View Single Post
  #49  
Old 01-13-2017, 09:30 AM
CaE CaE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hat View Post
In looking at your back bracing it looks like you go for a very 'live' back. Is that correct? Do you try to incorporate the back in your tap tuning process?
Actually, this style of bracing is most often considered to be "non-live" in that it is stiffer and couples with the top's movement less. There are two benefits that I see here- volume/projection and structural.

I like my guitars to respond well to a light, sensitive touch- volume and projection help with this.

A guitar's back over time can tend to loose its radius and flatten out. This allows more forward rotation of the neck and leads to the need for a neck reset. By strengthening the back's bracing by adding an x brace in the lower bout, the tendency to flatten out is reduced and, in theory, the need for a neck reset is lessened as well.

When carving the back braces, I am looking for light, strong braces. I remove enough material that the back rings well but still has some flex to it. But I don't remove so much as to weaken the overall radius.

With both my top and my back bracing, I use tapered braces. They make the most since to me. More strength is needed further away from the sides. The opposite is also true. So I remove more material closer to the edge of the plate and leave the braces taller and stronger where they have less support- and, in the case of the top, where there is more pull and force being exerted on the braces.
__________________
Chris Ensor
Reply With Quote