Brock..
I believe it is too thin. You better send them to me asap.
Ha Ha Ha!!!
Walter
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Brazilian, Plate Thickness, Horse Trading http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=3424 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Through a little creative horse trading I have acquired a very old, very dark set of BRW. It was really one of those deals you just can't pass up (even if I just end up using it for "parts"). However..... The back plates are a little thin. .085" Would you even try to build a guitar with this? |
|
| Author: | Mario [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thin? I'd take them down another .005".... Honest! |
|
| Author: | tippie53 [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't see that big a problem. I have built that thin john |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've heard of builders bringing it down to .070", so you're ok. |
|
| Author: | Rod True [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Giddy up Brock couldn't resist. |
|
| Author: | WalterK [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Brock.. I believe it is too thin. You better send them to me asap. Ha Ha Ha!!! Walter
|
|
| Author: | Bobc [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd say there just about perfect. With finish sanding and all they'll be down to .075 easily. |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks. I usually take my sides down that thin, but rarely do I let the back go down that far. |
|
| Author: | Dave-SKG [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That puppy is going to sing! Somogyi -" build to just before failure" - gonna feel like there's a motor inside. 
|
|
| Author: | Tim McKnight [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've repaired old Martin's and Gibsons in the .055" range and they still sing like angels on steroids. |
|
| Author: | John Mayes [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Depending on the model/wood stiffness/my mood I normally go down to .070-.080. Have at it dude! Post some pics of this set too! |
|
| Author: | Shawn [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 2:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You should have no problem with that thickness. Almost all of the classical guitars I build are BRW and the thickness is at that thickness or thinner. Note that I am building classical dimensions so I have no experience as to stability at dread type dimensions. The really dark sets I find to be more fully oxidized and much more stable than younger, more colorful (lighter) sets. That being said, I also reinforce the sides with linen tape which is accepted in classicals whereas steel strings typically have side braces. This is a good idea as BRW is not always stable and you will have little control after the guitar leaves your shop as to how it is kept humidified. While I dont build cutaway classicals (some say that they ae no longer classical) I have built very tight waist bends on reproductions of historic instruments and have thinned sides to about .065 with no problems or cracking. The sound should be killer. |
|
| Author: | Jimson [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 2:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
This is an eye-opener for me as I've not yet built anything with Brazilian rosewood (will I ever?). Is this because BRW is stiff enough to go so thin? |
|
| Author: | Don A [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Where is that envy icon when I need it!  Nice find Brock.
|
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
 It was just dumb luck.
|
|
| Author: | Don A [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Brock Poling] It was just dumb luck.[/QUOTE]
Be glad I don't live close. My ancestors weren't known to be horse "traders". I was told they decorated many a tree.
|
|
| Author: | Shawn [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Stiffness is a big part of being able to go thin...as wood gets thinner it becomes less rigid or "floppy" which dramatically reduces the resonance of the piece of wood. It is a delicate balance between going thin enough to maximize resonance without taking it to the point were structural integrity is compromised. There are a number of classical builders that are going very very thin with their tops and then to keep the top from collapsing reinforce the top with lattice bracing. While these guitars are much louder than traditionally built classicals, there are those that feel that with the tops very thin that it loses the tonal range (color) and loss of the overtones that fill out the sound. Stiffness is not limited to Brazilian Rosewood as there are many woods that are stiff enough to be thinner than another species that is less stiff. Stiffness is obviously not limited to hardwoods either in that Sitka or Adirondack can be stiffer than a number of woods used for sides and backs. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|