| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| R Taylor Asymmetrical X Brace. http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=10479 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Steve Saville [ Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks to Andy Zimmerman, I was able to attend the NAMM show. I took a few pictures. This one from the R Taylor both is pretty interesting. The intersection of the X-brace was notched just like a standard x brace. What do you think? Has anyone tried this? 
|
|
| Author: | peterm [ Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The way I see it, that top would allow for a lot more movement... maybe a good bracing pattern for a fingerstyle guitar. Definately something to look into... |
|
| Author: | Steve Saville [ Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Michael, I agree with you, but that Bob Taylor is a pretty smart guy. I suspect he's done a fair amount of testing and is pretty confident that he's not going to have a bunch of warranty work. |
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Steve, i also think this pattern has some merrit due to it's lightness and for the way it covers all the vibration area of the lower bout, should give a very balanced sound IMHO. |
|
| Author: | MSpencer [ Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think I will stick with the traditional X brace, but very interesting approach. I would be concerned with structural as well. He is certainly an experienced builder and innovator, of which I am neither so there must have been a reason or something to support the deisgn change in his mind. Thanks for sharing Mike |
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sorry to disagree Serge bro but the Tone faerie are whispering bass heavy and weakened in the worst possible place even with a thick stiff top. |
|
| Author: | Dave Anderson [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Theres no cap over the intersected brace there so I'm sticking to a traditional x brace too. Don't like this "innovation" much! Of course Bob Taylor has done a lot of work on this I'm sure...I'll be interested to see how it works out. |
|
| Author: | Bruce Dickey [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
These braces look huge to me. Notice the huge scallop in the one solid main brace. Is this the Grand Symphony? The routed edge is a known Taylor mod. One advantage Bob has is the ability to quickly try many variations of this top. Even moving a single brace a 1/4 inch or so. R and D dept. I'd definitely trip over to a local Taylor Dealer to play one of these and take a listen. Thanks for posting it Steve and congrats on your trip to NAMM. Did you see Howard? |
|
| Author: | old man [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Maybe showing something like this is a ploy. Lead the competetion down the wrong road while Taylor forges ahead. 
Ron |
|
| Author: | Lillian F-W [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Guys, what is running around the outer edge of the soundboard, about a 1/2 an inch in, waist to waist along the lower bout? Its not another brace of some sort is it? |
|
| Author: | Andy Zimmerman [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bruce This is not really the Grand Symphony. This is one of the 2 bracing options on the R.Taylor line. The R Taylor line came before the GS. The other is conventional X bracing. The body shape of the R. Taylor guitars became the shape that was used for the Grand Symphony. With the GS they use traditonal machine cut bracing like the rest of the standard Taylor line. As far as playing them, R Taylor is technically a different company than Taylor, so the have different dealers. Since they are hand made, they only make a few hundred a years so they are not in every store that sells Taylor. The most interesing thing I liked with these guitars is the solid linings they use. The bend them on a Fox style bender. The rims are solid as a brick. The had 2 sets of rims in the booth. One conventional kerfed lined and the other solid. An amazing difference. They use Mahogany for the top lining and a matching lining for the back. (EIR, Koa etc) They talk about this in the article in the Fretboard Journal. The web site is www.rtaylorguitars.com. I met Ed Granero, who is one of the 3 main builders of the R Taylor guitars. He invited me to visit their shop. It is in the complex of Taylor, but it is a separate entity. |
|
| Author: | Dave Rickard [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Aoibeann] Guys, what is running around the outer edge of the soundboard, about a 1/2 an inch in, waist to waist along the lower bout? Its not another brace of some sort is it? [/QUOTE] It's hard to tell by the picture. I'd also like to know what it is! |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
i believe that may be the proprietary taylor top edge rout. it purportedly frees the top to move more freely. |
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Kirby and Todd, thanks for your concern and differing opinions, i was not about to try this bracing pattern, i would certainly have to listen to how it sounds first! 
Looking at it though, while having some Somogyi theories in mind, i just couldn't resist the thought of lightness and long dipole and was trying to see how the sound would travel with such a bracing pattern. I might be wrong here but i think that if their rims is as solid as Andy states, the top doesn't need to be as braced as we are used to, just thinking out loud before attempting something foolish! 
Maybe we oughta invite Mr Ervin to hear his opinion on this?  
|
|
| Author: | Andy Zimmerman [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes That is their patented route around the edge of the lower bout |
|
| Author: | peterm [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I actually see a tonal benefit in that bracing pattern and I believe it will provide substancially more top movement than a regular X-brace. Sure it does look weaker.... but what does Ervin Somogyi teach? To brace a top and bring it as close to the edge as you can... a bit lighter and it would be too weak. I believe this bracing pattern may do just that, a bit weaker than a regular X-brace but not too weak. Besides, I bet Bob Taylor knows better and has ALL the resources to try and test.... |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It depends what sort of "top movement" that you get I suppose. It might be interesting to treat the treble side leg the same as the bass side one - a V brace from the soundhole up to the upper transverse brace with two offset lower legs, maybe with the lower legs notched (lappped?) into the V. Then again maybe not! |
|
| Author: | Kevin Gallagher [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I tried something similar to this bracing pattern years ago and the three guitars that have it implemented on are still in great shape and showing no signs of adverse effects from the lack of continuation of the two "X" legs in the lower bout. Bracing on a Taylor is pretty hefty and rigid anyway and that one continuous length will likely provide plenty of strength along the tension course of the strings. The result will be, more than likely, what I'd experienced....an increase in bottom end, especially in smaller bodied guitars. I built an MJ and two Grand Concerts and all were nicely balanced with powerful projection in the bottom. The variation that I used never became a default pattern for me simply because the difference was significant enough for me to make the change. That was only my personal experience, but the guys at R. Taylor may be getting different results. That "patented" edge rout is simply working like the carved recurve on the top of a violin or archtop guitar. it allows the more massive and rigid section of the top where all of the load of string tension is absorbed and distrubuted by the bracing to be suspended by a much thinner and more flexible edge section. Again, similar things have been done for years by many of us small builders, but no patents were ever sought or secured. It's an application that has been applied for centuries, actually, but on the outside of the tops of stringed instruments. Regards, Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars |
|
| Author: | Andy Zimmerman [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The R Taylors are built a bit differently. With the EXTREMELY rigid rims, they thickness all of their tops to 0.125. Thicker than the usual Taylor guitar. This allows them to braces them lighter. At least that is what Ed Granero told me. |
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Normally I do not think of a bass side but I think this one built one. This whole scheme to me hinges on the bridge plate scallop riding the edge of responsiveness/ structural integrity. |
|
| Author: | Andy Zimmerman [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hesh The rims are VERY VERY STIFF because they use a non kerfed lining on the R.Taylors. The top side and back side lining are actually integrated into the side supports and glued in as a single entity. They bend their linings like we bend our binding on a Fox style bender. At the NAAM show they had 2 identical rims of EIR. One had conventional kerfed linings. (Standard on the Taylor line) and one with the non kerfed linings (Standard on the R Taylors) The difference is stiffness was very dramatic. To make the look even cleaner, the lining on the back side is of the same material as the back. The top side liner looked like mahogany. Their is a nice article about the R. Taylors and their linings in the last issue of the Fretboard Journal Since I cannot upload a pict, I will email it to you |
|
| Author: | Kevin Gallagher [ Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hesh, I agree that there is no primary bass or treble side to a top, there are primary bass and treble nodes in every top. Those nodes can be effectively and dramtically addressed by brace placement and voicing. That's our goal when we voice our tops...to address the nodes that paricular frequencies resonate at. This is kind of like the discussion last month that brought up the topic of mass and its inevitable damping effects of EVERY guitar top from EVERY builder. Even though some can claim that their goal is to eliminate damping due to mass...it is impossible since bracing is essential to the survival of any guitar and its mass must be present. The issue becomes one of learning to use the mass and the damping that is always present with it to our benefit as we direct vibration with it since we cannot eliminate it. We can;t eliminate the traffic, but we can learn to direct to areas that will make it work for us, so to speak. It's never been a matter of lightening the the bass side for more bass response or tightening it for less. This is probaby one of the most misunderstood aspects of building and some builders have dismissed the value of voicing and addressing the specific nodes of a top simply because they can't seem to get it. These are the builders who will default to designs that have been deeply established by others for a generally good tone with a reasonable balance and response characteristic set. What they fail to realize is that those deeply established designs were arrived at through the countless hours that their originators spent doing just what we who pursue a more practical and applicable knowledge of voicing are doing. We just vary our efforts to intentionally reach different results, whether good or bad, for a number of reasons, the greatest being reference and experience. This joint being shown by R. Taylor is certaily one that creates a different venue for tone generation than a standard "X" brace and its ability to distribute vbration is completely different as it does. I look forward to playig one with this pattern and am anxious to hear the difference. I'm not in complete aggreement with the use of non kerfed linings, but look forward to hearing what they offer in the R. Taylor line. I like a rigid rim set, but alos feel that they can be too heavy if the concept is overvalued. Again, just my opinions. Regards, Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|