with fully mitred binding and purfling lines.

I think it offers a wonderful solid feel, amazing comfort, and beautiful aesthetics.

I would recommend this to anyone considering a guitar larger than OM-size.

For those who want to take the comfort further, it’s possible to place a bevel anywhere on the guitar body! More common requests include the rib bevel (on the upper back edge) and the palm bevel (on the lower front edge, adjacent to the neck - an alternative to the cutaway).

There is an ever-expanding array of new tools and techniques.

Personally, I strive to produce unique and beautiful instruments. To me, the art is in working sympathetically and dynamically with natural materials - constantly making decisions and adjustments to account for, and enhance, the quirks of the materials in hand.

As a result, 
I choose to only use tools that do a single operation at a time. Tools that require direct physical input and adjustment from the luthier in order to carry out the desired operation.

The vast majority of my work is done using traditional hand tools: hand planes to bring blanks of wood to thickness (including soundboards, backs and sides); chisels and knives for shaping; cabinet scrapers for smoothing and finishing; hand-sanding blocks to finish surfaces; files for cutting string slots in nuts and saddles.

The power-tools that I do use are: a band saw to rough cut blanks; an electric hand drill for drilling holes and final polishing; a handheld router for cutting channels and rebates (binding/purfling, neck rods, soundhole/rosette, inlays, neck joint); an air compressor and spray gun to apply lacquer

For me, perfection is at least in part a result of the character of the wood and the maker coming through in the final product. As a result, every single item I make is truly hand-crafted, and truly unique. No two guitars will ever be the same.

Humanity is already doing plenty to exploit the world’s resources and pollute what is left. I would like to tread as lightly as I realistically can - making choices that limit my negative impact wherever possible.

Cutting down old-growth tropical trees is, I admit, hard to defend. But the quantities involved in making a guitar are very minimal, and it is inherently biodegradable. I do my best to source from sustainable sources, to maximise the number of parts I can make out of each blank, and to avoid waste wherever possible.

An aspect that I personally have more control over is the toxic substances and non-biodegradeable waste resulting from synthetic compounds commonly used in the process: adhesive tapes, glues, epoxies, lacquers, thinners, abrasives.

I am constantly reviewing my process to reduce dependence on consumables wherever possible.

For transparency, the synthetic consumables I currently use include:

- Aliphatic Resin (glue): unmatched for reliably producing very strong joints between nearly all woods. Water-soluble, so requires no volatile solvents (~50ml per guitar)
- Masking Tape: hard to beat for accurately attaching purfling/binding, and masking prior to finishing. Paper-based with rubber adhesive (half roll per guitar)
- 2-part Epoxy: used to attach the fingerboard to the neck, and to fill open pores on the finished surfaces. Used very sparinglyand mixed in small quantities to avoid waste (~15g per guitar)
- Water-based Polymer Lacquer: used as a top coat over shellac. Produces minimal VOCs and requires only water for thinning and cleaning (~200ml per guitar)
- Synthetic Buffing Compounds: used to achieve a high-gloss finish on polymer lacquer (~10g per guitar)
- Abrasive Paper and Mesh: irreplaceable for finishing surfaces - used as sparingly as possible (~8 sheets per guitar)

In order to minimise use of disposable abrasive papers, I make use of edge tools (hand planes, cabinet scrapers, chisels and knives) as much as possible. All edge tools are carefully sharpened using diamond stones to maximise their effectiveness and lifespan.

In an ideal world, I would prefer to finish the surface of the guitar entirely by French Polishing - a process that uses only cotton fabric, naturally-occurring shellac resin, alcohol, pumice powder and small amounts of mineral oil. Since this is an additive polishing technique, it creates almost no waste and requires no sanding to achieve the final gloss.

Whilst I love the colour it imparts to the wood, and being able to use enitrely natural products, I personally struggle with how it ages and wears away over time and leaves the wood underneath susceptible to damage.

As such, I have carefully selected a water-based polymer system that can create a very thin but hard-wearing coating on top of the shellac and can buff up to a wonderful high-gloss sheen. It also produces minimal volatile organic compounds, and requires no thinners or cleaning agents other than water.

Use of animal products in all areas of life is coming under ever stronger scrutiny - for environmental, ethical, and other reasons.

In the normal course of building a guitar, many luthiers would use:
- Hide Glue
- Mother of Pearl/Abalone (for inlays)
- Bone (for nut & saddle)
- Shellac resin (for finshing surfaces)

If avoiding use of any of these products is important to you, there are very suitable alternatives which I am happy to recommend and mean that your instrument can be totally animal-product-free!

Please just ask.