Quote:
Originally Posted by iim7V7IM7
I mean having a target thickness based on dimension vs. using flexure or tap tone of the specific set dictate the target thickness. Shaping braces to a target dimension/geometry vs. evaluating how they are interacting with the top or back in situ to create a desired mechanical properties.
|
My interpretation is that Martins, Gibsons etc., are not tap tuned or tested for strength/bendiness - but made to a "formula" so that each top will have the same thickness etc, so that if a batch (6 or maybe 600) although all the virtually identical tops will have different strengths and velocity of sound etc, so one, or more might work wonderfully but others might be mediocre or have more resonance for some notes and less on others etc.
Smaller more expensive and more craftsmen like made instruments will be all made to a standard but someone skilled will assess each top and adjust thickness (even by a couple of thou, or even reject some tops) - to ensure that every unit is made to give its very best.
Please folks - watch this video.
By the way - whilst Bill Collings seems to be telling the guy with the 'tache how to do it - the guy (Bruce Van Wart) is actually (I understand) the guy that selects and suits the top, and he seems to do a ****ed fine job judging by mine.
"The best ones are the ones that have been humanly manipulated to be a great guitar". (Bill Collings)