Official Luthiers Forum!

So, I'm in the middle of a 6 guitar build. I just cut up all of the top bracing material. As I was shaping it, I noticed that all of my 1/4" tone bar and finger braces were cut with the grain in the wrong direction (not vertically oriented). X braces and transverse bars ok. Does this matter? Should I chuck it and redo? I am in "no compromise" mode on these builds.

OLF SJ model

Mike

You just made some nice kindling.

Think of how braces are shaped. Either tapered or scalloped, dips and planes go into them, which would expose the 'layers' in flatsawn wood.

I would expect structurally they would be sound if shaped with abrasives instead of blades, but...

For the amount of money brace wood costs, I'd let it go and get it all vertical grain...

Yeah, what I thought. Not sure how this happened. I bought the bracewood stock from HMTW. Never noticed the plank was flat sawn. Must have been a fluke. Gonna toss it.

Was sitting there looking at it and thought that crap ain't gonna work well with finger planes

A flat sawn plank turns vertical depending on how you cut it. Necks are made from flatsawn planks...

If you have more billets like that, they're still good, you just need to dimension them differently...

Yup. Clearly my bad. I assumed something I should not have. Lesson learned! Lol

Mike: If you got flat sawn wood for bracing from HMTW if might be a good idea to touch base. I don't think Shane ever sent out flat sawn brace stock. I may be wrong about that, but I would not want to receive flat sawn stock. Seems kind of wasteful to me, you just can' t get the same amount of cut braces as you would from vertical cut stock. They may not be aware if they are new to luthier wood.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

" Seems kind of wasteful to me, you just can' t get the same amount of cut braces as you would from vertical cut stock"

Why wouldn't you (honest question)? If the wood is perfectly flat sawn couldn't you just cut it to height first and then cut it to width?
I usually split my braces from suitable odds and ends, so I'm not that familiar with"store bought" brace stock, but it seems to me flat sawn would work as well as vertical grained if sawn braces are used.

Lutes use braces with the grain oriented opposite to that commonly used for guitars. For finger braces and tone bars they might be O.K. from a strength perspective (but probably a bit less split resistant). But if these are uncompromising builds, cutting new braces is probably the way to go.

Clay: Depends on how thick the brace stock(flat sawn) is and how thick you want to make your braces. If the stock is the normal 3/4" thick as Shane cut it and you want to get 3 quarter inch braces................good luck.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

IMHO, they are fine for finger braces and tone bars. I often use FS for the soundhole reinforcements.....simply because that is what I have left over from cutting the other braces. However, I would not use FS for X-braces, the UTB, or the back braces.
As far as carving with a knife or finger plane, it should make little difference. Whether it is FS or QS, you need to carve with the grain, not against.

_________________
John

The piece was clearly flat sawn. And I failed to recognize it. My bad. And flat sawn is not bad. Most brace stock is 3/4" thick. For some braces, that's not tall enough. You do want some flat sawn so you can cut the other way to accommodate. HMTW did nothing wrong. They simply anticipated variety of use and sent the right stuff. My mistake was in not understanding this. I do now.

Btw, this stock is presale of HMTW. I'm sorry I mentioned it, only because it looks like I was dissing them. I was not.

I used flat sawn brace wood my first time and didn't even know it until a fellow OLF'r pointed it out to me. I myself had ordered a plank of western red cedar from a lumber place not knowing that it wasn't quarter sawn or really that I needed it. I was told to take my wood and cut it the other way which I did and let me tell you, if it ain't truly quarter sawn wood it's not truly gonna work. It held and the guitar sounded great but when I eventually scrapped it for parts, I started just tapping it hard with a hammer and every brace sheared and fell off. Not only that but there was a visible radius to the bottom and top of each brace that I didn't put there. I do flats. Any way I'm glad I scrapped instead of giving it away I would have hated for someone to hurt them self if it ever catastrophically failed. Which it eventually would have done.

Here's a pic I hope of one of the back braces I saved as a reminder. This is what happens using non QS lumber.

_________________
In order to make an apple pie from scratch you must first invent the universe.
- Carl Sagan

Check out F.O.F. Custom guitars on Facebook.

Www.fofcustomguitar.weebly.com

Ya know, adherence issues crossed my mind, but honestly, I can't understand why it would be an issue. It's not like you were trying to glue to end grain. I'm thinking something else was going on like poor (new) technique etc. I think the real issue is being able to shape it. Plus it looks odd.

Now if I could just get my new order of brace wood in from the new HMTW, I could move on!

Hi Mike, sorry to hear your situation and no offense taken. I sent your order out on Sept. 11 so I imagine it would be there this week. Maybe Thursday or Friday at latest. The flatsawn BW must be from when Shane owned? Either way no biggy, I have lots and am happy to help you out.
FYI - All our bracewood is Vertical Grain and I try to keep it under 5 degree grain slope.

Hope it works out for ya Mike!

_________________
High Mountain Tonewood Company
Bruce Andrews
Terrace, BC, Canada
http://www.highmountaintonewood.com

"I myself had ordered a plank of western red cedar from a lumber place not knowing that it wasn't quarter sawn or really that I needed it. "

Western red cedar works good for soundboards, not so much for flatsawn braces. It splits along the grain more easily than spruce. Redwood is another one I would not use for braces. Looks like the brace itself split - gluing technique wouldn't help that.

Bobby, I wasn't at all intending to complain. Like I said, I was sorry I mentioned HMTW. Yes, bought from Shane. This is all on me. That said, I think you should either consider a thinner flat sawn option for taller braces, or a thicker quarter sawn plank option. Some braces are indeed taller than .75". But thanks for informing us of ur quality goals. Baseline brace stock should default to vertical grain (IMHO)

Mike

Hey Mike, you build some instruments (like your harp guitars) that might need different size brace stock. I am sure Bobby will get some custom pieces (just as I have in the past) if you give him your needs. By far, the greatest demand is for brace stock that max's out at about .625 and less when finished, so .75 rough and bang on quarter is the way to process. That said I have processed everything from contra bass tone bars to special sized pieces so makers can use their shapers.

Hope that you get what you need and I will be in touch soon about the EIR harps sets.

Thanks
Shane

_________________
Canada

Yikes. I've created a mini controversy. Not intended. Thanks for chiming in Shane. Ya see, i gotta learn to not post after 8 hours in the shop. Seems I lose perspective and filters.

I will say that my current OLF SJ builds call for .75 braces. When stock comes .75, there is no way finished braces will be .75. Yes, harps are worse in that regard. I'd recommend 7/8" base stock as an option. Does it really matter? Probably not as most designers overspecify

I agree Mike, there are some plans that call for .75 braces but of the thousands of inches of brace stock that I milled it was always .75 rough as most makers went with .625 x braces. Every once in a while someone wanted something larger and I just kept a few billets around that I could cut larger stock out of. If most makers use .625 x's then cutting to .875 as a standard is a shameful waste of valuable wood. So it was always a compromise. I don't think that you have stirred anything up at all. Having these conversations is what helped me decide on the products I was going to produce. But again, I am sure that Bobby can do a small run if you needed something taller.

Thanks Mike
Shane

_________________
Canada

FWIW...

I really really don't think that you'll need 3/4" tall braces. The plans call for 3/4" braces 'to start and then trim as necessary'.

I believe there was some small controversy in this regard at some point. For a guitar with a 15"ish lower bout, 3/4" braces are going to be preeeety stiff...

I'm actually building some as well, I was going to start a thread about that very thought...

Hey Mike,

I seem to recall that the OLF plans were designed on the "heavy" side as far as the bracing goes. You know, the designer wanting to ensure there is no back lash from bulging guitar tops..... what's the soundboard thickness measurement on the plans.....?

If you're talking x-brace at .75" that's just super high and you can easily knock that down to .625 (5/8") or even .5625 (9/16") if the braces are stiff. Heck might be able to go lower still if you trust your brace stock.

On all my 16" lower bout guitars (what I call a GA model), and all at 25.6" scale (bit more tension on the strings) I go with 0.5-0.5625" height x-brace at the intersection and taper from there.....I've had no issues with the oldest guitar out there (6 years now).

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

There's no hard and fast rule here folks.
In doing a restoration on a Hernandez Y Aguado guitar (a rather revered and valuable classical guitar for those of you who are not familiar with these) a few years ago, I noticed that the Harmonic bars were made with the grain lines parallel to the plane of the top.
The rest of this guitar is impeccable construction-wise (and the braces perfectly quartered stock) so the only reasonable conclusion is that this is the way the makers intended it to be.

When I first read ur post on "parallel" grain I thought you meant like the seam cover used for the back. That sounded crazy. But looking at ur (low res!) pictures, I can see you are talking about the same grain orientation I'm dealing with. Braces like that are not weaker, or less likely to adhere (IMHO), but not as good looking and harder to plane. The good looking part? For the top, not an issue. I wonder if the mechanical properties are different however.

Btw, still waiting on the order. Maybe the Canadian Mounties confiscated my wood as contraband?

Mike