Official Luthiers Forum!

Ok I am wanting to clarify somthing in my mind . Which , as you all know may take a while

Example : Lets say I have a Mandolin that has Top thickness of .115 and back thickness approx the same . Sides approx .110 .

I know there is a WORLD of other issues that come into play here , but for the sake of simplicity im wanting some basic directional advice .

IF I am thinking right The THICKER WOODS would respond better to med/ heavy strings , and the thinner you go the better it would respond to lighter weight strings .

Is this directional thinking correct ?

_________________
The Shallower the depth of the stream , The Louder the Babble !
The Taking Of Offense Is the Life Course Of The Stupid One !
Wanna Leave a Better Planet for our Kids? How about Working on BETTER KIDS for our Planet !
Forgiveness is the ability to accept an apology that you will probably NEVER GET
The truth will set you free , But FIRST, it will probably Piss you Off !
Creativity is allowing yourself to make Mistakes, Art is knowing which ones to Keep !
The Saddest thing anyone can do , is push a Loyal Person to the point that they Dont Care Anymore
Never met a STRONG person who had an EASY past !
http://wiksnwudwerks.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/GatewayA ... rAssembly/

Maybe. This is where experience comes into play. Forget the sides. They just don't contribute much of anything to the tonal qualities of the instrument.
There is a point at which a given guage of strings drives the top perfectly, the tension is just right and the load on the top is perfect. Lighter strings will not drive the top and heavier will overload it. As a general principle you might say that thicker tops need heavier strings, thinner lighter.

up to a point, yes you're right.

go too light and the strings won't drive anything, regardless of how light the top is. too heavy and the tension will collapse the instrument.

I made a octave mandolin with a 500mm scale.

regular mando gauge strings (11-40) just flopped and it sounded awful.

mandola strings (14 - 49) were SO much better and the instrument really came to life.

_________________
My soundclick xx luthier blog xx luthier soundclick

To extend this discussion one more step, what thickness should a spruce top be for mando-cello strings.

My original top was 0.085" and it lasted less than three months. The replacement top will have X bracing, maple bridge-plate and thicker spruce.

I am joining the plates at 0.125" and any opinions would be appreciated. ( 0.085" is heavyis for ukuleles)

Bob

Bob, I'd be thinking in the .170-.180" range if it's a mandocello. My 12 string guitars are in that range and tuned down to B or C. We're talking some poundage of pull here not ukes with nylon strings...

Haans:
Those thicknesses sound awfully heavy. Can you get some reasonable sound from something that thick?

Today I cut out the top in 0.125" sitka and decided to use X- bracing at 0.60X0.38". My bridge-plate will be 0.070 maple 2.5" wide. The bouzouki is 13.5" dia with maple back and sides.
If this one doesn't work I will have to do it your way.

Thank-you for the information. I should have asked for help sooner.

Bob

My twelve strings are really FAT sounding. Strings are .070-.015...try that on yer Martin!
Mandocello strings are pretty hefty, and that's why I mentioned my 12's. My mandolas are around .062 on the bottom end (carved top), and while I haven't made a cello (don't feel like carving a dugout canoe), I can only imagine the strings on it!
Good luck at .125 and hope it works for you.