Why would you prefer "hand-carved" scalloped X bracing?

[brandall10]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

There are two things at work here.
To be clear, tap tuning is a different practice than deflection testing, tuning to a specific pitch, chladni plate tuning, etc. which all have a basis in objective science.

I'm not meaning to target tap tuning itself - just any kind of feedback mechanism, measurement, etc, that would go in hand with hand carving the braces to create a more consistent instrument. That's all.

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

I'd put money on the bet that they will not. They don't have to and there isn't a proven advantage to doing so. They get to punch the "emotion ticket"/appeal to tradition by using dovetail joints and "hand shaping" of braces. Nothing is gained - no increase in market share is achieved - by adding the claim that they "tap tune". By contrast, as Alan points out, it adds cost without return for that cost.

Then why are they doing torrefaction?

I don't buy the whole 'they don't have to' argument. They're a business, yes they need to uphold their brand, but they're also in this to make $$, increase sales, expand their market. They don't need to put a carbon fiber bridgeplate and liquid metal pins on the modern deluxe series but they did, they want to signal to the market that they can throw down on the innovation front.

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by brandall10

I don't buy the whole 'they don't have to' argument. They're a business, yes they need to uphold their brand, but they're also in this to make $$, increase sales, expand their market. They don't need to put a carbon fiber bridgeplate and liquid metal pins on the modern deluxe series but they did, they want to signal to the market that they can throw down on the innovation front.

Of more importance to a company like Martin, I would think, is "maintaining market share" rather than "expanding market share." Bringing in new buyer as long-existing ones age out. I am a part of that latter group, a trailing edge baby boomer. For me and my like, if we are interesting in Martins, then we probably already have them. If I ever buy another one, it is likely to be a vintage piece rather than new.By this point in their life-arcs, Gen-Xers either already like Martins, or they like something else. So the prime group for replacing aging-out boomers is the Millennial and whatever their successor group is going to be called.

Which raises interesting thoughts. On the one hand, this younger grouping is very comfortable with evolving technology and techniques. Things like CNC machines,or Taylors evolving bracing or neck attachments, fit right in with this kind of thinking. So do the environmental perspectives of people like Bob Taylor or Jean Larrivee.

But there is also a fair bit of reverence by members of these groupings for things "authentic." "Artisanal" is a word bandied about quite a bit. "Small-batch" and "craft" come up a lot.

Is Martin trying to play to this market, given that their largest direct competitor, Taylor, seems focused on the technological one?

I read something earlier in this thread, or perhaps in another,about Harley-Davidson's problems. I think that they have boxed themselves into a corner to a certain degree. There is this vision of what a Harley rider is, how they dress, how they act. Their problem is twofold. First, is that being a Harley rider has become as much a lifestyle brand as it is anything to do with motorcycles. And secondly, will the younger generations be as interested in their parents lifestyle brand? Finally, Harleys have become too bleeding expensive. There is not a reasonably inexpensive "starter" Harley.

Martin, it seems, is not making the same mistakes. They are working the beginner and inexpensive guitar market as much as possible, knowing that those buyers are likely to stay with the brand if and when they upgrade. And secondly, they are trading on their position as the oldest family owned steel string guitar business in the US. And on the fact that they were there helping evolve the steel-string as we know it to boot.

So it is marketing? So what.

OMMV

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

Not to diminish his free thinking, but, I believe, the access panel was first introduced by Richard Schneider in the 1980's.

Hi Charles…

I guess I didn't think Harry invented it, just that he implemented it in a way I'd sure never seen before (or since). There are many things 'GUITAR' which I encounter or learn, and then find out they are kind of ancient history.

But often it's forgotten history and has to be renewed generation by generation.

That's one of the great things about this forum, isn't it??? Thanks for bringing Richard Schneider into the discussion.

[RGWelch]

I recently was watching some factory videos, first Yairi, then Yamaha, and then Martin. It was very interesting seeing the differences between the methods of production. Of the three, Yamaha was the most machine heavy, but Martin had the most "hi tech" machines. Yairi, on the other hand, was much more hand made. About the only machine I saw in their factory tour was a mold to make the shape of the sides. In the Martin factory, I think in their custom shop area, they actually shape the sides by hand. But in the Yairi factory, the do "tap tune" the tops, while hand carving the scallops. I really don't see how the process of tapping the top to see where it's responsive really increases the amount of time spent on carving the scallops that much more than just hand scalloping without tap tuning. I'm really not sure exactly what the tap tuning does other than ensure the top does have resonance and isn't "dead". But I can't help but feel that the process the Yairi factory does results in very nice sounding guitars over all, I know mine does. The Martin guitars are very fine as well, so maybe tap tuning isn't the most important aspect of this process.

I had a local luthier tell me the big issue with the mass produced guitars these days is each of the braces is made from a different piece of wood. With a custom made guitar, or maybe in a factory like Yairi, then a single piece of wood can be cut and carved up for all the various braces in the guitar. In the bigger factories, you can have one brace made from one piece of wood, another brace from another piece of wood, etc. And while each brace is of the same type of wood, each can have different densities and grain structure, so can each have different tonal qualities. This is why such guitars can be so hit and miss. I suppose if hand scalloping these, it might be possible to compensate for this. Also, with hand scalloping, you might have the opportunity to create all the different braces from the same piece of wood, as a small shop lutier may do.

Anyway, whether any of these are major factors or not, I would say if you told me I could have one of two guitars, but had to pick on a blind basis where I didn't get to play either of them. Then you told me they were identical, except one was hand scalloped braces and the other was CNC machined, I'd be inclined to pick the one with hand scalloped bracing. I would guess the chances of that guitar having excellent tonal characteristics is likely higher. I can't say why I would feel that way, other than I value the fact that a human spent more time working on it, and I would like to think they brought a certain amount of craftsmanship to the build process that no machine could duplicate.

[gitarro]

Luthiers can and sometimes do reach in through the sound hole in order to further save the braces even though the box has been closed. I once owned a guitar that was held back by the Luthier for something like 6 months as he continued to voice the guitar even after itsa completion Iannd also because he enjoyed playing it so much. Needless to say that guitar sounded like the veritable piano

Originally Posted by hillin

Tap tuning is done after the braces are glued. I guess if the guitar is finished, what's done is done. A boutique luthier may give it a bit more adjustment through the sound hole, but I highly doubt anyone would take the guitar apart just to adjust the scalloping. To an experienced luthier, tap tuning isn't something you can go too wrong.

[gitarro]

Whether individual voicing of the guitar actually improves the tone of the guitar depends a lot on the skill of the guitar Luthier himself or herself. For those who are truly gifted and skilled, the results can be truly amazing when tbey hit the sweet spot and are in the zone, and I encourage you to go and visit boutique guitar shops like the luthierscollection or dream guitars or guitar gallery to see just how good Luthier made guitars can sound.

Originally Posted by RGWelch

I recently was watching some factory videos, first Yairi, then Yamaha, and then Martin. It was very interesting seeing the differences between the methods of production. Of the three, Yamaha was the most machine heavy, but Martin had the most "hi tech" machines. Yairi, on the other hand, was much more hand made. About the only machine I saw in their factory tour was a mold to make the shape of the sides. In the Martin factory, I think in their custom shop area, they actually shape the sides by hand. But in the Yairi factory, the do "tap tune" the tops, while hand carving the scallops. I really don't see how the process of tapping the top to see where it's responsive really increases the amount of time spent on carving the scallops that much more than just hand scalloping without tap tuning. I'm really not sure exactly what the tap tuning does other than ensure the top does have resonance and isn't "dead". But I can't help but feel that the process the Yairi factory does results in very nice sounding guitars over all, I know mine does. The Martin guitars are very fine as well, so maybe tap tuning isn't the most important aspect of this process.

I had a local luthier tell me the big issue with the mass produced guitars these days is each of the braces is made from a different piece of wood. With a custom made guitar, or maybe in a factory like Yairi, then a single piece of wood can be cut and carved up for all the various braces in the guitar. In the bigger factories, you can have one brace made from one piece of wood, another brace from another piece of wood, etc. And while each brace is of the same type of wood, each can have different densities and grain structure, so can each have different tonal qualities. This is why such guitars can be so hit and miss. I suppose if hand scalloping these, it might be possible to compensate for this. Also, with hand scalloping, you might have the opportunity to create all the different braces from the same piece of wood, as a small shop lutier may do.

Anyway, whether any of these are major factors or not, I would say if you told me I could have one of two guitars, but had to pick on a blind basis where I didn't get to play either of them. Then you told me they were identical, except one was hand scalloped braces and the other was CNC machined, I'd be inclined to pick the one with hand scalloped bracing. I would guess the chances of that guitar having excellent tonal characteristics is likely higher. I can't say why I would feel that way, other than I value the fact that a human spent more time working on it, and I would like to think they brought a certain amount of craftsmanship to the build process that no machine could duplicate.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by brandall10

I don't buy the whole 'they don't have to' argument. They're a business, yes they need to uphold their brand, but they're also in this to make $$, increase sales, expand their market. They don't need to put a carbon fiber bridgeplate and liquid metal pins on the modern deluxe series but they did, they want to signal to the market that they can throw down on the innovation front.

Guitars are consumer goods like any other consumer goods. Now, there is more available choice in guitars than ever before. More manufacturers, more brands, more models, more luthiers. How does a buyer choose from all of the options? How does a manufacturer (or luthier) get chosen?

One of the biggest issues for a guitar maker - large or small - is the same as for any other consumer good: differentiating their product from every other similar product on the market. How does one guitar maker differentiate its guitars from any other manufacturer's? There are lots of techniques: slogans, material choices, appealing to specific market sectors/connect with buyer emotional triggers, different features, and so on.

Martin is "Since 1833". One of their differentiators, is, as Mycroft pointed out, they are the oldest family run manufacturer. They are "Made in USA", another emotional appeal to certain buyers. They do it the "old" way, the "authentic" way, including dovetail joints, a feature largely abandoned in modern guitar making, and for good reasons. That has emotional appeal to another segment of buyers.

However, overall, the guitar market is moving on beyond wanting only what was done 100 years ago. To appeal to that segment of the market one must have innovation and do things that are "new" - or have the appearance of being new. (Having the appearance of being new is as, or more, important as actually being new.) So, what can one do that is innovative or "new"? One can use different materials - synthetics, for example. One can offer new features, such as Gibson tried with their auto-tuning machine heads, or Taylor's "V-class". In Martin's case offering "liquid metal" bridge pins is "exotic", "innovative" and "high-tech" sounding and is something only they have. Ditto for carbon fibre bridge plate. Does that really change anything about their instruments - sound, longevity, playability, for instance? It doesn't matter: it has value as a means of differentiating their product from all of the others on the market.

They don't offer "torrefication" of tops: they have a unique, proprietary process that no one else has - "Vintage Tone System", VTS. By having a unique, proprietary process, it is another differentiating characteristic of their products that no one else has.

And so on.

I'm not picking on Martin. Every guitar maker - large and small - must find some way, any way, of differentiating what they do from everyone else. If they don't, they won't sell many. There has to be something that makes the consumer want and buy your product rather than someone else's. That something can be real, imaginary or emotional. Perception is a huge part of it.

[Alan Carruth]

Actually, Martin DID hire Dana Bourgeois to 'tap tune' guitars: the 'Shoenberg model'. Dana would pick out sets of wood at the factory, which Martin would use to make tops, backs and rims. Dana would 'tap tune' the plates, assemble the boxes, and fine tune the assembly, also by tapping and flexing. Then he'd pick out more sets of wood, and Martin would start the process again, while also binding and finishing the previous batch. I think Dana also did some final setup and fine tuning on those instruments once they were completed. And, yes, they got a hefty upcharge for them.

I've taken a workshop with Dana on tap tuning 'free' tops, and also had the chance to track him through fine-tuning an assembled box at a GAL convention 20+(!) years ago. I took my Chladni setup to the 'free' plate tuning workshop, and tracked changes there, both in my own top and those of other students, as well as the 'teaching' top that Dana brought with him. After the workshop he generously gifted me the Torrefied example top, which had cracked a number of times in the process of working on it. It's hanging on my wall in the shop.

Chladni tuning is simply a 'tech' version of tap tuning. It's easy to demonstrate that the tap tones that Dana is hearing are the resonant frequencies of the plates/assembly that show up as Chladni patterns. The main differences are that with Chladni tuning you can see the shape of the mode (which I feel is important) and also have a more exact reading of the pitch. Dana gets nearly as much information by tapping and listening as I do with my equipment, and he's a lot quicker. My hearing is such that I can't do what he does, and I also find the Chladni method to be easier to teach and easier to keep records on.

In terms of 'science' there's not much to choose either way. It's easy to show that there is no simple way to correlate the 'free' plate tap tone/Chladni pitches with assembled mode frequencies of the final guitar. This gets complicated. If you make two guitars of the same size and shape, using 'the same' materials, and Chladni tune the 'free' plates to the same pitches, the assembled instruments will have the same resonances. However, any change, such as swapping out a different B&S wood, will alter the final modes even if the 'free' modes were similar. And note that even a 'matched' pair of instruments made from 'the same' wood, matched as closely as you care to do it, will still sound different, even if the spectra in the low frequency range are 'the same' within measurement error. At the moment (and probably for some time to come) the justification for Chladni/tap tuning rests in the realm of faith, backed up with some reasonable mental models that will be very hard to 'prove' scientifically.