jammy Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 This is the back for a guitar I'm working on at the moment. Self designed bracing pattern, and I quite like it. What have you guys used in the past? I'm bored of the ladder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodWood Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 This is the back for a guitar I'm working on at the moment. Self designed bracing pattern, and I quite like it. What have you guys used in the past? I'm bored of the ladder Looks a bit heavy, as though you used more brace wood than a ladder! How's the tap tone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammy Posted March 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 Fine actually, it's still pretty stiff mind! I'm considering loosening the lower X slightly - though I'm one of the tribe that thinks that back bracing has minimal effect on overall sound. (*insert sound of can of worms opening here*) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 9, 2007 Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 I like it! I think the back makes a difference especially in the lower end, but it is more subtle. I have been pretty happy with ladder in the past, but I kinda like the X-bracing also. You seem to have captured a taste of each. It will be neat to see how well it works for you. This is my last back pattern. I have not fired it up yet so I can't tell you how it worked out. Peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myka Guitars Posted March 9, 2007 Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 (edited) I'm considering loosening the lower X slightly - though I'm one of the tribe that thinks that back bracing has minimal effect on overall sound. Then why change it? You must have been motivated by something other than boredom? Perhaps not. I have changed things for this reason too so I do understand it. I think that if you have built with similar materials in the past but used a ladder bracing instead that you will notice just how much of a difference back bracing makes. I am a big fan of x-bracing on the back but I center it in the middle of the lower bout. The way you have it this will be a slightly less stiff back because your x brace is going diagonally across the grain instead of perpendicular (like the ladder style). Here is how I made my last one: It had wicked projection and a very articulate low end compared to other designs I used. EDIT: I meant to add that I think your design will do something similar to this. I like to look at the back like a speaker cone and tightening up the center between the X should have an affect. Let us all know how it turned out and if it changed anything for you or not. I am always interested in bracing design. ~David Edited March 9, 2007 by Myka Guitars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted March 9, 2007 Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 Tap an X-braced back and a ladder braced back, and there is a difference. I'm not sure how back bracing affects sound, yet, but I think it certainly can do. My last (long time ago, now; have a workshop finally taking shape, which means I should be able to build more, despite actually having less time to build) back was x-braced, looked like this: I'm going to make the next one a little lighter (6mm wide X-bracing instead of 7), although the pic makes that one look much bulkier than it ended up being. It was a relatively limp piece of Khaya, though, so I felt a little extra support wouldn't go amiss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 9, 2007 Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 You know what really is striking to me is that every bracing configuration in the pics posted is so different. Some placing higher strength configuration at the upper bout area, some at the lower, some focus on the middle/lower bout with mild bracing, and of course I was going mild all over with a little extra focus on the middle. Just shows you how many different ways there are to achive the goal you are going after. Not to mention some scalloped, some tapered. Just goes to show you how dynamic design can be in acoustics. I love it. Peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myka Guitars Posted March 9, 2007 Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 Indeed! What a cool thread. Here is another pic to add to it of an older style I made a few years ago: The upper X only functions to limit the resonating area of the back to somewhat of a circular shape but i love the look so i still use it instead of a straight brace. Also there a neck block with a large heel above it. You can see that in this pic. The only difference I have made with this standard shaped design is to place the larger X in the center of the lower bout. The low end sounds more articulate having it there. I still love experimenting. After a few more of this shape I may have a set design. For the back at least (don't get me started on top bracing). ~David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammy Posted March 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 I've just been and shaved down the lower X a little - it's made quite a substantial to the tap tone; far more sustain. All the other back designs on here are ace. Mkya: do you not have a problem maintaining an even curve over the back with those 2 non-overlapping X's? I considered a design like that but was worried I'd end up with a pair of domes when the back relaxed between them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 10, 2007 Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 Indeed! What a cool thread. Here is another pic to add to it of an older style I made a few years ago: http://www.mykaguitars.com/instruments/005/03.jpg The upper X only functions to limit the resonating area of the back to somewhat of a circular shape but i love the look so i still use it instead of a straight brace. Also there a neck block with a large heel above it. You can see that in this pic. The only difference I have made with this standard shaped design is to place the larger X in the center of the lower bout. The low end sounds more articulate having it there. I still love experimenting. After a few more of this shape I may have a set design. For the back at least (don't get me started on top bracing). ~David Wow, I bet that was loose as a goose. I bet it really responded to the top. I love low end responce, but I find myself really trying to refine my designs to keep from getting too boomy. It is fun trying to bring all the elements together and get that sound you want. Peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myka Guitars Posted March 10, 2007 Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 Mkya: do you not have a problem maintaining an even curve over the back with those 2 non-overlapping X's? I considered a design like that but was worried I'd end up with a pair of domes when the back relaxed between them. No there isn't much of a problem getting the back to dome like I want it to. I use a radius dish and sand the braces to the curve and also the side rim so that when I glue and clamp the back on it conforms very well to that shape. The bracing concept was to have a stiff center with the perimeter being quite flexible so the angle on the top edge of the sides pulled the shape into the back. It is more flexible with this much of a span between the X's but when I started putting the larger X near the center this was remedied. Wow, I bet that was loose as a goose. I bet it really responded to the top. I love low end responce, but I find myself really trying to refine my designs to keep from getting too boomy. It is fun trying to bring all the elements together and get that sound you want. Yes it was quite boomy and responded almost too much to the top. That is what lead me to move the larger X to the center of the lower bout. It helped a lot and the low end was more crisp. I had one back that was very flexible Koa and I put the X in the center of the lower bout and also ran braces along the center seam. This stiffened it up considerably and made sure the arch was maintained. I also carved the braces much thicker. Here is a pic of that one: As soon as I get setup in the new shop in Seattle I will have an area devoted to making acoustics. I can't wait to get into this again and really explore more of these ideas. ~David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammy Posted March 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 What's the width dimensions of those braces? I'm considering experimenting with narrower bracing, even if it's just some stress testing of spruce sections. I like the centre braces on that top, giving me even more ideas! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodWood Posted March 10, 2007 Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 (edited) This is my first mistake, er attempt at backbracing. Based on what Ive read I came up with this design. The holes were not drilled out very even, Im not happy with the finnish, but its my first guitar, well see what happens. If it looks like this is going to be a complete disaster, let me know! Edited March 10, 2007 by GoodWood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammy Posted March 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 Holes around the high point of the braces is something else I'd like to experiment with - I'm sure there's someone else on here that does it, but I can't remember who! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myka Guitars Posted March 10, 2007 Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 (edited) What's the width dimensions of those braces? I'm considering experimenting with narrower bracing, even if it's just some stress testing of spruce sections. I usually use 1/4" to 5/16' wide braces (1/4" in the pic). I like to use narrow but tall bracing, even on my tops. I rarely use any width over 3/8" and those are usually just for the x-brace with the rest being narrower. EDIT: Here is a link that shows some braces drilled with holes to reduce weight. ~David Edited March 10, 2007 by Myka Guitars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 I have popped a couple holes in bracing before. I found I was leaning more to taller skinnier bracing. It seemed like drilling in the middle third was great(and it is pretty effective), but I did find it reduced strength less than I thought it would and made it more challenging to carve braces to suit the top. This is all my mistake in that I did not have a solid enough idea as to how much carving would be needed. I limited the drilling to close to the main X(this area was more predictable for me). I find myself leaning more twards thinner bracing with less scalloping and more smoother tapering. Seems to help me control the stiffness. I also am finding I want to use more braces(smaller of course- some very small). To get more even vibration with thinner soundboards. I suspect I am headed for almost a lattice pattern in the lower bout. Peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 While I think holes-in-bracing looks pretty, I worry about the strength issue; there are stress points around each hole you drill, and you're not exactly saving a whole lot of weight (what, maybe 10 grams? Your bracing should weigh in around 100-150 grams, tops, your top about 3 to 4 times that, and then you've got your 25-40 gram bridge...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodWood Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 While I think holes-in-bracing looks pretty, I worry about the strength issue; there are stress points around each hole you drill, and you're not exactly saving a whole lot of weight (what, maybe 10 grams? Your bracing should weigh in around 100-150 grams, tops, your top about 3 to 4 times that, and then you've got your 25-40 gram bridge...) Ok, and I was also thinking about hole-in my bridge plate, around the ends also. Not too much of course. I dont know how the holes affect vibration, I would think they help it. But I have no experience, just the babble in my brain. Have 2 sets thickness sanded though. Making my side bender. I want a box or 2 SOON!!!!!! My Padouk set has a nice ring to it, hope I get it right!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 So here's a question for all y'all. Do you guys butt the brace ends against the linings? Or notch the linings to accept the brace ends? Butt, or notch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammy Posted March 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 Notch, for sure! Well saying that the only braces I notch on the top are the X braces and the main transverse one above the soundhole. I actually notch all the way through the linings and sides - it's easy, and the binding covers it all anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 (edited) Sometimes notch sometimes not. Notching is an easy thing to do, and does help keep the top where it should be. I sometimes just fade the braces out before they touch the kerfing. Just depends on what I am trying to do. Peace,Rich P.S. Mattia, I weighed that last Redwood top(.110") in at just under 300 gram braced(boy that stuff is light). I am shooting for a bridge weight of 25gr or less(using EIR). Edited March 11, 2007 by fryovanni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 Erik: notch, most definitely. I wouldn't be averse to tapering down to nothing at all and 'butting', but just straight-up butting...no thanks. Rich: nice and light! May have my numbers a bit high, come to think of it...I doubt bracing even breaks 30-40 grams, sans bridge, come to think of it. I have my notebook elsewhere.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 (edited) Rich: nice and light! May have my numbers a bit high, come to think of it...I doubt bracing even breaks 30-40 grams, sans bridge, come to think of it. I have my notebook elsewhere.... I don't focus too much on weight generally, but your point is solid. The bracing is a fraction of the weight of the actual soundboard(I agree 150%). An important thought when trying too hard to lighten bracing . You are a wise guy as always my friend. Peace,Rich Also; Since we are talking about how to deal with brace ends at the kerfing. What is the motivation behind the method used(whichever one you choose). Are you trying to add to the structural integrety? Prevent unwanted vibration from loose parts? Improve side stiffness? Make the edge of the soundboard more flexable by tapering it away short of the kerfing? Trying to limit unevenly braced points about the rim? Just curious about yawls thoughts. Personally I dont see it as a black and white kinda element or method. I see it as a tool that can be used to help you achive your goal. Edited March 11, 2007 by fryovanni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myka Guitars Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 I either notch the ends into the sides or I feather the taper to nothing before the edge of the purfling. The latter is my preferred method these days. I am trying to make the top very responsive and loosening up the edges helps me achieve that much like the recurve on an archtop. If I do notch the braces it is usually just the upper x-brace on the tops. I recently made a top with a smoother taper on the braces like Rich uses but still scalloped then a bit at the ends to loosen up the soundboard edge. It worked very well. Also note that the bridge plate is spruce at 45 degrees (like Petros) with ebony over the top of that. This really stiffens up the center and hopefully eliminates much of the bulge around the bridge. I will find out how it works as this guitar is in Seattle and I can watch it age. Here is a pic of this one: Rich, I would be interested to see how the lattice idea works for you. It is an intriguing idea. Anyone work with Nomex or the double top concept yet? ~David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted March 11, 2007 Report Share Posted March 11, 2007 I either notch the ends into the sides or I feather the taper to nothing before the edge of the purfling. The latter is my preferred method these days. I am trying to make the top very responsive and loosening up the edges helps me achieve that much like the recurve on an archtop. If I do notch the braces it is usually just the upper x-brace on the tops. I recently made a top with a smoother taper on the braces like Rich uses but still scalloped then a bit at the ends to loosen up the soundboard edge. It worked very well. Also note that the bridge plate is spruce at 45 degrees (like Petros) with ebony over the top of that. This really stiffens up the center and hopefully eliminates much of the bulge around the bridge. I will find out how it works as this guitar is in Seattle and I can watch it age. Here is a pic of this one: http://www.mykaguitars.com/instruments/013/08.jpg Rich, I would be interested to see how the lattice idea works for you. It is an intriguing idea. Anyone work with Nomex or the double top concept yet? ~David Looks like I was typing when you were typing. I have not got around to a Nomex top yet(I did pick up my vac system though, so I am ready). I keep getting side tracked with projects. The whole "latice" thing is coming from my feeling that I want more of the back of the board covered(I don't really know if that means a true lattice pattern) with braces(fairly small) to let me get more action out of the top. I pluck strings and feel the tops that I make and just feel more vibration in areas that have less area between braces. I am definately not lacking in low end and believe I can tune extra small braces in and not lose too much low end(and hopefully bring out some extra punch). I am also using my pinless/wrap around/front anchored bridge that seems to allow me to worry a lot less about distorting the top. So the soundboards are getting pretty light and bracing demands are changing on mine. I will definately pass on my findings(of course this hobbiest is a slow builder, and that may take time ) Peace,Rich P.S. Any chance you will find time to make it to the Marylhurst show this year? I am sure you are going to be pretty busy with the move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.