Official Luthiers Forum!
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Romanillos Back Bracing ?
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=13447		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  vachterm [ Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
the recent threads about Romanillos' course in siguenza and the active participation of J.French and other people who attended this class at some point, leads me to this question.

what i understand, from Roy Courtnalls book, is that romanillos shapes his back braces so that their "top" is also curved to the same curve given to the back.
so unlike the usual back brace ,it isnt flat at the "top" and curved a the "back", but rather convex at one edge, concave at the other.

i know other classical makers use that "system" too
(Rene Barslaag comes to mind).

in case Jose still shapes his back braces like that, has he ever given any reasoning as to why?
and even if he doesnt any more, or simply never explained why he uses it, can YOU talk about it a little bit?

Udi.

Author:  Alexandru Marian [ Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
It probably changes the way back moves a good deal.  Instead of being a more rigid center, with elastic edges (like the top is) it is more elastic in the center and rigid at the edges.  But this also depends on the height of the braces.

I hope Shawn and Joshua will chime in, as i am very curious about the issue myself.....
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:36 am ]
Post subject: 
Actually its very similar to the way he treats the harmonic bars. You scallop the center and leave the edges at full height. I'm going to try to dig up a picture.
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:00 am ]
Post subject: 
You can get a good look at the braces and harmonic bars at this site.

Classic Guitars International

What he does is scoop the center out of his braces and harmonic bars.  They are 15 mm at the edges and 10 mm in the center.  The harmonic bars are not scooped until they cross over the cutouts for the side braces. (Learned most of this from Shawn.)  He also told me that Liam no longer scoops the main back brace in the lower bout.  He thinks that weakens the brace too much in that critical wide area, and might not protect the back enough from a hard bump.

The little slide show is pretty informative as to the Romanillos construction technique.  To stop on a particular picture, right click, and unclick the <play> selection.  To restart it, right click, and click the <play> selection.  You can also zoom in.  (At least that's the way it works with Firefox)
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:21 am ]
Post subject: 
Udi, he likened it to a diving board when he spoke about it in 2001. Saying that the brace only needed the stiffness at the edges.

In my opinion when you make the braces like this you are going to gain a bit of depth to the basses (at least, that is how I percieve it for my guitars).

For me, I've reverted more towards the Torres route and leave my back braces at full height all the way across. Sometimes I still do it the Romanillos way though, depending on how I feel.

I think this works great for the open harmonic bars on the soundboard.

I dug up this picture from five years ago:
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Interesting to note that they've beefed them up a little bit. I just looked at the guitar I made on the course in 2001 and the height at the middle was 6mm.
Author:  Jim Kirby [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:40 am ]
Post subject: 
Waddy - I get an 'invalid URL' message from your link - I can't get it to tell me what it's trying to get to, either (Only thing I miss on my Mac so far is the right mouse button!)

JK

Author:  DP LaPlante [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:48 am ]
Post subject: 

And just to confuse things further <GRIN> Jose' this year was quite pleased and excited about a guitar he had completed recently which followed the Torres bracing pattern (SE 83) for both front <and> back bracing. We were all given the choice of doing the Romanillos system as described above, or the Torres.


As I had made a copy last year of the Torres SE 114 (Jeffrey Elliott's GAL plan) I thought it might be wise to continue the exploration of that approach. Jose' feels strongly that the original Torres concept needs more exploration. I don't know if he has totally abandoned his own pattern (he stated quite strongly that he considers bracing and bracing patterns to be "structural only") but perhaps now that he is free from having to produce guitars commercially he can explore that which interests him. 
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:55 am ]
Post subject: 
See if this works.

http://www.classicguitar.com/claudio.html

Don't know why it didn't work before.  Are you using Firefox on your Mac?
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:58 am ]
Post subject: 
Joshua,

Do you wash coat the inside of your guitars?  Don't mean to steal the thread, but that brace and back looked finished.
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Dave - I agree with all of that. The Torres design DOES need to be explored. Thing is, everyone thinks of it as the "Torres/Hauser" tradition, when the two makers had vastly different approaches.

We think of Torres as the traditional design but the deeper you delve into it the more you realize everyone has totally forgotten it.

I'm constantly getting closer and closer to the way Torres did things and its constantly making a difference. Some things I prefer to do differently (like the side/neck joint with wedges) and the aesthetics - but when it comes to the important things: soundboard design, back design, thin sides, distance between strings and soundboard, overall lightness of construction... its all helping.

Pepe Romero once said "The closer you stay to Torres the closer you stay to perfection". Amazingly, its difficult to actually GET close to Torres.

With that said, the Hauser design has just as many nuances that have gone overlooked.
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:18 am ]
Post subject: 
Waddy I used to give a bit of shellac to the braces and the foot inside the guitar, but not anymore.
Author:  DP LaPlante [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:10 am ]
Post subject: 

Joshua,


Also as part of my self imposed re-exploration of these traditional designs over the last couple of years I built a copy of the 1937 Hauser I using Richard Brune's (new and improved...the one in the little white box) plan. I agree with you totally that despite the superficial resemblances between the Hauser and Torres designs, where it really counts their approaches are entirely diffferent.  Interesting as I used to perceive the Romanillos design  as more Hauser based (V-joint, head shape) but it is obvious now that it is far more in line with Torres' approach.
Author:  vachterm [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:08 am ]
Post subject: 
is Romanillos familiar with the kasha theories?
what does he, or any of the Torres "purists" think of it?
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:16 am ]
Post subject: 
Dave - I think early in Romanillos' career he was quite influenced by Hauser. After all, thats what he had available to him and what he based the famous '73 guitar Bream bought on. But as time went on I think he tends toward being quite influenced by Torres. This must have started a good while before he decided to research for the biography.

Especially since you got to take the course this year you've probably seen the absolute pinnacle (thus far, anyways) of his Torres influencce. Its kind of interesting, Gerhard Oldiges - who probably has as much first hand experience with original Torres and Hauser Sr. guitars than anyone - kind of went the opposite route, gravitating from the Torres influence and later rediscovering Hauser. He attributes this to being influenced early on by Jose as Jose's interest was moving from Hauser to Torres. Kind of funny, if you think about it.
Author:  jfrench [ Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:24 am ]
Post subject: 
Udi, Jose is very familiar with all levels of guitar making, including the "scientific" methods. He's a humble man, if you asked him he would probably say its not a "Spanish guitar". He spoke of Richard Schnieder as being his friend.

I think its pretty obvious through his guitars and what he teaches that he's not big on the kasha thing.

Very few people are, really.

Author:  Shawn [ Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:27 am ]
Post subject: 
In the Torres bracing pattern that some did this year at the Romanillos class, the back braces were done full height across the width of the back without the dip that Jose did in the Romanillos pattern. The Torres back braces are rounded on top except for the last 25mm or so on each edge so a support brace can be glued to the side and to the back bar.

The back braces stop 1mm from the side on each end although the side support is glued to the side and the cross bar. The grain direction of the side support glue block is in the same direction as the side, not folowing the grain of the back bar.

As Joshua said, Jose is a humble man and will not speak poorly of other builders, even when he disagrees with their approach. Jose spoke at the 1981 Toronto guitar festival on a panel with Dr. Kasha and Righard Schneider and got along well with them. When asked about the Kasha approach to the classical guitar he has that he could not compare it to a Spanish guitar as it was a completely different instrument (which I am sure everyone would agree with).

When asked about Richard Schneider, he said that he felt he was a very good craftsman who is very thoughtful and was always looking to refine the sound he got out of his guitars, which is why he assumed tht he became interested in Kasha's designs.
Author:  vachterm [ Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:18 am ]
Post subject: 
never had the chance to hear a Torres nor a Hauser in person.
but for those of you, more experienced and familair with their work, is there a "german" style of building/sound and a "spanish" one?
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:32 am ]
Post subject: 
Hauser learned to build in the Spanish style.  The only one I ever played was owned by a friend, and was built by the Old Man between '50 & his death in '52.  To me, it had a very clear, clean voice.  Not boomy at all.  Spruce top, so even temperament across the board.  Body depth was surprisingly shallow, when compared to, say a Ramirez.  Very easy to play.  Nice setup.  Finish was minimal.  Not particularly stunning to look at.  Very understated.
Author:  DP LaPlante [ Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

For what it's worth, these I think are the main differences in approach between Hauser I and Torres....


Torres: Top Domed and Thinner , no bridge plate, braces larger 5.5-6mm wide


Hauser: Top flat (slight arch perhaps, but no doming) and Thicker, bridge plate, braces much smaller at 3.5mm wide


There are other differences such as back and side thicknesses (Torres' are thinner) but I think these are the important ones. Torres has made his tops thinner (and bracing stronger) Hauser appears to have relied on the thicker (stiffer) top with minimal size bracing.


both of these approaches work quite well, but produce a different guitar. 


Best


 

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/