While changing strings today on my PSD28, I put my hand in side the guitar body to check the bracing
and found one of the short braces right below where the "X" meets does not go all the way to kerfing on the side of the guitar.
It tapers down and stops approx 1 1/2 from the side of the guitar. This is on the pick guard side of the guitar.
Has anyone else notice this. This brace should go to the side an tuck under the kerfing..
Jim
BRACING ON MY PSD28
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 jimeanes |
BRACING ON MY PSD28 |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 4 (10/20/09 06:20 PM) |
|
||
|
sixiron150 |
|||
|
Posts: 149 (10/20/09 10:46 PM) |
jimeanes wrote:I had a luthier look at my PSD-21. He didn't mention anything like what you are describing. However, he might have simply overlooked it. Perhaps Gypsyjazz Steve will chime in. He has probably looked at the braces on more Stanford guitars than anyone else on this forum.
In the family:
Stanford PSD-21 Martin 000-15 Fender DG100 ________________ Time flies... except on a treadmill. |
||
|
intune66 |
|||
|
Posts: 3526 (10/21/09 12:21 AM) Moderator |
I'll check mine out, Jim.. Not much of a brace expert but we have a few on the forum. How is the tone and playability? Any problems there? What were you
checking for on the bracing initially?
Ryan
_____________________ Stanford PSD-10, 20, 21, & 28 Blueridge BR-70, 60-AS Aria AD-80, R.K. RDC-57 |
||
|
gypsyjazzguitars |
|||
|
Posts: 600 (10/21/09 02:38 AM) |
Why should it go under the kerfing? That's one of the numerous causes of tight guitars. I'm unaware of any book of standards. Would be nice to have.
|
||
|
dmcowles |
|||
|
Posts: 3311 (10/21/09 03:07 AM) Admin |
Because Martin's pre-war models had braces that were under the kerfing, many people think that's how they should be. Top bracing is to keep the topwood
from splitting and bulging, while allowing optimal vibration. Placement and shape of bracing and use of tone bars is for the purpose voicing. There is no
"rule of thumb" that says bracing should be under the kerfing, AFAIK. Ryan's question is most relevant; how does it sound and play?
Edited to add: I looked inside my PSD28, but didn't use a mirror or reach inside. The back bracing is clearly positioned under the kerfing, so I can only assume top bracing uses the same standard. Sometime when I have an inspection mirror, I'll look at the top bracing.
You forget it and I'll forget it, but I'll remember it, and don't you forget it!
Last Edited By: dmcowles
10/21/09 03:54 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
davis |
|||
|
Posts: 242 (10/21/09 04:42 AM) |
I'll try and get a look at the guts of my 21. I would think as little bracing as possible while still maintaining structural integrity would be the goal.
Stopping the bracing short of the side walls of the guitar certainly would give the top more ability to vibrate I would think.
|
||
|
gypsyjazzguitars |
|||
|
Posts: 601 (10/21/09 05:28 AM) |
Keeping thick bracing away from the edge, except the main X, seems to be promoted by some builders as a good thing. Unless something is touted as a copy, I
can't see any problem.
The bracing on violins and mandolins stops short. The fan braces on classicals stop short, too.
|
||
|
jimeanes |
BRACING ON MY PSD28 | ||
|
Posts: 5 (10/21/09 05:48 AM) |
No problem with the tone or playability of the guitar, in fact I love it. Would sell
|
||
|
Fstpicker |
|||
|
Posts: 1168 (10/21/09 07:00 PM) |
My PSD10 doesn't have the side brace going all the way out to the kerfling either. Apparently, it is the way they are made to be.
I don't really care either way, as long as it sounds wonderful like it does, is all that matters to me. Jeff |
||
|
dmcowles |
|||
|
Posts: 3320 (10/22/09 06:41 AM) Admin |
Just pulled out my inspection mirror. My PSD28's top braces stop short of the kerfing as well. Clearly a design element, and no big surprise, may well
contribute to the huge, open sound of these puppies. I say, whatever they're doing, keep it up.
You forget it and I'll forget it, but I'll remember it, and don't you forget it!
|
||
|
jimeanes |
BRACING ON MY PSD28 | ||
|
Posts: 6 (10/22/09 02:20 PM) |
Sounds like its part of the design. I was looking for a guitar to take the place of a HD16-LSH I foolishly sold and
|
||
|
Fstpicker |
|||
|
Posts: 1169 (10/22/09 03:31 PM) |
Jim,
I used to own a HD16RLSH also, and I still miss it at times, although not too much any more. I have wondered how these Stanford dreads would sound with an enlarged sound hole as well. I've come close to trying it out on my PSD10, but have chickened out in the end. I know that my HD16RLSH sure was alive and projected well with the LSH. You get some much more of everything with it...more mids, more trebles, more bass, but no boominess. Jeff |
||
|
intune66 |
|||
|
Posts: 3628 (11/04/09 07:54 PM) Moderator |
I've heard that the enlarged sound hole idea is sort of a gimmick. Cant say I know firsthand from experience whether that's true or not though. Might
depend on what guitar it's done on and the way it's braced etc......
Ryan
_____________________ Stanford PSD-10, 20, 21, & 28 Blueridge BR-70, 60-AS Aria AD-80, R.K. RDC-57 |
||
|
jimeanes |
BRACING ON MY PSD28 | ||
|
Posts: 13 (11/05/09 06:07 AM) |
I think you get more projection with a larger sound hole. When I purchased mine, I a/b with a new Bourgeeois, a used D-18GE
|
||
|
Fstpicker |
|||
|
Posts: 1187 (11/05/09 10:07 AM) |
jimeanes wrote: Same feelings here, Jim. If economic hard times hadn't raised their ugly head, I would still have it. Jeff |
||
