|
|
#17
03-30-2014, 08:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
[QUOTE=John Arnold;3885102]
To a large extent, bracing determines how good or bad a guitar sounds. A 1969 Martin has straight, unscalloped bracing and a huge rosewood bridgeplate. An HD-28V has forward shifted scalloped bracing and a small maple bridgeplate. QUOTE] That pretty much nails. My only offering is that instead of god or bad, I'd say one's preference will determine which bracing they like. I am a forward shifted, scalloped braces fan. Non-scalloped and non-forward shifted braces leave me cold. 
|
|
#18
03-30-2014, 10:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
As said by others, the build has much to do with it. Also old does not guarantee a good sounding guitar with any wood combination. Frank Sanns
|
|
#19
03-30-2014, 10:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
侘 寂 -- wabi-sabi -- acceptance of transience and imperfection by finding beauty in that which is imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete
|
|
#20
03-30-2014, 10:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
It was the prewar Martins with Brazillian rosewood that are sought after. They had the forward shifted bracing, like Dan Tyminski's, Tony Rices' . You never hear a lot about the 69s. They sure look nice though. I think that Blueridge has a Brazillion wood model in their upperend guitars.
__________________
Recording King Parlor guitar- Cherry Sunburst Snark Tuner
|
|
#21
03-31-2014, 06:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Again, straight, unscalloped bracing and a large EIR bridge plate on the '69 kill potential for great tone.
|
|
#22
03-31-2014, 06:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would call the earliest 14 fret Dreadnaught bracing "forward" rather than "forward shifted". A small distinction, but that is it's original position. It's also the same position relative to the bridge as the 12 fret Dreadnaught.
The X-brace was shifted toward the tail block by 7/8" in mid-1938. However that is not the modern position. That change came in the mid 1950's when the bracing went back toward the sound hole to what I call the "modern" position at approximately 1 1/2" from the sound hole. Dan Tyminski's main guitar is a 1946 D-28 and is rear braced. It originally had non-scalloped (what we call tapered bracing now) but was scalloped by someone else before Dan acquired the guitar. It also has a Sitka top. Scalloping stopped in late 1944. Dan also has other prewar Martins, but he's most identified with that guitar. Back to the OP, BRW is no silver bullet and by current standards a 1969 D-28 would be considered by many to be overbuilt. That said, BRW does have a distinctive tone and when all else is right, nothing quite matches it. Still, I'd rather have a lightly built guitar with IRW or mahogany back and sides as opposed to a heavily built guitar with BRW back and sides. The design and construction matters more than the woods, although the wood is not unimportant by any means.
|
|
#24
03-31-2014, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
hunter
|
|
#25
03-31-2014, 12:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
A supposed 'dream' guitar which moved you. There is no guarantee that a 'dream' guitar is as ideal as other 'dream' guitars.
__________________
Baby #1.1 Baby #1.2 Baby #02 Baby #03 Baby #04 Baby #05 Larry's songs... …Just because you've argued someone into silence doesn't mean you have convinced them…
|
|
#26
03-31-2014, 03:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"I used to try to play fast, and it’s fun for a minute, but I always liked saxophone players. They speak on their instrument, and I always wanted to do that on the guitar, to communicate emotionally. When you write, you wouldn’t just throw words into a bowl. There has to be a beginning, middle and end. Same thing with phrasing on the guitar" Jimmie Vaughan
|
|
#27
03-31-2014, 07:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
They built them less and less delicate to adjust to Warrenty issues. If you play a 60's D18 and then compare it to a 2005-11 37' D18A (Authentic) you can hear aprox the result of those changes.
|
|
#28
04-01-2014, 06:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
hunter
|
|
#29
04-01-2014, 07:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The bracing position (on Dreadnaughts) was changed from 1 7/8" from the sound hole to the modern 1 1/2" position in the mid 1950's.
Bracing in the immediate post war period was not scalloped, but was lighter than what we consider Martin's straight bracing today. It became subtly, but progressively heavier until the early 1950's. The move to the new factory in 1964 brought the change from hide glue to modern synthetic glues. Short drop-in saddles followed. By 1966/67 Martin could no longer source their 1/2" T-bar and made the transition from that to a 3/8" T-bar for a short time, then to the 3/8" square tube. They also switched to rosewood bridge plates. I've left out a lot of details, but my point is that the changes were progressive. A 1959 Martin was not all that much different than a 1961 Martin, but a 1951 Martin was vastly different than a 1969 Martin. The late 40's and early 50's guitars are among my favorite postwar Martins. I'm not generally enthused with the later ones. We also now know that Martin used various species of spruce during the postwar years, at least through 1962. Contrary to what was previously assumed, some of that was red spruce, Engelmann, and German spruce. They kept shop records for some periods better than others. That throws more variability into the sound of the postwar guitars. It's just impossible to lump them all together.
|
|
#30
04-01-2014, 07:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
