Feathered Braces vs Tucked Braces

[Steve Eubanks]

I came across this description on the Woolson Soundcraft website:

However, the most significant feature used in Woolson Soundcraft top bracing is that the braces are not tucked into the linings. Tucked braces severely restrict the motion of the top and drastically reduce its ability to vibrate. Therefore, Woolson Soundcraft guitars have feathered braces at the edge of the linings which gives a much more vibrant "alive" quality to the tone.

I can envision what I assume this means, but would love to have a more experienced luthier explain what he's saying, as well as some opinions as to whether what he's saying is legit. I mean, if "feathered" braces truly produce better sound than "tucked" braces, why doesn't everyone do it?

Thanks,
-- se

[John Parchem]

"better sound" is a subjective description, especially for a steel string. If I am trying to build a guitar that sounds like a Martin or what ever Brand, I get information and build the guitar like they build it. I keep the X at nearly full height above the bridge and in the upper bout before bringing it down to an 1/8 to tuck in. That upper part of the X is an important structural component. If I make an xbraced guitar I only tuck the top of the xbraces into the rims. I have done all sides of the X tucked and only the top and do not really hear a difference that I can attribute to the change. I switched to only tucking in the top braces as it is easier than tucking in all the ends.