| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Sounboard arching http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=7162 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | James Orr [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 12:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi everyone Kevin Ryan once told me he doesn't arch his soundboards because he hasn't had one dome up on him. Not arching the soundboard would seem to take away a few steps and make a few more easier. I'm interested in a couple more voices on this. What would you say the cons are of not arching the soundboard? |
|
| Author: | Michael McBroom [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 12:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The biggest con I can think of is the guitar's soundboard will be more prone to cracking or splitting if it is exposed to an excessively dry environment for even a relatively short period of time. Heat can do it too, but I suspect that's more a function of the top losing moisture faster at higher temps. If a guitar with an arched top is exposed to low humidity, the arch will begin to flatten out. If the arch is not there, the wood fibers become stretched cross-grain and cracks are likely to develop. Having a soundboard "dome up" would be the result of being exposed to higher than optimum humidity, but this is generally less of a problem, unless the wood fibers actually beccome crushed as they are compressed together due to expansion. The way I see it, having an arch already established allows the top to flex either way easier, hence reducing the risk of premature failure. Best, Michael |
|
| Author: | drfuzz [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 1:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
For me, I see two additional factors to the comment Mike made... The Larson Brothers (prewar builders)arched their tops, and an awful lot of their instruments are still in good shape. I also see it as prestressing the top. Similar to the way iron rods in tension are used to prestress concrete, making it much stronger. |
|
| Author: | tippie53 [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 2:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Martin had the top radiused from the get go. I have a 1888 00-28 with a top radius. There are 2 reasons they do this. One is for strength. The 2nd is to allow for top movement in humidity changes. Top infamous martin crack wasn't from the shringage of the top but from the pickguard. In the olden days the pickguard was put on under finish. This was adhered straight on the wood. As the wood dried and the pickguard didn't the top cracked at the pickguard. This is known to this day as the martin crack. john hall |
|
| Author: | Bill Greene [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The man I built my first guitar with, Brad Nickerson, does not arch his flattops. I was fascintated by this and specifically talked with him about it. He's built a few hundred guitars now, and says he has never had one come back for any kind of repair related to a humidity crack in the top. Not that it cannot happen, but it can happen to radiused guitars, too. Oddly, he believes the exact opposite of what Michael said, namely that "not" artificlly arching the top actually allows it to flex in both directions easier than if it was arched. I'm a newbie, so I have no experience...but it's hard to argue with Brad's sound...or Kevin Ryan's for that matter. Plus, who really buys a multi-thousand dollar instrument, and then doesn't treat it properly regarding humidity? It's so easy, even a caveman could do it. More than one way to do things I suppose. And my first guitar? No arch. |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
if you've spent a few years in the repair game you know that a lot of folks spend their thousands and don't take the time to properly care for their instruments. the old more money than sense syndrome... |
|
| Author: | tippie53 [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 12:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have seen guitars both ways. I have seen few Flat flat tops that don't crack. Here is why the tops are arched. 1 st strength 2nd movement ( if it shrinks the top sinks and will crack no matter what you were told. I have seen and repaired too many guitars ) 3rd with the radius this makes the 1t neck angle work better. Yes you can build flat but I can bet you will see a problem down the road. Humidity can cause the tops to move a good bit. All builders that I hang out with that do this professionally will dome the top. Rememeber the top will expand a good bit from dry season to wet. Have fun building john hall |
|
| Author: | Cocephus [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 6:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I hadn`t thought much about this until now, but wouldn`t a raduised top be beneficial to the action later down the road? I`m thinking it would provide a happy medium when the top does it`s changing, and still keep the action within some sort of tolerance. I shuddering at the thought of the strings laying on the 20th fret when in one place and then finding them 1/4" above it in another location/enviroment. Maybe I`m just blowing smoke rings, here. |
|
| Author: | Louis Freilicher [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Brad Nickerson's flat top guitars are very stable. I built my first guitars with him as well. He puts a finish on the inside of his guitars, top back and sides, but not on the braces, blocks or linings. I can only think that putting a light finish on these surfaces would help the instrument stabilize more slowly to climate changes. The only drawback to this inside finish that I can see is that it could make it more difficult to repair cracks in the future if (and when!) they develop. Any thoughts?? |
|
| Author: | David Collins [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
In addition to stability under tension and forgiveness to lack of humidity control, I have always considered tone a primary reason of radiusing a top. Piano makers have always considered what they refer to as the crown of the soundboard as key to shaping the tone. If you go in to many piano shops they will often have a small demo soundboard with a tuning fork mounted to it, and an adjustable arch to the top to demonstrate the tonal importance of keeping your soundboard humidified. I can't imagine myself ever building a true flat top. To me they generally sound rather sloppy and shapless (yes, even those from a number of well respected current builders). Of course that's my own opinion, but I know many customers who bring thier dried out guitars in tell me the tone seemed to spring back to life after being rehumidified, and the top returning to a good radius. I suppose it could be well though of as part of the bracing, given that a compound radius stiffens the entire board and so effects the way you can design and voice your bracing. I am a very big fan of 30's Gibsons in which many tops appear to be an astonishing 18'-20' or greater radius, with relatively light bracing. These guitars generally have also remained much more stable and survived better than other flatter topped guitars from the same era. |
|
| Author: | James Orr [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm appreciating the discussion. I think it can be educational. If I were to play devil's advocate, I would wonder why, if it's such a garaunteed way to have a cracked top, Kevin's never had an issue? He's close to 100 guitars a year I believe. |
|
| Author: | Michael McBroom [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I wonder how rigidly Kevin braces his sides. It seems to me that if a guitar's sides are not braced against either the back or top in a solid fashion, such as to maintain their own perpendicular orientation, then they can flex in and out (+ or - from perpendicular) as a way of ameliorating the movement of the top as it shrinks and expands. Best, Michael |
|
| Author: | Jeff Doty [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 9:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
On a true flat top wouldn't the string tension pull the soundboard into a small dome or arch, or at least a little belly behind the bridge? Maybe this could be where the give and take of environmental changes gets accounted for. Or maybe if you did not tuck your baces under the lining that would allow for some movement. I don't know, just thinking out loud. Jeff |
|
| Author: | Bill Greene [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sometime ago, "somebody" said that Kevin Ryan doesn't use side braces. I have no idea if that's accurate. Anybody know? |
|
| Author: | Mattia Valente [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Bill Greene] Sometime ago, "somebody" said that Kevin Ryan doesn't use side braces. I have no idea if that's accurate. Anybody know?[/QUOTE] Based on the handful of 'contruction' pics I've seen of Kevin Ryan's guitars, yup, no side braces. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|