|
View Poll Results: What would you do with this soundhole? | |||
Nothing: leave it alone | 70 | 57.85% | |
Replace & repair the missing piece | 42 | 34.71% | |
Convert it to a large soundhole OM-28"LSV" | 9 | 7.44% | |
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Sell it to Willie...
__________________
"Mistaking silence for weakness and contempt for fear is the final, fatal error of a fool" - Sicilian proverb (paraphrased) |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
This was going to be my response.
I'd have it repaired. No reason not to.
__________________
Dabbling in the 6-string arts... |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As for replacing the wood that broke with a new piece "changing the tone," that's very doubtful. Here's a photo showing the underside of the bracing of a guitar top: ˙˙˙ That's not a Martin OM, but the bracing around the soundhole is similar, as you can see in this photo that DOES show the underside of a Martin. It's braced the same way: ˙˙˙ The wood that's missing from the soundhole of Maury's guitar is very small, and none of the wood in that immediate area does much vibrating or add much to the musical tone of the instrument. So replacing the chunk of wood that's missing with a small replacement piece that's been carefully sized and glued into place isn't going to hurt ANYTHING. On the contrary, it will help protect the instrument. Gluing a thin little reinforcement pad underneath the new wood piece will not add any significant mass to the guitar's top, either. Sure, if you were going to use cast iron for this repair instead of thin little pieces of spruce, it would probably have a negative impact on the tone. But the amount of weight that these small wood pieces will add is negligible. The only drawback at all to going forward with fixing it is the fee that a guitar repair tech will have to charge for the work, and even that is likely to be fairly small: I'd guess you'd be looking at a shop charge of $150-$200. Since the new piece of spruce needed to replace what was lost is so small, brush lacquer can be used for the finish repair instead of the luthier having to crank up the shop air compressor to shoot spray lacquer. It's a minor operation, a minor repair and the shop fees are likely to be very reasonable as a result. Hope that makes more sense. Wade Hampton Miller |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Since it is not actually playing damage, IF I had the original piece, I would replace it.
Ed |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Could it be repaired by just making the sound hole bigger?
If it were mine, I'd see about getting it repaired. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
˙˙˙ Getting the soundhole enlarged is the easiest, fastest and thus least expensive repair option Maury has. As I've already explained in my previous posts, I think the best course to follow would be to replace the missing wood, but that's Maury's call, naturally. whm |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
She's ok with whatever I decide, but she'd leave as-is, if it's not structurally in danger.
__________________
14-day Return Period -No restocking fee Maury's Music PODCASTS View actual pics of ALL in-stock guitars Martin Guitar Certified Online Dealer Martin Blueridge Martins & More Podcast |