Larrivee volume / shaving braces

[jeremy3220]

Has anyone other than me noticed the quiet G and A strings?  

Me and a few others have noticed the low E was quieter.



A lot of this bracing theory about what's best is really about what one prefers. Scott thinks having braces butted against the X causes problems but pre-war Martins didn't just butt the braces they actually inlet them into the X. Most builders butt or inlet the braces with the X.

Does making the inside smooth and rounding the corners always make the guitar sound better? Not to everyone. Have you ever seen inside a vintage Gibson? It looks like they were made with a hatchett. I know one builder(the name escapes me) who builds in the vintage Gibson style and intentionally leaves the inside rough. Here's a Gibson bracing library - http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/topic/1364/t/Vintage-Gibson-bracing-library.html?page=1

It is my contention that each note reaches a resonance with a specific ring on the top

This I don't understand. I didn't think there was anything to contend because we can see where certain frequencies resonant and don't on a certain top using Chladni patterns. http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/guitar/guitarchladni_engl.html

[jeremy3220]

My Sound is Round model sees things differently.  It is based on simple physics and compares a soundboard to a speaker cone.  Or a Dobro cone, which is what first brought the idea to mind.  Basically, each note played finds resonance in a circular pattern, the diameter of which is inversely proportional to the input frequency.  In a similar manner, a drummer's cymbal makes a specific pitch, which  depends on the diameter, density of the alloy, and thickness.  It is a mass-at-a-distance thing.  Given uniform thickness and density, any cymbal's resonant note depends only on its diameter. 

Your last statement says a lot. It's true that with a circular plate of uniform thickness and density the resonant frequencies will form rings. Guitar tops are not circular nor are they uniform in density and thickness with braces glued on.

[GA-ME]

Me and a few others have noticed the low E was quieter.

On my 000-60, this is the case. The low E is anemic and the A is the loudest, most present, of the open strings, followed closely by the D.

Does making the inside smooth and rounding the corners always make the guitar sound better? Not to everyone. Have you ever seen inside a vintage Gibson? It looks like they were made with a hatchett. I know one builder(the name escapes me) who builds in the vintage Gibson style and intentionally leaves the inside rough. Here's a Gibson bracing library - http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/topic/1364/t/Vintage-Gibson-bracing-library.html?page=1

Jeremy, are you referring to John Grevin here? He has been known to leave some messy work inside of a fantastic sounding L00 style guitar here and there.

[jeremy3220]

Jeremy, are you referring to John Grevin here? He has been known to leave some messy work inside of a fantastic sounding L00 style guitar here and there.

I was thinking it was Greven but I'm not sure.

I know a few builders who's philosphy it is to voice the top and when it sounds good they stop regardless of what it looks like. For instance if they take down a scallop and it sounds the way they want they don't bother rounding off the edges.

[GA-ME]

I know a few builders who's philosphy it is to voice the top and when it sounds good they stop regardless of what it looks like. For instance if they take down a scallop and it sounds the way they want they don't bother rounding off the edges.

It is kind of hard to argue with some one who does it this way if they are getting the good results they are looking for. What the end result instrument sounds like is most important, after all!

[count savage]

Fascinating topic--altering the guitar. I asked my guitar guy Will at Spruce Tree 25 plus years ago to shave the braces on my '64 Gibson J-50 and basically he refused. Now talk about an overbuilt guitar. Anyway, I guess I wouldn't consider it with my D-03R.  For one, I play in a little bluegrass group -- a banjo and another guitar -- and the Larrivee stands up fine.  Plus, it sounds so good recorded that I wouldn't fool with it.   However, For What It's Worth, (double entendre sort of intended) here's Steve Stills in a 1970 Guitar Player cover story talking about how he shaved the braces on his Martin D-45.  We all know how great that guitar sounds:

"" I recently bought a D-45, a new Martin. Incidentally, it might be good to put in the magazine that I am searching frantically for an old D-45." (Hear that gang?) "Anyway, I bought this and shaved the braces down, which is a little trick I learned from a guitar maker in New York named Mark Silber. When Martin moved the factory, and went into a kind of production business, the braces on the inside .... it's like we do the best we can .......but now they even use a different kind of wood. Martin has a few strange practices, but they're still the best in this country.""

[GA-ME]

............and then "Have a nice day".  Which you obviously don't mean.  Sarcasm.

Scott, I actually did mean have a nice day. So, I'll try again, Have a nice day.

[tadol]

Real pain when you start mixing art, science, and craftsmanship together. Hard to tell where one stops and another starts, and theres never enough credit to spread around.

But it is all very informative and entertaining!  Thanks to all who contribute!

Tad

[Zohn]

  I won't mention that name on this forum again....  

[OdiePiker]

I might as well add my saga to this thread.

A few years ago I had the opportunity to buy a used SD-50 at a very good price.  It was (and remains) the best guitar I could afford, and it was a huge step up from what I owned at the time.

During the next year-and-a-half I gigged with the box and practiced incessantly.  As my skills grew, so did my dissatisfaction with the sound of the guitar.  A certain amount of "jadedness" is to be expected with any axe over time, but I was in no position to think about looking for another instrument.  I decided to try to mold the guitar into my dream axe.

My first complaint was the apparent volume of the guitar.  Despite the assurances of my bandmates that the guitar sounded fine, I didn't feel "enveloped" in the sound, and tended to thrash it to hear myself.  I carefully cut a sound port in the upper bout over the built-in reinforcement.  This was a big improvement but..

..now I felt the guitar was entirely too bright.  I confirmed this by recording myself - yup, too bright.  I wanted the box to sound as old-timey as it looked.

I read everything I could find on guitar bracing.  Lots of information out there, some of it conflicting, some just plain "iffy", but I took away two important (and fairly consistent) theories:  (1) Shorten the braces and get more volume and (2) square corners are bad.  Plus one big takeaway:  Get stupid, and you will ruin your instrument.

Over a few months I did the following, restringing and letting the guitar settle in between steps:

1.  Bone saddle.  Took several tries to find a piece of bone (from Larrivee) with the right density.  Result:  better sustain and a little "rounder" sound.  Still too bright.

2.  Changed strings from phosphor bronze to 80/20.  Result:  a fatter tone, but not fat enough.

3.  Raised the action a full eighth of an inch.  Result:  a major improvement in the sound all-around.  Wanted more bass, though.

4.  Planed and sanded the corners of all the top braces.  Did not change the height at all.  Result:  more volume, but no substantial change in the timbre.

5.  Planed an eighth off the bottom braces.  This was a revelation.  Brought the mids way up.  I felt I was on the right track.

6.  Sanded the corners off the bottom braces.  Result:  a bit rounder sound.  Just a bit.

7.  Planed an eighth off the top braces.  Big jump in volume, still a bit too bright.

8.  Sanded the corners off all top braces.  BINGO!  Following the existing contours of the braces, but taking a little meat off everything, then rounding all right-angles off, I got exactly what I wanted.  The previously weak low E now growls, the highs are sweet, not tinny, and a light touch is all it takes to get good, solid music out of the guitar.

I am a tinkerer.  I don't have a single instrument I haven't "tweaked" in some way.  I'm also foolish enough to try anything that pops into my head, if I think it will make a positive difference.

Do I recommend anyone else try this?  Heck no.  Am I glad I did it?  Heck yeah.

[hadden]

Great post OdiePikier

By top brace do you mean the main Xbrace? I'm just not sure what specifically you mean by top and bottom braces. Planed an eighth as well I'd like to know more about.

[Big E]

Hi Odiepiker, thanks for sharing that with us. That is exactly how I think. I just haven't tried it with my Larrivee,,, yet. I'm going to try it on my camp fire git.. I'll let you know how it goes.

[OdiePiker]

Great post OdiePikier

By top brace do you mean the main Xbrace? I'm just not sure what specifically you mean by top and bottom braces. Planed an eighth as well I'd like to know more about.

When I say "top" or "bottom", I'm referring to the braces on the front or back of the guitar - not just the main x-brace, but everything.  I used a small plane to remove about an eighth of an inch from the top of each brace - every brace except for the big honker above the sound hole.  After that process, I used the plane and some 120-grit sandpaper to round off the shoulders of the braces.

[tadol]

Agreed - great post OdiePiker -

Please post some pics, especially of your sound port - I don't know if you can get any shots of the interior, but it sound like you've done exactly what alot of others are thinking seriously about -

And it also needs to be noted that the -50 has the enlarged soundhole, making getting hands and tools inside possibly alot easier.

Your descriptions of the changes in sound you experienced along the way are very good too - thanks for taking the time to write it all out.

Tad

[Zohn]

Agreed - great post OdiePiker -

Please post some pics, especially of your sound port - I don't know if you can get any shots of the interior, but it sound like you've done exactly what alot of others are thinking seriously about -

And it also needs to be noted that the -50 has the enlarged soundhole, making getting hands and tools inside possibly alot easier.

Your descriptions of the changes in sound you experienced along the way are very good too - thanks for taking the time to write it all out.

Tad

Hey Tad!
You already have bone rattlin' tone and cannon coughs from your Barri hey mate? 

[tadol]

Hey Zohn!  I have to admit, I finally removed the JP Bari set last night and put on some EJ-19s just to feel the difference - and it is amazing. They're heavies, but I feel like I'm playing extra lights! Lost the bottom end, the lowest I can tune it to is C without it feeling floppy, and it sounds sweet there - but not the rumbling bass baritone sound I love. I'm gonna leave these on a while, but definitely the EXP-23s are next ( or EJ equivalents in single strings if I can get the .070 ).

I am tempted to sand the sharp edges on the braces, especially as the large sound hole on it means its the only Larrivee I can get my hand into. I'm gonna work my way through different strings and tunings first - and save that fun for some long rainy weekend in the future!

How about you - didn't you track one down recently? Don't remember seeing any pics -

Tad

[hadden]

Holy smokes, I just went to the link of the pics of insides of old Gibsons. A couple of them look like a cellar someone would get locked in from a horror movie.

The mess inside one makes me think there must have been a glue fight at the shop. Not pretty.

[OdiePiker]

I'm too "noob" to attach pictures.  Need four more posts.  I'll get them up at some point.

Cutting the hole(s) was an interesting project.  I opted for a paw-print (the name of my group is Three-Legged Dog).  I cut the pattern out of cardstock, glue-sticked (stuck?) the pattern to the guitar and traced around the pattern wiith a dry-erase marker.

I then took a Dremel with a very fine bit, starting from the inside, working toward my marks.  Once I had the shapes cut to size, I used fine sandpaper to smooth the edges and lightly beveled the finish down into the holes.  Next I used a curved Xacto blade to cut away the stray fabric of the reinforcing patch, and finally stained the raw edges with some red oak stain.

[Scott van Linge]

Me and a few others have noticed the low E was quieter.



A lot of this bracing theory about what's best is really about what one prefers. Scott thinks having braces butted against the X causes problems but pre-war Martins didn't just butt the braces they actually inlet them into the X. Most builders butt or inlet the braces with the X.

Does making the inside smooth and rounding the corners always make the guitar sound better? Not to everyone. Have you ever seen inside a vintage Gibson? It looks like they were made with a hatchett. I know one builder(the name escapes me) who builds in the vintage Gibson style and intentionally leaves the inside rough. Here's a Gibson bracing library - http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/topic/1364/t/Vintage-Gibson-bracing-library.html?page=1

Jeremy,

You seem to be trying to refute everything I've said here.  So, to clarify, I do not say a guitar cannot sound good unless if follows the ideas I mention.  What I am saying is that a guitar cannot produce its full potential of sound if it has square corners on braces or braces butting against the X brace. 

Martin now doesn't butt braces, and I talked with John Calkin (#3 person at Huss and Dalton) once, who said that he changed their bracing to reflect this, based on an article I wrote, and liked the change.  Several years ago, I re-voiced a Goodall, and noticed that not only were there no braces butting against the X, but also, the bridge plate had its edges beveled, so that the sides of the bridge plate didn't touch the X, either. 

It's interesting to read OdiePicker's post, in which he mentions that rounding off all the corners made the improvement he was looking for.  Thanks for the validation, OP.  Sounds like you did this before this thread came up.  Great minds at work can sometimes come up with the same great idea!

As far as my observation that the 12 Larrivees I've re-voiced all had louder low E and D strings, you say that the low E is quieter.  Must have been simply random chance that I found the only 12 made that exhibited this. 

GA-ME,  Sorry if I misread your comment.  Have a nice day, yourself.

Scott

[jeremy3220]

Martin now doesn't butt braces

I think they do. Here's a picture of a Martin (serial# 1291860) with braces butted against the X.

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk86/johnnycanso/HD-16R/Guitars116.jpg

Jeremy,

You seem to be trying to refute everything I've said here.  So, to clarify, I do not say a guitar cannot sound good unless if follows the ideas I mention.  What I am saying is that a guitar cannot produce its full potential of sound if it has square corners on braces or braces butting against the X brace.

Not really, I'm saying everyone has their preferences. It's fine if you like the sound of guitars with no braces butting against the X but a lot of builders don't care to do that.

I tend agree that rounding off the brace corners on most guitars would improve the sound but for a different reason - the stiffness to weight ratio. Of course in a typical guitar all the braces form corners where they are glued to the top anyway.