-
This is one of those areas of subtlety to be sure, and impossible to compare since you can't swap out different types of braces on the same instrument to A/B the sound.
But the impression is that kerfed braces are cookie-cutter factory parts that one can just install on any top and have them be functional. This is in contrast to the impression that carved braces are fit carefully to a specific top, and can be shaved to tune the top's overall resonance. At a high level, this seems to make sense so I believe it to be true. But it doesn't mean it holds up 100% that every carved brace beats every kerfed brace.
I have a 1928 L-5 with carved braces and a 1933 L-12 with kerfed ones. Judging only by its tone, the L-5 is a more refined instrument with an uncannily even response across all registers. More cork sniffery here, but the original Loar and immediate post-Loar instruments that continued to be made according to his guidelines allegedly contain individually tuned parts. That's what the signed Master Model label was actually attesting to, and it's documented in write-ups on Lloyd Loar the man/engineer.
I am sure that this practice went out the door not long after Lloyd did, but I am betting that my '28 was made the original way. You can literally tune the guitar and as each string comes up to concert pitch, you'll hear a slight boost/focus in the guitar's resonance, as if it was tuned to vibrate best at those frequencies. It may be wishful thinking but I really do experience that, so who knows.
Anyway, the change to kerfed braces would seem to make individual part tuning a thing of the past, and represents a cost-cutting measure (it's Gibson!) that makes one hanker for the old days. Really old days in this case!
-
05-08-2018 03:57 PM
-
Hi every one, I just purchased a 1936 L-4, It sounds unbelievably good..
strong bass, sparking treble, big volume and projection.
I took a picture of the braces and they look solid?
It surprised me.
-
i'm a bit puzzled. Are we talking about top bracing or side bracing? Because kerfed bracing does not offer good support. It's one reason that many kerfed-braced tops sink and don't hold their shape properly. Kerfing is used to allow the wood to take extreme bends like in the sides of a guitar. It's flexible and it's cheaper than hand-carving bracing that has to fit intricate curves. But it does not offer the same kind of support as carved bracing.
Originally Posted by sgosnell
My luthier used to work at the gibson and fender custom shop and in the past, has advised me to steer clear of guitars that had tops with kerfed bracing.
-
Having seen a LOT of guitars with kerfed top braces I would have to say “many kerfed-braced tops sink” is a way overblown statement. Loose top braces is an entirely different matter though. I’ve even seen a couple of Gibson laminated archtops that had been made right after WW2 that had no top braces at all and no sink at all. If the kerfed braces are tight and have an intact reinforcement strip I don’t think those tops are any more prone to top sink than solid braced tops. Originally Posted by jzucker
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
My luthier was a manager at the gibson custom shop and has probably seen more kerfed tops than you and I combined. I'm pretty happy with his expertise in this area. And from a physics and design standpoint, the kerfing is what allows the wood to bend. You do *NOT* want that in a top. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
-
All braces can bend. They are just wood after all. The reinforcement strip over the kerfed side has longitudinal grain and the chances of that stretching allowing the brace to bend significantly are awfully small. Again, that is assuming all is intact and glued in place. Originally Posted by jzucker
When would he have seen kerfed top braces in the Gibson Custom Shop, outside of a few possible restorations? I don’t buy that he would have seen a large number of them there. They weren’t making them in the custom shop.
I would agree with one thing. Jack Zucker should never buy a guitar with kerfed top braces.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Some of the earlier photos show kerfed braces with a cap strip glued on top for stability and strength. My ES-175 1959 VOS reissue from 2014 doesn't have those - should I be worried?
-
I've always heard kerfed bracing is big deal to L-5 aficionados. Does it really make a difference?
-
No. Yes.
To a great extent, whether it makes a difference depends on the player and how much they obsess about this sort of minutia. As long as the braces are intact and the top hasn't sunk, either probably work fine. Is there a tonal difference between them, I can't say. I have never been in a position to compare.
-
Don't you have a bone saw somewhere?? Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
I bought one of those endoscopic cameras to use with my phone, but its light is not very good. I’m trying to come up with a good way to get more light inside the guitars. I’m not sure you can tell much with this pic.
-
It depends on whether you’re buying or selling. Originally Posted by olejason
-
In terms of market value, it makes a definite difference. Kerfed braced guitars always sell for less than their solid braced counterparts. Originally Posted by olejason
In terms of sound quality, it comes down to individual guitars. As a general rule, the very best sounding 16” Gibson guitars have solid braces in my opinion. BUT, there are many kerfed braced Gibsons that are excellent, and better than the majority with solid braces (and the kerfed ones will cost less than the solid braced ones that don’t sound as good).
I don’t care what Jack says. If a kerfed braced guitar has a solid, sunken top for 80-90 years, it’s not suddenly going to sink in.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
This is my '37 L-7 - - x braced. I bought it around 2000 and it looked like this. I almost didn't buy it 'til I got my luthier to look at it. He said it was settled but stable. Here I am 25 years later and it never moved any further. Oh yeah - and I've had 1 L-5, another L-7, and 2 ' boutique ' guitars since, and guess which sounds the best ?
Just my .02 cents...... ( sorry about the photo size. )
-
The ‘30s x-braced guitars were actually carved that way with kind of a double hump. They all look that way. It’s actually not sinking. Originally Posted by Dennis D
This is my '37 L-7 - - x braced. I bought it around 2000 and it looked like this. I almost didn't buy it 'til I got my luthier to look at it. He said it was settled but stable. Here I am 25 years later and it never moved any further. Oh yeah - and I've had 1 L-5, another L-7, and 2 ' boutique ' guitars since, and guess which sounds the best ?
Just my .02 cents...... ( sorry about the photo size. )
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
With some past "in person" experience and as far as I know, X-braced L-7's didn't have kerfed bracing.
With that "sway back" look I used to think X braced 17" Gibsons of that period had top sinking issues, but I now suspect they carved the tops that way (or at least flattened the top under the bridge) to accommodate the X braced layout.
The f-hole edges in that photo are still aligned side to side......with top sinking the interior edge would be noticeably lower.
It's been awhile since I've paid attention to this stuff so could be wrong....
-
Thank you for the confirmation TRM!
-
Yes! Also, I’ve never seen kerfed x-braces in a Gibson archtop. Originally Posted by zizala
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Owned both kerfed and solid 16” Gibsons—L-5 both ways, L-7 both ways, and L-12 solid. If kerfing makes any difference, I sure couldn’t tell you what it is. Each individual guitar was different but I couldn’t ever say this or that attribute was due to kerfed braces. My main players now are a kerfed L-7 (courtesy of ThatRhythmMan) and a solid braced L-5. They are both in the same ballpark; L-5 is warmer, L-7 a little more cut, but I could never say it was the braces. Mostly I’ve used the kerfing as a reason to negotiate a lower price on a guitar that was just as good, so that’s a feature I guess.
Also +1 on the x-braced top being fine—that’s just how they carved them. Had an amazing x-braced L-5 where the center of the top was almost completely flat, but clearly was not sinking. Those guitars tend to be very interesting.
-
If a top is going to sink, it will sink where the wood is the thinnest and weakest, not where it's thickest and strongest. The thinnest part of a top is the edges, near the recurve, and that's what will sink. The center of the top will not sink longitudinally.
-
I remember in another discussion here that someone had mentioned the ' double hump ' carve of most x- braced 'L-7's including mine pictured. It's about an inch below level. I have no reason to dispute that poster, I just have never held another Gibson w/ a carve like that, so I've never been able to at least compare the tops. Wish I had !
-
Here you can clearly see the kerfed bracing in the x-ray of a 1930 Gibson arch top:
1930 Gibson L-5 — The Archtop Project
To address Gilpy's question, Gibson introduced kerfed bracing as a cost saving measure. The brace could just be bent to fit the curve of the top rather than having to be carved, planed, etc. Probably saved at least an hour per instrument. The problem is that they are prone to breaking at the thin part of the wood. It is probably part of the "Gibson sound."
Gibson ES-175N that’s sporting the broken brace issue. - Old School Guitar Repair
Kerfed bracing where the sides meet the top and back isn't a problem because all that's providing is a gluing surface, it's not under load. Under the top, it's what's holding the arch up against string tension, so when the kerfed brace fractures then the top starts to collapse.
-
Try shining a small flashlight through one of the f-holes. A flashlight on a flexible wand would be ideal. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
-
I have a far better endoscope now, but that guitar was sold years ago. Originally Posted by dconeill
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I had a '60s or '70s ES-175 for awhile around 1980 that had kerfed bracing. The top of that guitar was collapsing, which is why I didn't keep it very long. I also had a '40s L-12 that had solid bracing. Originally Posted by Dave Richard
I know this doesn't answer your question, but it's all I got for ya.
-
while not as many as some of the folks here, i have/had a good number of vintage acoustic gibs archies. i was surprised to see the kerfed '30 L-5 in the archtop project reference as i thought the kerfing started later. i learn a lot reading on this great site. we all know vintage gibs stuff can be amazingly inconsistent in features (see my post on the dating L-50 thread). i have an early '32 L-5. it's more like a type 2 build, kinda players grade, but its voice and responsiveness is from another planet. truly exceptional. its as good as my '39 D'a but in its own way. i don't know if the voice is at least party due to its solid braces or more to the somewhat random conjunction of the wood and parts that were used to build it. another factor is that the original owner played it semi-professionally until he left this bandstand on earth. which are the more important factors? the sum of its parts and its life? i don't know but its a blessing to have such a guitar. as the old gibson ad says, "man, what a guitar!"
to dave the OP, i have a pair of '37 L-50's from the same FON batch. i'm not home just now but i assume it has kerfed braces like in my '35 L-50's (one with a maple neck! more gibs inconsistency). one of the '37 L-50s has a horribly mismatched top plate relative to grain, halves are probably even from diff spruce trees. however, it is a great guitar. not quite the L-5 but a very very good tone.
back to your regular programming.
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos