Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Forward X Bracing
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=15145		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Dennis E. [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:31 am ]
Post subject: 
The latest Stew-Mac Trade Secrets Newsletter just arrived in my Inbox and it's a corker. In this issue, Todd Sams details the Martin Guitar pre-1938 forward X bracing that's revered by many bluegrass pickers for its ability to deliver sheer volume.

This particular issue is a strong reminder of why I subscribe to the newsletter. Thanks Stew-Mac!
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:16 am ]
Post subject: 
Got a link? I used to get those? Hmmm... signed up again
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:18 am ]
Post subject: 
http://www.stewmac.com/tradesecrets/ts0051_xbraces.hzml?jrl= 155875&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=t s0051&clk=191731

As soon as I signed up again, here it came. Hope this works. Thanks Dennis.
Author:  David Collins [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:30 am ]
Post subject: 
I'm all for forward position and wider X-brace angle, but I really wish they
hadn't endorsed removing the popsicle stick brace. They were put there
for a good reason, and if you're going to remove them you have to at
least supplement with some other upper bracing and reinforcement.

Wait, I take that back. I make my living off repairs,

Tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock, tick - creeeeeeeep. craaaaaaack.

Cha-Ching!!

Man I love idealism built in to guitars.

Neck resets and shoulder reinforcement are good money, man.
Author:  grumpy [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:37 am ]
Post subject: 
The popsicle brace has been useless since day one, and has never prevented a single crack, as is evidenced by how many are cracked....

there are better ways....
Author:  grumpy [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:51 am ]
Post subject: 
Oh, and let's not all run out and shift the braces forward or splay out the x angle yet. If you have the wrong top(IE: not stiff enough)or the wrong overall combination, this is a sure way to build a muddy-sounding dog. If you(or your client) wishes a bright, focussed tone, this is a sure way to disappoint.

Two of my favorite vintage dreads have both been '34 D-18. But ranked right with them are a couple of killers from '39(again, D-18's..). Not far behind are a friend's '44 D-28. If I had to have them to play, I'd likely choose one of the 39's(if I had to own, I'd take the 34's and add them to my retirement portfolio <g>)
Author:  David Collins [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 5:01 am ]
Post subject: 
Mario, I certainly agree that the popsicle stick was not the best way to
support the shoulders, and it does fail quite a bit.. Actually, I'm quite glad to
see people dropping the popsicle stick in favor of more V-style bracings,
which make much more sense. Still, I think the traditional stick is still good
deal better than nothing, which is what they seem to advocate. Oh well,
hopefully most builders will have more sense than to just leave it empty.
Author:  j.Brown [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:32 am ]
Post subject: 
Are there any photos floating around of the V style upper brace?
-j.
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:42 am ]
Post subject: 
Hey, if something is good, then more of it will be better, right? It's just simple logic.    

Notice that forward bracing actually works against wider angle; The further forward you go, the narrower the angle needs to be to keep the arms of the X under the bridge wings. As I've said before (and so has Mario--but it seems to need to be repeated over and over), you don't start out with the distance of the X from the soundhole, or with a bracing angle. Those are artifacts of the design, not the origen of it.

You start with a body shape and a scale length. Then you locate the bridge. Then you locate where the arms of the X cross the bridge wings. Then you locate the anchor points for the upper arms of the X; you can play with this a little for the purpose of getting a wider or narrower X angle, depending on the desired sound (as Mario points out, you tradeoff between bass and focus). Once you are up to this step, the location and angle of the X have been fixed. The soundhole location has nothing to do with the location of the X.
Author:  martinedwards [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:47 am ]
Post subject: 
is this what you're talking about?



George Lowden developed this sort of thing to anchor the top bracing into the neckblock
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:48 am ]
Post subject: 
dang Howard you mean I have been doing it right all these years How did that happen
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:02 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=martinedwards] is this what you're talking about?
[/QUOTE]

No. Just where the upper arms of the X meet the liners.
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=j.Brown] Are there any photos floating around of the V style upper brace?
-j.[/QUOTE]

In the USA, this type bracing is referred to as the Martin A-Style top bracing. I think I've heard that more than once that Lowden developed it? Maybe?

So instead of V, flip it over and you get the A.
Author:  Tim McKnight [ Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
Another consideration of the forward shifted design is that it puts more torque on the bridge area. Yes, this will give you more volume but the tradeoff is [possible] top problems down the road [unless] you beef up the top with added thickness or use a really stiff top.
Author:  Jody [ Fri Dec 28, 2007 3:02 pm ]
Post subject: 

   what noone is talking about is the reason martin changed the design! my understanding is they were doing the forward x braceing until heavier strings become more popular in the 1940's ( or there abouts) they shifted the bracing back to make the top stronger to lessen the warrantee problems caused by the heavier strings attached to the forward bracing ...


    I also dont understand why stew-mac is eliminating the use of the "popsicle"( as they  call it ) brace...   jody
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/