Official Luthiers Forum!

Anyone out there doing any experimental work with guitars besides me? Here's your chance to show your work.
Most everything I build has some form of experiment going on and here is my latest, an attempt to combine X and ladder bracing. The idea is to try to control the potato chip effect while retaining some tone of ladder bracing. This will be a white oak MJ with the Nettuno style purfling.





So, let's see YOUR "outside the box" thinking.

Haans , I like the looks of that . Since I havent built a actual guitar yet , all my stuff has been much smaller , I was wondering . When u look at the braced back "it seems" that the area to the right hand along the bridge line has very little bracing ? Or maybe a better way to say it is it "seems to be a larger open area" . Again , im a newbie , so not being critical , just curious .


Love the rosette btw

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

Interesting bracing Haans.
Are you just winging it here, or have you been going in this direction for a while?
The only things I'm doing at this point is taller thinner braces than the plan calls out.
Also, I am finishing up 2 weiss styles with an 25' arc, not radius on the top and back.
Seems for these weiss an arc might be better than a radius.
We'll see/hear.

This isn't too experimental. It's a Stella body with X bracing, but it is a 22.875 scale. The first one is sitka and sapele, the second is wrc and walnut.






Bob

I'm a newbie and don't have enough knowledge to stray far outside the bounds of convention yet. I do hope to at some point in the future though. It interests me a great deal.

Haans - I've been very intrigued with your Prairie State Jumbo and Mini Jumbo builds. They look pretty cool IMO. I would love to hear a sound clip of either or both!

I'm also intrigued with the carbon fiber sandwich braces, although I don't see myself experimenting with anything like that for a while. Someday...

You mentioned a desire to retain some tone of ladder bracing. Would you mind describing that tone, if possible? Ladder bracing is something about which I have not seen any literature or discussion, and I'm interested to know more about what it brings to the table in terms of tone. I do get the impression it's used mostly in smaller bodied guitars, which I am interested in building in the future.

TIA!

Bob - nice looking guitars! May I ask what a Stella is? Thanks!

Jim, you have to remember that ladder braced guitars have a thicker top to start. So far, this one is in the .120's, and it is a stiff chunk of red spruce. Then you have "the big patch".
Here are a couple of ladders:



And this is a ladder parlor that I made that I wouldn't part with for love or $$$.

.

You can see that ahead of the bridge patch is the problem area. That's where I wanted to integrate the X Behind the patch is pretty safe, but does bulge more than with tone bars. I've been doing 3 tone bars lately, so...
Alan, I'm sort of winging it. I've been trying a few small braces behind the soundhole, but thought I'd give the X a go. Like your use of thin, tall bracing!
OK, Bob! another very short scale. Like that too. Very nice looking, what's the lower bout?
Charlie, I'm not crazy about using CF lam bracing, so I use hardwood, rosewood, wenge, anything hard.
Tone is hard to describe, but with red spruce/ white oak, it's a very fundamental tone, really bluesy.
Here are three soundclips...

http://www.brentrup.com/page7/files/page7_10.mp3 Prairie State 18"

http://www.brentrup.com/page7/files/page7_11.mp3 Mini Jumbo 16"

http://www.brentrup.com/page7/files/page7_2.mp3 Oak parlor

OK, folks there's got to be some more of you more adventurous builders out there!

Thanks for the answer . I will probably start mine soon . I have enough material for 6 guitars at this point but mainly have been trying to get better with the mandolas and work out the bugs on smaller stuff first .

Another question I have is , the bracing you have is laminated . what is the center material in the lamination ? Carbon Fibre ?

I look forward to seeing more of the build .

Thanks

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

Sorry Jim, I hit post instead of preview and had to edit...see above for the answer. This one's wenge.

Hi Hans,

The body on mine is 13.25" at the lower bout, 9.125" at the upper bout, 7.50" at the waist and 17.875" tall. John How was kind enough to post a rough tracing of a Stella he measured a few years ago and I used that as a reference. It's a fun little guitar.

Here's an X-fan pattern I've been building a while, it's an take off (ok, rip off) of Jeff Elliots work.

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

Thanks for the information and the sound clips, Haans. They sound very nice!

Bob, I have referred to that post myself. Your short scale is just a bit wider than my parlor and a little shorter. Very short scales can be a real problem box-wise, especially if you want a large volume box. The only way you can go is wider. A 12 fret neck helps too by allowing a longer body.
Very nice, Jim Watts! I see you are using a perimeter clamp while carving braces. A very good idea. I have been using them screwed right to the mould. Really isolates the top. Can you tell us the reasoning behind the fan-X bracing tonally? What you are hoping for?
Anyone else out there? Some of you are experimenting with back bracing, yes? Or have we collectively become complacent building dreadful dreds, meditating OM's, etc. Is there no innovation left?
It's getting a little boring talking about our latest bandsaw or nut file holders, let's put some of those tools to use!

Nice idea there with the short X, Haans. I'll be looking forward to hearing the finished product.

Jim, I like your X-fan pattern as well. I've thought about trying something very similar myself, wide X included Glad to know it's a proven design then. Is that for a steel string, or classical? Looks like a pinless bridge either way.

I've got an experimental guitar underway, although for the moment it's pretty normal. Top is ready to brace in a standard X style layout, for practice and to serve as the benchmark for subsequent tops that I will be trying on it.

I'm debating whether to do integral neck or maybe try a dovetail. Bolt-on is certainly easy and practical, but it just doesn't make my insides happy. I love the idea of integral, but not the idea that my instruments could wind up in a closet all alone and unloved if they ever do need a reset. And not so much the idea of trying to French polish the crack around the heel either. So maybe dovetail is the happy middle ground. Or maybe I should just stick with the functional bolts.

I'm also trying this back bracing pattern I made up

I should make a thread for this project, it might be fun to watch. After the first top, I'll do mahogany with standard bracing to compare. After that, peel all the braces off of the spruce top, thin it down a bunch, and rebrace using this X-lattice design I'm working on

Depending on how that works out, I'll either tweak the lattice and try again but on the mahogany top, or go straight to one of the objectives of this project... to see if I can make a solid rosewood top sound good Partly because I'm rebellious and everyone says rosewood top is a bad idea, but mostly because I love variety and it would be great if I have a bracing pattern that enables me to use almost any wood and see what kind of sound I get Plus having an alternative to standard X for the usual softwoods.

Dennis , Keep in mind Im a newbie , so my question may not be valid . I understand the back bracing , however the top bracing seems excessive ? would u please explain the thinking behind ur idea for so much top bracing ? Thanks

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

Thin thin top, maybe .080-.090" for spruce, even .070" or less for the heavy hardwoods, so it needs densely packed braces so there aren't big spans of floppyness. The braces will be very thin and short though, so it's maybe not as much as it looks like. Probably about 3/16" wide, 3/16" tall on one angle and 5/16" tall on the other angle to notch over the shorter ones without needing to cap all those intersections. Maybe 1/16" taller than that all around if the first top goes belly up

The main X will be more normal height like 3/4" at the intersection, and tall upper transverse, and normal 1/4x3/8" or so soundhole braces. Also headblock extension to the upper transverse, and that fairly large bridge plate probably .100 thick, with the lattice braces notched to where they glue to the surface of the plate should beef things up. May make those lattice pieces right behind the bridge extra tall as well.

Can't decide if I should precisely notch the main X for a snug fit to all those intersections, or just have it arch over them no-contact. May not be that tough to do using a router for easily repeatable depth, but I'm not sure it would be beneficial... stiffer yes, but maybe too stiff at those points, compared to letting the lattice do its thing semi-independently of the X.

I'm rather green myself though, so I'm really just winging it. It's entirely possible that the spruce top will die in this trial. But I think I have a pretty good feel for the stiffness of these things. I read lots and study pictures and flex braces and plates as much as I can. We shall see what happens when I get there.

Makes Sense to me now that I see the size and thickness dimensions, I will be interested in seeing more of this one as well

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

Dennis, is that a center brace on the back or the re-enforcement strip? I don't put much stock in an integral neck for just the reason you mention. If I read you right, you are making a regular X first to keep around for comparison? Good idea as you have something to compare taps with.
Glad to see there are a few willing to experiment. Looks like most are "in the box", not willing to push the envelope. Guess we'll just let it drift to page 2 and fade into oblivion.
Back to yer new bandsaw and latest cocobolo at Dustbin Hardwoods...

Haans,

Since your state-of-mind status is green , can you give an update on that CG you were working on which had the large bridge plate and no tone bars ?

-jd

Yes.

That is, it's a brace that also serves as seam reinforcement.

And if that ain't "out there" enough for you, how about this design? Don't know if I'll ever build it up, but I've always thought the fan fret thing made a lot of sense, with good tone quality on low notes, good comfort on high notes where you do most of your speedy tricks, and better match to the natural rotation of the arm, especially for bar chords. But the crooked bridge seems mismatched with the shape of the body.

I also always thought the bass side waist was a waste of potential soundboard area. So fill in the waist, stretch the lower bout to elongate the part south from the bridge axis and narrow up the part where your arm rests to make it more comfy and symmetrical about the bridge... put the soundholes in the upper bout where it's all wasted anyways, and voila. You have a sort of bean shaped thing.

Few different bracing ideas here. All of them use the same structural parts. Headblock extension butted to angled upper transverse brace, and a carbon rod connecting the headblock to the back/side as seen in many guitars nowadays, to support where the angled UTB doesn't.

First layout is a plain ol' lattice, graduated for maximum stiffness in front of the bridge, plenty behind, and feathering thinner as distance from bridge increases.

Second is another lattice, but going with the bass side/treble side mindset, with with the lattice "converging" on the treble side to tighten it up there, while spreading out and loosening the bass side. Also conveniently makes a nice fan bracing style direct-line support for the bridge to the neck, with braces catching the wings of the bridge for maximum efficiency.

Third is more like the standard X bracing, but maybe puts too much of a stiff and heavy spot at the X, which isn't at such an optimal location in this layout. Also could use 3 tone bars instead of the south quadrant lattice, for possibly more even stiffness/weight compared to the west/east. The X braces just run right over the soundholes, which I think would look pretty cool.

I think this design could especially work well on acoustic bass guitars, where you need maximum soundboard area, scale length on low notes, soundbox volume, and the lower bout shape helps keep it playable as it increases in size. You could also do an armrest bevel instead of squishing the the bass side lower bout in so far, to get a bit more box volume while keeping the soundboard the same shape. But since it would only be logical to use a Manzer wedge on it, that would be the narrow side so not much to be gained there.

One interesting question with this shape is... what angle should the soundboard grain run? It's sort of like a big oval with the neck attached crooked on it... so should the grain go in line with the strings, or in line with the bridge axis? Maybe half way between?

Here's one. Classic shape but minimal bracing, 630mm scale, Four piece Cedar top, Euro Ash back and ribs. Sounds lovely, esp. because it only cost about £15 in materials - tuning machines !

I'll post some more pics and info soon if anyone's interested (its finished)

Well, John JD, that one has been set aside. Right now, I'm more interested in the "old man's guitar" with the VS scale length. That other one has a 25.34" scale length and I just can't play that scale at this point. And my "state of mind alert" is so that nothing is "read" into my posts...no conspiracies today.
Now yer pushin' it Dennis! That's a bit too far out for me...I like vintage shapes, but am not opposed to wild stuff on the inside as long as it accomplishes something.
Jonsse, so is that a pretty thick top (no need to give numbers)? Very clean work and I like the wide X. Pretty sparse back there...are you getting much bulge? String guage? Some of us would love to see more, please!

This is the bracing I'm trying on a Weissenborn type lap slide instrument.

I've been using the lattice in the lower bout on standard acoustics with success so it'll be interesting to see how it holds up on a lap slide, considering the extra torque due to the string height.

X brace is 8mm x 13mm and the lattices are 3mm x 5mm

_________________

------------------------------------------------------
Bob Connor
Geelong, Australia

This is the last of a series of guitars without x-braces. They were mostly controlled by longitudinal braces. I was having trouble with the tops deforming along the sides of the braces especially behind the bridge. None of them ever failed but it was a concern. So I decided to try having the braces span the area behind the bridge. This is what I came up with. It solved the problem but the sound was a little tight.

_________________
Ken Franklin
clumsy yet persistent
https://www.kenfranklinukulele.com

Green eh!

Green is good.


blessings

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

My mind is blown...I think I might have to build OVATION guitras.god help me

_________________
Jason Moe
LaCrosse WI 54601