| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| X - Braces, anyone using 1/4 inch? http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=1839 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Jeff Doty [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hey Everyone, Just wondering if anyone is using quarter inch on their x-braces? I talked to a few people at the NW instrument makers show who said they use 1/4 as their standard x-brace width, and have had no problems. The current top I am working on is 5/16, but I am thinking about 1/4 on the next one. Jeff |
|
| Author: | John How [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use nothing else but .25" braces, cept the big fat one up top. |
|
| Author: | WalterK [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jeff, I think the size of the X brace has a lot to do with the thickness of the top? Or the type of top wood you are using. I am planning to make an all mahogany guitar using 1/4" bracing. Walter |
|
| Author: | bob J [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jeff, I have been communicating with many and it seems to be universal that 1/4"braces are used with all smaller bodied shapes: L-00,0,00,000,OM and some S/J. |
|
| Author: | John How [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
If I'm building a larger guitar I will usually leave the braces taller but most of my guitars are fairly small however I do build a 16"er and use .25" braces about .75" tall at the x. |
|
| Author: | HankMauel [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes. |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
a bit off topic, but it is interesing to note the differing and confusing use of the sj designation on this site. it's historical and proprietary use is by gibson to mean their southern jumbo design, a large bodied guitar by any definition. have a 1950 version on the bench as i write; it ain't small!!! yet there are some here who use the term to refer to a small body. makes me wonder what the sj plans being prepared really are for? |
|
| Author: | Jeff Doty [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 2:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for the help! Just trying to avoid doing anything stupid. 1/4 inch seems plenty strong if left nice and high. I tried to break one that was just under 3/4 inch by 1/4, took some doing! Jeff |
|
| Author: | Pwoolson [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 2:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
For all intents and purposes, I always use 1/4" braces. that said, mine are ever so slighly bigger for the x braces because I run the joint through my table saw and my 1/4" dado is slightly under 1/4" so I add a 1/32" chipper which makes the whole 1/64" over 1/4" for a good snug fit. As long as you keep them fairly tall (3/4 or so) I'm pretty sure you'll be just fine with 1/4". |
|
| Author: | arvey [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I cut it to 1/4 x 5/8 inch and then shape from there. I use this on everything from my size 5 to my SJ. I use the term SJ as it seems to be comonly used today refering to a guitar similar in size to the J-185. A Small jumbo, Shaped like a Jumbo but about the size of a Drednaught. |
|
| Author: | Paul Schulte [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use 5/16" X-braces on larger (OM and bigger), I plan on makeing an L-00 size with 1/4" x-braces. I do make the lower face braces and finger braces 1/4". I think the slightly wider braces provide more glueing surface area. I've seen some high end factory guitars with the upper back braces that look to be around 3/16" wide, which is a bit scary to me. Not much glue surface there. Then again I tend to think long term. |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
richard i'm wondering how that useage came about. the gibson sj, a term in use commercialy by them since the late '40s, is somewhat shaped like a round shouldered dred with a slightly wider lower bout, yet remains a very graceful instrument without any of the (to my eye at least) rather bulbous shape of a tru jumbo, a la the j-180's and their ilk from taylor or guild or whomever. |
|
| Author: | arvey [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My impression is that the term Small jumbo just developed up over the last number of Years as the Old Gibson J-185 style guitar has become so popular. Because it has the same basic shape as a jumbo or Southern Jumbo but is smaller. In typical fassion people began shortning the tem to SJ and that, I think is when the confusion began. The term Small Jumbo seems to have been around around for a long time as Has Southern Jumbo. Both have the same innitials therefore the confussion. Of course Gibson also uses SJ to refer to their Super Jumbo, so even they are not being consistant. I refer to my model based on the old J-185 as my Small Jumbo Model and I use the Innitials SJ to designate it (ust Like I use 5 for my size 5 L-00 for My grand concert model, 000 for my Auditorium etc. There are all comonly accepted designations. Sj seems to be used for guitars ranging from 15.5" to 17" at the lower bout but the basic shape is always the same. |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Sat Apr 30, 2005 6:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not sure who coined the term "Small Jumbo", but the person most commonly associated with it is James Olson. It's really close to the dimensions of an OM, except deeper, and rounder. Lower bout is around 15.5", and the upper bout is about 11" or so. Smaller than a dread by a good bit. The OLF Sj is not the same size as this. It is bigger, more like a....well I don't know what exactly, but perhaps more like the J-185. |
|
| Author: | John Mayes [ Sun May 01, 2005 2:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
All my x-braces are .290. Not quite 1/4 but not far off... |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|