Checkering

[culpeper]

Well, you could look at statistics and ask yourself, how many times have you seen a smooth-sider, a non-checkered short box win Nationals, or about any other comp for that matter?  With the exception of Marlin's Fiddle Box call, a completely different design BTW and not really related to the Cost style, and perhaps Darrin's, there are few non-checkered calls that have or can obtain the quality and range/depth of sound, from which a checkered box can offer.  This NOT saying a non-checkered box isn't good, not the case at all.  Lynch and others did well, but that sound is still limited to what a checkered box can produce, if at least the callmaker has checkered for the sake of sound and not just appearance.  This can also be taken further, why do certain callmakers run a couple slot channels/grooves, whatever, down the side of their box calls...just so happens very near the same location as where checkering occurs.

[larry9988]

Checkering and slots free up the sides for more vibration  the sound to resonate more.

[BOB_HARWELL]

 In the 9 1/5 years that I knew Neil, I became a very close & trusted friend. We talked by phone weekly & I went to his home about once a month. We talked about a lot of things over that time.
The first checkering that Neil saw was on a jewelry box, the single & double design. The triple check was his design. He ask call makers not to use it as long as he was living. He also said that single check boxes always sounded better than double & triple checked boxes. A plain or grooved side was better. He was probably the first to checker calls.

The video & books were just a basic guide lines to make a call, not to teach you how to do it. "If you aren't smart enough to figure it out on your own, learn how to knit." Neil D. Cost.

Any questions?

  Bob

[culpeper]

Mr. Harwell, a great answer.  Do you do suspect that if Neil had lived longer and discovered checkering sooner, he might have pushed his exploration of checkering further?  Clearly, he knew there was something worth considering and he wanted to protect its potential.  Neil's quote sums it up well...he definitely knew there was more value to checkering and of course other components to a box call when building one, that affected the sound.  He also understood the value to those who were willing to build them to explore and discover on your own would make them better call makers.

And there is this...I built non-checkered calls for 6 years and did a lot of woodburning on them.  I liked the art of the craft, they had a good sound, but NOT a great sound, but at a point I wanted more and try as I did to get the sound I wanted and heard from so many other great call makers; McKamey, Kruer, Lapp, Baseshore, Harwell, Clark, Terefenco, Strawser, and many others I will forget, I just couldn't.  I then decided to checker my calls.  Within 1 year, my sound improved drastically and I started winning competitions...it was night and day in the quality of sound.  I had fought it for years, many who know me well will agree...checkering, when done well as mentioned before has a profound effect on sound.  Is it for everyone, absolutely not for there are many great callmakers building the Eminence calls, David Ferguson for example who not only does remarkable wood burning , but has obtained a very effective sound and Bob Fulcher with his Fat bottom design and of course there is Marlin Watkins with his Fiddle Box design and now TJ Johnson to carry it forward, some exceptions to the "rule".

[Greg Massey]

Mr. Harwell, a great answer.  Do you do suspect that if Neil had lived longer and discovered checkering sooner, he might have pushed his exploration of checkering further?  Clearly, he knew there was something worth considering and he wanted to protect its potential.  Neil's quote sums it up well...he definitely knew there was more value to checkering and of course other components to a box call when building one, that affected the sound.  He also understood the value to those who were willing to build them to explore and discover on your own would make them better call makers.

And there is this...I built non-checkered calls for 6 years and did a lot of woodburning on them.  I liked the art of the craft, they had a good sound, but NOT a great sound, but at a point I wanted more and try as I did to get the sound I wanted and heard from so many other great call makers; McKamey, Kruer, Lapp, Baseshore, Harwell, Clark, Terefenco, Strawser, and many others I will forget, I just couldn't.  I then decided to checker my calls.  Within 1 year, my sound improved drastically and I started winning competitions...it was night and day in the quality of sound.  I had fought it for years, many who know me well will agree...checkering, when done well as mentioned before has a profound effect on sound.  Is it for everyone, absolutely not for there are many great callmakers building the Eminence calls, David Ferguson for example who not only does remarkable wood burning , but has obtained a very effective sound and Bob Fulcher with his Fat bottom design and of course there is Marlin Watkins with his Fiddle Box design and now TJ Johnson to carry it forward, some exceptions to the "rule".

I agree with you .. back few months ago i got the pleasure of hearing Darrin Dawkins play a walnut butternut checkered box and the same box in a non checkered box , from his tuning of both boxes you couldn't tell one box was better than the other and Darrin said it was all just a matter of preference of what your wanting, so i think it's all up to what the call builder likes and prefers to build and has the most confidence.