Official Luthiers Forum!

Owned and operated by Lance Kragenbrink
It is currently Sun May 18, 2025 2:41 pm


All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:37 am 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 3:21 am
Posts: 684
Location: Nashua, NH
Why is it you don’t see carved top or arch top stringed instruments with fixed bridges?
I have heard that arch top guitars can have a better dynamic range but can lack in volume. Flat tops with fixed bridges are louder but seem to favor a narrow dynamic range. Are there good reasons why we don’t see this combination?
Thanks,
Wade

_________________
Wade
Nashua, NH
http://www.wadefx.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:54 am 
Offline
Mahogany
Mahogany

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:20 pm
Posts: 56
Location: United States
It's been my experience that true archtop guitars (not thinline electrics) are typically louder than flat top guitars.

Gibson did have some fixed bridge archtops, about 100 years ago (I've played a 1906 version) - but it's hard to evaluate the sound, since it was such a unique instrument.

Also, the first Gibson harp guitars had fixed bridges, but they switched to floating bridges not too long after their introduction.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 5:32 am 
Offline
Koa
Koa

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:38 pm
Posts: 1106
Location: Amherst, NH USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
If I understand the physics correctly, and I may be totally wrong here, The purpose of the arch in an arch top instrument is to have a thin top that will withstand the downward pressure of the strings. You get a downward pressure only if you have a bridge and a tail piece. Archtop have considerably less bracing than flat tops.

If you were to mount a fixed bridge on an arch top, you wouldn't get a pure downward pressure. You would get a twisting pressure. Also, the arch of an archtop is not a simple sphere but some other complex curve. Making the bottom of a fixed bridge exactly match that curve would be a challange. It took me an hour to fit just the feet of a violin bridge recently. I can't imagine getting a bridge that fully conforms to the top to fit right so I could glue it down.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:22 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood

Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 12:50 pm
Posts: 3933
Location: United States
The original Orville Gibson guitars had glued down bridges.

What Mike said: glueing down the bridge and tieing the strings to it torques the top, and you have to make it heavier or add bracing to withstand the load. Why not take advantage of the geometry and just use a tailpiece?

An article in the recent 'VSA Papers', the putative replacement for the old Catgut 'Journal', claimed that the twice-per-cycle tension change in the strings could drive a violin top. The language in the article is vague, but basically it's because the strings are not parallel to the plane of the top, but at an angle. Changes in tension push down on it. This is the main 'benefit' claimed for flat-top type bridges, and it may bnot be all tat much of a difference after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
phpBB customization services by 2by2host.com