Official Luthiers Forum!

We aren't arguing whether a tomato is a fruit or vegetable, but whether it is pronounce tomayto ot tomahto. We have the sawyer's terminology and the user's teminology, and as long as the user gets what they want in a product, it doesn't really matter. Brent has a lifetime of using his set of terms, and he isn't about to change, but as long as he delivers III grain with little or no runout when that is what you want.....

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

Alex, you mean t'mater right?

Silly me! Actually meant P'tater! Thanks, Ken!

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

So Alex, you're saying - T'mater, p'tater, dont'mater .....

As long as I get what I'm looking for, it dont'mater! I hope that the CND$ heads north in value, some day, so I can get some of Brent's nice III grained sitka, or whatever you call it!

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

I was searching online for pictures for someone and stumbled onto pic from an article in Fretboard Journal, that reminded me of this thread we had some time back.
What I see here for your understanding of sawing, is the original wedge that appears to be about 10" wide/deep x 6-7" thick. that is re-sawn into bracewood stock. Flat sawn bracewood stock, that will yield Vertical grain cut braces when re-sawn again.
You see the first cut and the second cut as marked were both Vertical grain cuts and each of those boards and the remaining wedge was flat-sawn into roughly 1" thick boards. The only boards that remain VG cut, are the nose boards at the top of each initial #1 and #2 cuts. This is because to the grain orientation in relation to the cut board. That being, the growth lines are at right angle, or perpendicular to the wide face of the board.
Had this wedge been in our shop, I would dissected either an archtop guitar front and bracewood or 3 flat top guitar fronts and some bracewood, depending on other criteria we cannot see by looking only at the end grain.
The article is here.. [https://www.fretboardjournal.com/features/fretboard-summit-om-guitar-build/

I would still like to know what the best orientation of braces would be. One could determine this if they had some identical square cut stock, like 1/4" x 1/4" dimensional with sander the the same. and then test each for deflection and breaking shear or fail, with each board setup 1/4 turn of the other and record the results.
I don't have the measuring equipment or time for this, but I'll bet someone does and may like to know the results as well.
We at ASW produce and stock bracewood in both orientations of cut.

There have been several efforts made by different people to do quantitative studies to address the question of grain orientation versus stiffness in braces. The overall take away for me has been that there is not a clear difference on average between the two orientations. The main practical advantage of orienting the grain perpendicular to the soundboard surface IMO is that the brace is easier to carve than if the grain is parallel to the soundboard surface.

Do you have access to the American Lutherie journal? Issue number 127 from last fall has a fairly extensive study on this written up in it.

Personally, I would not buy the brace blanks as shown in the photo because I much prefer that the wide dimension be perpendicular to the grain instead of with the grain. That is also how most of the brace stock I've seen for sale is cut too.

_________________
Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right - Robert Hunter

[quote="J
Do you have access to the American Lutherie journal? Issue number 127 from last fall has a fairly extensive study on this written up in it.

No I do not. I was a member and received the magazine for a number of years. But I am just a lowly wood cutter of tonewood products for the last 20 yrs, and the main particulars of soundboard and brace-wood of lutherie I have learned from doing and knowing wood but leave the intricacies of lutherie to luthiers

Personally, I would not buy the brace blanks as shown in the photo because I much prefer that the wide dimension be perpendicular to the grain instead of with the grain. That is also how most of the brace stock I've seen for sale is cut too.[/quote]

It makes sense that most bracewood produced is VG cut because, it's a fall down product, produced when cutting soundboard stock. One would virtually go out of their way to produce flat sawn bracewood in most instances of production. it's certainly easier for us.

A few months back I made the mistake of gluing on a lower tone bar brace flat sawn, grain like this ==. I noticed it the next day when I started carving it. It got me interested so I did some deflection studies very similar as to how you mention. I made (I think) 1/4 x 1/4 x X length pieces and did deflection on both the VG orientation and the HG orientation and I found that the HG was actually stiffer... So I just left the brace in place

It was a kind of scratch back of the envelope experiment but it did match up with other results that have been published. HG is stiffer than VG. It's just a bit harder to carve and maybe for some builders that would rather have less stiff braces. I don't think at those dimensions expansion is an issue.

+1 right on! IMO

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

Wow. A blast from the past.

I prefer split chunks straight off the billet over everything else. That way I don't have to worry about the grain wandering hither and yon (quite as much) when I am splitting it out to verify its suitable for braces... That part is already done.. I can go to the saw and cut.

Second most - I prefer flat sawn stock... Very very few split out straight down the middle... But with flat sawn - I have 4" or 6" or whatever for the grain to run diagonally before I am SOL...

I don't like 1" thick quartersawn stock for bracewood.. There is simply no room for working around any runout or twist. Its too thin for me to split it to check..

I did a thread on this a few years ago. It is on the fixtures section.

http://luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10117&t=24665&p=493701#p493701

Just scroll back to the top once you hit the page. Hope some find this useful.

Thanks
Shane

_________________
Canada

What does the acronym HG stand for? In my 40 yrs in wood and processing, I have never seen this.

Horizontal grain. Flatsawn...looks like convention adopted like VG. Always preferred QS or FS myself.
I have a lot of trouble with this thread as old coots used QS exclusively. Has anyone tried gluing the test braces to a spruce top section and testing the deflection? What about warping over time? Flatsawn can get awful twisty and who knows what humidity or lack of does. Anyone measure?
Of course I was the exception to the rule by using laminated bracing for the X. Most of them had QS on all the other bracing. Backs were laminated bracing. Moot anyway, just wondering...

OK Horzontal grain.... I don't think that's a term used by any sawyers/sawmills... But now I know how it is referenced. I would bet laminate braces would be the cat's meow. But much more labor to produce. Look at glue lam's in construction vs. solid beam regarding strength..

I think it's just "their" way of interpreting a clear understanding of of the two sawing techniques. Cabinetmakers always referred to them as QS, rift, or flatsawn boards.
The laminated braces I glued up were probably not what you are thinking. I used to glue up laminations of approx .1" QS spruce with an .070" lam of Brazilian or Wenge and .1" QS spruce. I believe the original intent of Larson bros. was that it improved the tone more than added strength. Seems to impart a clearer tone than normal X. They actually even tried metal...probably aluminum.

TruckJohn, You would just love our flat sawn/split face. It's flat sawn with the split face showing grain parallel to the width cut
http://www.alaskawoods.com/products.php ... etail=true

Brent - that is fantastic. Almost all of the "split bracewood" I picked up several years ago looks like knotty firewood in comparison.... And probably was...

Haans..... Several folks started using "vertical grain" because it refers to the outcome where "quartersawn" refers to the process - not the ultimate outcome. I have bought plenty of "quaretrsawn" wood that was hardly vertical grain.. Especially stuff out of smaller trees like maple and cherry. The majority comes off the saw between 45 degrees and maybe 80 degrees... There may only be one or two boards off a quartersawn log that are close to vertical grain.... Groan....

That is dependent on the way it is sawn. You are clearly talking about "plain sawing" when you say that there may "only be one or two boards...". A log prepared for QS is first "quartered". The quarters are sawn to get the most yield by sawing one side and then the other making smaller and smaller boards in width. The wedge above is half of a quarter log. I would have had no problem buying such bracing. It is about as quartered as you can get...the grain runs parallel to the side of the cut brace. Wood cut at a 45 is not QS. It may be advertised as QS, but we all know that is like most advertising, a lie wrapped with some small truth. Wood cut at 80 degrees is very lousy QS.
Also consider that you are talking generally about "lumber". We don't use lumber, we use specialty wood cut for the accuracy we pay for. Took me several years to find the sawyers I used for my instruments. They were both builders too.
Whether or not ya'll use flatsawn or QS stock for bracing is not my concern. My concern is no one has brought out their 50 year old guitar with flatsawn bracing. It's well known that QS is the most stable of all the cuts.
It's all pretty moot to me as I said, but by promoting all this flatsawn bracing stuff, some of you are going against 400 years of sense and tradition. I don't much care, but you are influencing beginners with your little experiments.

We are not talking about which is a stiffer cut, we are talking about stability.

Done...

Haans, I don't know that anyone is actually promoting the flat sawn stock. Everyone has their own recipe. I really don't care who uses what, But do like to know why. I started this thread to offer some nomenclature clarification and some observation. I know what most folks want and do. Which is taking VG cut boards and resawing into flat sawn braces, that are then installed on edge, in a vertical position, when glued to the braced surface. A few do another couple of ways. I stumbled across the photo, that gave me an opportunity to help in anyone's, everyone's, edification. There are as few folks, that have veered from "tradition" and use this flat sawn produced stock. And as a matter of fact, We're shipping another pallet of flat sawn stock to Lowden Guitars in Ireland, who has used this flatsawn cut of product for many years. Whatever bracewood stock any of you folks get from ASW, you can be sure it will be a very high quality product. And produced from 100% salvage sourced, old growth temperate rainforest timber.
The End?

The End? Maybe a lull or pause, but the End? Not likely! Talking brace wood is like talking politics!

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

Brent, I would have had no trouble taking that 1x4 (?) and re-sawing into 1" tall QS brace stock out of which I would have 2-3 brace blanks each (were it red spruce). It looks to be of VG quality Sitka.
Both my suppliers/sawyers would get 1-2 downed trees a year. One was the late Ted Davis.