Official Luthiers Forum!

I'm about to begin carving the braces on my Weissenborn Style build and would like to get some
feedback on shaping the braces. Do you scallope, ramp, etc... If I'm not mistaken the original Weissenborn guitar braces were ramped (?). According to the MIMF plans (which I know are controversal) the braces appear to be ramped, but some of the braces have a slight arch to them. Also, what is the thickness of the brace thats inletted into the kerfing? I know that every builder has his or her own way of doing things, so please share how you shape your Weissenborn Style guitar braces and why. The attached photo is my understanding of a ramped brace thats 2mm at the inletted end. Please correct me If I'm wrong.

Thanks.
Ron

According to the MIMF plans some of the braces for the top appear to be ramped and some are scalloped. The back braces are ramped.

-Ron

I have the Stew mac plans,
which call out .380" braces for everything, even the finger braces.
That's roughly 3/8" x 3/8".
I started making them taller, and narrower, because from the gate they seemed wimpy.
I'm making the finger braces roughly 5/16" x 5/16".
I'm still experimenting though.
My x is about 9/16" at the intersection, 5/16" wide, as all others are in width.
tapers down to zero at the lower bout,
and stays thicker at the upper bout, but doesn't tuck, and goes to zero.
The high saddle height, and the heavier strings will really distort the top,
if you're not careful.
I'm playing with different bridge plates too, but haven't seen the outcome, yet...
So, I think a little over built might be good,
then lighten up, on future builds, and see how it holds up.
I'm still learning though.........
I've got a couple of first builds with sunken x at the joint,
but are probably humidity related problems, but the gitars sound good.
Maybe Tony Karol will pipe in.

You called?



Hi Ron. Although these plans are only a general guide, I guess you could call them ramped. I would say the brace ends at Weissenborn were scalloped (more or less), although in two different styles which is about stiffness control. So ramped / scalloped, depending on which braces.



No, the braces are always flat, and the arch is created using humidity. Its hard to tell if they were actually glued flat, or into a slightly concave work-board. Either way the stronger arch is always better, although it is a traditional longitudinal / lateral arch not spherical as today.



The brace ends are tucked, and feathered to nothing where they meet the inside of the sides. The linings are simply relieved to fit the brace with a sharp chisel or knife.



Right. So this is typical for the early to mid 1920s (ca.1923-1925) production instruments, but not for the later models. The braces were cut 3/8" square and then dressed on the sides and bottom with a plane. The chunky 3/8" braces were paired with thinner tops and the large bridge / small plate design.

The later models by comparison have 5/16" square braces (dressed, again), and a thicker top that was paired with the massive "Christmas tree" bridge plate / small bridge design. The critical detail here is that a slide guitar needs a somewhat heavy top, it needs sustain. And so the tiny braces are not a problem.

One other aspect is that the sound of the instrument is not controlled through the brace scalloping and consistent top thickness as with Martin and to a lesser extent Gibsons. At Weissenborn the brace layout is always the same (more or less), and tops and backs are graduated.

Hi Alan,
Thanks for you reply. I have the Stew Mac and MIMF plans. From looking at the photos from a past thread that you started, It looks like you ramped your braces. I made the braces 5/16" as Tony suggested.



Hi Todd,
I was looking at the photos from your Weissenborn-Style build from a few years ago and It looks as If you ramped your braces too. Did you scalloped them slightly? I can't see them that closely. Thanks


Hi Tony,
Thanks for chiming in and for clarifying the bracing details. A while ago you wrote on one of the forums that the braces of the best sounding Weissenborn guitars were 5/16", so I had already cut them that size. I also made a X-Mas tree Bridge plate too. I knew that the brace ends were tucked because you had informed of that in the past, but I didn't know that they were "feathered next to nothing" so thanks for that bit of information as well. I appreciate you taking the time to share those and other important details.

Ron

This thread is timely - I have two Weissenborn style guitars under construction right now. Can someone link some pictures of their finished braced tops? I also found it interesteing that a recent article in American Lutherie featured one with a very Martin looking bracing pattern (angled tone bars) - the author said he did not follow tradition with his builds.

I meant Tony Francis, sorry!
Thank you Tony for the info.
FWIW, which ain't much, here are some shots of one that is yellow siris,
a strange wood, not very hard, that I was neuroticing about the bracing.
I took the top and back to Tom Ribbecke,
who took the time to critique it,
and he told me if it were his, he would taper the tone bar and finger (?) braces in the lower bout,so I did.
He said it looked pretty good, a little stiff, but high saddle/heavy strings make me think okay.
I hope it works.
I changed, from the original plan, the lower brace at the end of the x that goes straight across,
to this, because one I built previously has some distortion where I've now put the 2 small braces that you can see.

My bracing isn't that traditional either.

The lattice bracing is Red Spruce and is quite fine - 5mm x 3mm. Coupled with the large bridge plate there doesn't appear to be excessive deformation in the lower bout.

I also use a soundhole patch and an A-brace through the upper transverse braces right through to the X-brace to beef up this area and stop any soundhole "dip' caused by bridge rotation.

This is essentially what I'm using on my steel strings as well.

The X-braces are 8mm x 13mm and are tucked in the lower bout at a height of 4mm.

I've built 5 of these now - mainly with Blackwood backs and sides (but one from Myrtle) and a variety of tops including Blackwood, Surian, Huon Pine and Celery Top Pine.

_________________

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

Hi Alan and Bob,

Very interesting approaches to bracing Weissenborn-style guitars. Thanks for posting the pictures. I'm tried to keep It simple and followed the plans, minus the dimensions. I should be finished to tomorrow and will post some pictures.

Ron

Hi Todd,
Thanks for the info. The braces looked straight tapered, but I wasn't sure. It's good to know that the Weissenborn- style guitar that you built is holding up just fine. Thanks.

Ron

Here is a photo of the carved top. It has a nice ring to It when I tap It (not that I know much about that sort of thing).

Ron

Yes and no. These were originally designed as a Hawaiian instrument, and so Hawaiian A Major tuning was what they were designed for, with mediums of the time (slightly heavier than today), and I would say that is a far more brutal than what most of today's players subject their instruments to.

Its important to remember they were made over a 20 year period, and they are not all the same. That's why I talk about them chronological order or manufacture (as per the Most/Noe book), because they are all quite different.

There many Weissenborn instruments in need of pretty major restoration work (just look at my blog), and on the other side of that, there are many that are in exceptionally fine structural condition - including Ben Harper's instruments that have been constantly gigged and on the road for more than a decade.



Looks great Ron. A couple suggestions, apart from those already discussed above. You might like to pare down the thickness of your seam splints, and remove the one under the fretboard. Additionally, the bridge plate is 90* to the top - not at an angle. I have seen a lot of people do this after I posted pictures of a Teardrop I restored at by blog. The lines running at the 45* are saw marks from how the wood was cut on a circular saw - similar to the burn marks on vintage rosewood Martins. Watch those flat sawn braces. Great job otherwise.

That is absolutely true. And the people that take care of them over the years.

Hi Tony,
Thank you for your compliments as well as your constructive critique. Next time I'll orient the bridge plate grain the right way. Tomorrow I'll remove the seam splint above the soundhole. The top is glued on, but the box isn't closed yet, so I can still "pare down" the other seam splints.
Good stuff, thanks again.



Todd,
You made a very good point that I won't take lightly. Thanks

ron

You could always adopt the bracing methods of Chris J. Knutsen, the "inventor" of the Hawaiian guitar - the guy who showed a violin maker named Weissenborn how to make them (or at least the guy who built the instruments that Weissenborn used as a starting point for his instruments). I haven't taken the back off of my Knutsen, but judging by what i can feel through the soundhole the bracing is similar.

I'm very curious as to why you think the seam splint is too thick, Tony.
Isn't that a dead part of the top,
being locked in by the fretboard glued on top of it?
Not that I know anything about it, just curious as to your comment.
This thread is good for me,
because I'm trying to figure out what to do with these, as Padma calls them "thingme's".

No part of the instrument is a dead part.

But actually, I suggested Ron remove it - as you mention the fretboard becomes one big seam splint, essentially.

Okay, so lets pick up on what Todd was talking about.

This image is from a circa 1927 Style 1, a classic late period instrument. Here you can see the X brace, and where it is butt-fitted, how it transitions from perfect quartered piece into a dead floppy flat sawn brace in the lower bout. The top on this instrument is serverly distorted, which I do not think is solely as a result of this brace, but it is interesting.

For what its worth, this is also perhaps one of the best sounding instruments I have ever worked on.

Thanks for starting this thread, Ron.
Also thanks, Tony.
Great shot, John!
I missed that somehow.
Can I hijack, and ask about the back bracing now?

Hi John,
the knutsen has a very interesting bracing pattern. I have seen and played a Weissenborn Kona before, but never came across a Knutsen. Do you play your Knutsen, and If so how would you define the sound? I may use a Knutsen bridge design on this build. Thanks.





Hi Tony,
Does the late model Style 1 in the photo with the distorted top have a "x-mas tree" bridge plate?
Also, does the Weissenborn guitars with the x-mas tree bridge plate distort less than the earlier models without the x-mas tree bridge plate? Thanks for posting the picture




Hi Alan,
Thanks for contributing to this thread and others that I have started. Hijack away.

-Ron

Hi Ron,

Yes - this is a late 1920s model featuring the "Christmas tree" bridge plate and associated construction techniques. For me it illustrated Todd's point about stock selection and execution. But this instrument is the exception not the rule, typically these later models are in perfect structural condition today.




Is it time to talk about arches yet?

This is one of my favorite ever guitar threads on the internet:

http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.y ... ing?page=1

Is it time to talk about arches yet?

This is one of my favorite ever guitar threads on the internet:

http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.y ... ing?page=1[/quote]


Hi Tony,
Thanks for answering my questions, interesting indeed. Here is a photo of the back bracing.
I'll give the "Flat tops" vs arched bracing" thread a read. This also one of my favorite internet threads too, so thanks to you and everyone else who contributed. I learned a lot in the last few days about the Weissenborn construction process.

I have the top and back glued to the rims. I used fish glue so it will be in the mold/go bar deck for about 24 hours. I got lucky today, the humidity was hovering in the 30%-37% range all day. I'll see If i can get some pics up after It comes out of the mold.

Ron

Oh, good.
We have Tony interested, .
I built 2 of these thingme's with flat tops and backs.
Sinking x at the soundhole, before the tops were glued on.
I didn't care.
RH stuff.
They sound really good, but the bridges are rotating too!
Learning....
So, I decided to glue up at 40 percent or so, thanks forum!,
and made a sanding sled, and go bar deck with a 25' radius,
used for the back and top.
Not a radius dish, but an arc, as I feel this is better for a Weiss.
Still doing finishing on 3 with this radius,
so, I don't know what will happen, but,
I think (hope) it will help.
I also beefed up the upper bout back brace,
because I noticed there was a slight depression there because of the "break" bending at the back.

Both of the ones I've played (including my own) have been tuned down pretty low. Mine has a pretty serious bulge on the top behind the bridge when I tune it up, which I'll need to figure out how to address. I've played a few Konas and Weissenborns, but the ones I played were in good condition, so I can't really compare the instruments. Unfortunately.

Hi john,
Thanks for your reply. I would love to see a picture of your Knutsen If you can find the time.

Thanks,
Ron