#1
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on modding Breedlove Stage Dread
So I recently picked up a Breedlove Stage Dreadnought (Craigslist special) and I am really digging this guitar, especially considering that I got an all-solid spruce/rosewood dread for a very good price. It is apparent that the previous owner had it setup, as the action is low and dead-even all the way up the neck and it plays like butter (I also dig the neck profile).
Though I like the tone of this guitar as-is, I feel that it is nowhere near its potential. I have two major (and hopefully interrelated) qualms about it: the bass response is weak and overall projection seems lacking for a solid wood guitar, I mean my 2004 Washburn with lam sides projects much better than it does. Google searches have revealed several reviewers who basically say the same thing, that the guitar seems too quiet for what it is. The Breedlove feels heavy and projects like it's got a wet blanket inside it; I strongly suspect it is overbuilt. I can see that the two bottom back braces are huge, they look like rafters in an old barn; comparatively, the braces in my Washburn are much thinner yet equally tall. So has anyone else sanded the braces on a Breedlove dread? I'm going to hit those back braces and see what happens. Your thoughts are appreciated (minus internet pedantry, of course).
__________________
2004 Martin D-28CW 1983 Martin D-12-28 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
modifications
My humble opinion about doing things that are irreversible: If I don't know what I'm doing, or why, I won't.
This sounds like a really nice instrument. If it was mine, I'd leave well enough alone and enjoy it as-is. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
If it has a Bridge Doctor, lose that first thing.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ok I’ll tell you what I think are some fundamentals of doing this in a guided way as to not take the braces down too far (.ive done so and then ended up removing back, re bracing top, making new back etc etc. And I still don’t like it!).
Anyhoo, I think it’s a good idea to know the starting Top back and main air resonant frequencies. The way I do it is I record the tap tones into audacity, a free recording software that has a spectral analysis viewer. I use the built In mic on my laptop. To get the resonant frequency of the top and the back, it’s best to put a soft rag or towel in soundhole loosely. Then I start recording, hold guitar by neck and use my index finger to tap a few times on top just behind bridge. Then I turn guitar around and tap the same way on the back. A soft mallet etc is often recommended for the tapping but as far as I’m concerned, my finger works aok. Then in the newly recorded audio file select the recorded top taps first and find the spectral analysis sub menu (I don’t have computer with me right now) and plot that. There may be more than one peak but the top should be between 160 hz and 200 ish (if the recording picks up the main air, which is the resonance of the body air chamber, that will be around 100 hz ish). So note the frequency of the main top. Then close window, select the portion of sound clip of the back tap tones and do the same. There you will see probsbly the top and the back resonances. The back should be in the 200 to 280 hz range but I’m just assuming based on my own measurements....and I don’t measure Breedloves. They’re not allowed in my house. Ok so now you got some data. Those data don’t mean a lot to everyone because there’s guitars that sound good that do not follow any standard resonances. That being said, Santa cruzes are consistently 180 ish for top and 220 ish for back (for 000 and 12 fret dread). Some say 4 semitones is a good separation between top and back. Whateva! If one or the other are way outside of this range, that’s when I’d think about shaving and the specifics of would tell me whether I should shave top or back. But ideally one should be patient here and do it over several DAYS. Remove wood and measure until you drop a resonance by just a couple few hz and then leave it for a day or two to let it adjust. And Since I made such an effort to explain that I’ll give unsolicited advice that was given to me that I didn’t heed and that I’d do again because that’s how I roll!: sell the guitar and go find one you like instead. Because the moment you touch those braces, the guitar loses value and or you have to not tell the truth when you ultimately want to sell it.....and I’m guessing that’s the end result since that’s what I was told consistently happens when people mess about and precisely how I feel about the guild I did this to hehe. Good luck! Sam |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
As posted - record tap tones of the back, top, and air.
I don't recommend working the top braces. Usually - you can get better results by: 1. Tune the back so it's about 4 semitones higher than the top. 2. Check that none of the 3 land directly on a scale note... Ideally - you would prefer them all to be about half way between notes. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
It has the Bridge Doctor and I've wondered if that thing was really just a tone suck. I never heard of anyone removing those, guess I assumed they were integral but if it's copacetic I will rip that puppy out of there pronto. The company promotes it as adding strength and stability at the bridge, but I don't think it needs it; goes back to the original issue of the thing being braced like an Amish barn anyway lol
But thanks man, that's good info.
__________________
2004 Martin D-28CW 1983 Martin D-12-28 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I have a Breedlove Pursuit concert. Cedar top. Lam Sapele B & S. It is a very good sounding guitar. Very warm and also sparkly. It has the bridge doctor. I've never touched it. No need to. I do know these things can be too tight. I would think long and hard before removing it. It may be structural. Good luck with your tone quest.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I have a Yamaha AC3R which had electric guitar low action and played great but had no projection -- so much so I nearly sold it. Anyway, I ended up putting a taller saddle in it to bring the action up to "normal" and the projection was amazing all of a sudden.
As a tinkerer myself, I'd like to try to shave some braces, but for sake of a quick fix, have you considered a taller saddle?
__________________
As my username suggests, huge fan of Yamaha products. Own many acoustic-electric models from 2009-present and a couple electric. Lots of PA too. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
2004 Martin D-28CW 1983 Martin D-12-28 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
What, practically, does "optimize the saddle" mean? If the break angle is near zero, changing the saddle while keeping the same height/break angle won't accomplish anything. If the geometry is the issue, nothing is "optimized", you're simply switching from one material to another while keeping the same geometry.
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
2004 Martin D-28CW 1983 Martin D-12-28 |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Adjust the neck how?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Additionally, there's an issue with the strings moving around on the saddle a little bit. I've never had a saddle made before but I imagine you could make a taller saddle with notches for the strings and keep the action right where you want it.
__________________
2004 Martin D-28CW 1983 Martin D-12-28 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I've seen people "notch" the saddle where individual strings go, but 99% of compensated saddles I've seen have smooth curves rather than sharp notches to get the intonation right, with the B string being the exception. If the strings are moving around on the saddle, then the break angle is definitely too shallow.
__________________
As my username suggests, huge fan of Yamaha products. Own many acoustic-electric models from 2009-present and a couple electric. Lots of PA too. |