|
|
#1
08-04-2011, 08:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Thoughts on radial bracing?
I found a local luthier who employs a number of unconventional, and often proprietary designs and construction methods. One of these is a radial-braced top. I was hoping to hear from players & luthiers, regarding the tonal qualities and/or durability of such tops vs more traditional X bracing and the like.
I know his guitars will sound like HIS guitars, but in wondering if there are any generalities that can be made, and whether these tops are more/less/equally susceptible to humidity damage, etc. 
|
|
#2
08-04-2011, 09:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Martin, Gibson & Taylor along with a plethora of other companies all use VERY similar bracing patterns but their guitars don't all sound alike. Its not always the bracing pattern that controls the tone but what's done with it in terms of voicing that has the most impact on the final product's voice.
|
|
#3
08-04-2011, 01:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
as far as generalities are concerned it's basically like tim described -final tone is mostly dependent upon final voicing. regardless of the combination of woods or construction methods.
haven't thought much about humidty variables with radial bracing. i have a build in progress that has radial back bracing which i feel has advantages for what i'm doing and my current thinking but probably differs from others.
|
|
#4
08-04-2011, 07:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Agree with the other re: voicing makes the tone more so then on type of bracing. Also think it matters not in terms of humidity conditions. If either type are exposed to drier conditions then the one in which they were constructed they stand a chance of damage. Much much less chance of being damaged by exposure to higher humidity.
Tom
__________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything
|
|
#5
08-04-2011, 11:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think I have come to understand what you're getting at with the voicing discussion. Thank you all for your input.
I tried the guitar in question today - sinker redwood top over cocobolo. It turned out to be a heavy, overbuilt guitar with imprecise woodwork and boxy tone. It didn't matter what type of bracing it had - it was a definite dud!
|
|
#6
08-05-2011, 01:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've built a few steel string guitars with my own take on radial bracing. They had circular lower bouts with the bridge in the centre and braces radiating like spokes from that centre. They had an interesting and not bad sound, but different to an X-brace. My gut feeling was that this system gave a more simple resonance to the top and therefore not as rich in overtones, but with a stronger fundamental. This could be as much to do with the circular bout as the bracing. I never tried the circular body shape with X-bracing.
|
|
#7
08-05-2011, 10:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Most radial bracing has its origins in a design created 40 years ago by a chemist who was not a builder, Michael Kasha. Like many people before him, he came along and figured no one had ever thought about the guitar scientifically, so by doing so he could take it a quantum leap forward. Many of his assumptions abut the guitar were false, and many years later he admitted this. Most of the builders who tried radial bracing have gone back to something else. A few still use it.
__________________
"Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest." --Paul Simon
|
|
#8
08-05-2011, 10:39 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have found that radial bracing often limits the top movement when my goal is to free up the top to move. Some people like that, others don't. That is of course a generalization, like most comments about guitars.
If you like the sound then by all means go for it.
__________________
“Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all.” ― G.K. Chesterton
|
|
#9
08-05-2011, 10:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've always felt that the bracing was more 'structural' than 'acoustic'. Structurally the most important area of the top is between the bridge and the soundhole: if you can keep that from caving in, the guitar should keep working. The two most successful bracing designs; the Martin 'X' and Torres 'fan' both concentrate bracing in that area. Hmmm.
|
|
#10
08-05-2011, 10:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is there only one type of "radial" bracing? Seems like it would encompass quite a range of bracing patterns.
My first build has sort-of radial bracing.   It'll be a while before I know how it sounds, though.
__________________
gits: good and plenty chops: snickers
|
|
#11
08-11-2011, 09:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have a Kasha inspired Andrew White. I believe it incorporates all of Kasha's ideas in one form or another.
It developed several slight ripples across the top after a couple years here in Canada. Now at six years young it seems to be quite stable with no signs of further changes.   To learn more about Dr. Kasha's designs read Vince Meyer's brief overview here: http://www.jthbass.com/kasha.html Or do a Google search.
__________________
"the Dreamer" Living life on the edge. Less crowded, better view. Ruby: Andrew White custom ordered model C Coral: Andrew White custom ordered model E Fast Eddie: Andrew White custom ordered model F Frieda: Duane Noble custom built Harp Guitar
|
|
#12
08-11-2011, 11:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I built a classical guitar with the Kasha inspired bracing combined with Ramirez, keeping the sound hole in the center. I found that tonality was great, but a little lacing in the high end register, which is very important. Any one can build a bass heavy classical, it's getting it to be balanced. I ended up joining the braces that were divided at the base of the bridge and it was a great improvement. Still not what I thought was the best and now I have gone back to the Torres style.
In saying this, there is a popular classical player in my area that thought it was the best sounding classical he has ever played and found the notes to be quite round that appealed to him. He also said I would be stupid not to build more. Everyone has a different view point on what sounds good.
|
