Assess this back bracing?

[Dave Bagwill]

This picture is from Howard Klepper's site. How would you assess the strengths and weaknesses of this BACK bracing system? (Try not to focus on the carbon rods which are another issue entirely).

[ken cierp]

Looks nice --- lots of work -- it does not prevent the back from caving in as well as ladder bracing -- if it presses against the player torso not likely it would not sound different then any other brace pattern. And why in the world would one not give themselves the benefit of being able tap tuning the sound-board after it is attached to the rim --- gluing on the back first negates what in my opinion is a major adjustment opportunity.

[Dave Bagwill]

That last is a good point.
Supposing just for the sake of discussion, that the top was glued on first, and tap tuning done to one's satisfaction. Then the x-braced back, which had also been tap-tuned, was glued on. In addition, the player was able to keep the back away from his torso, much like classical players.
It SEEMS like the x-braced back would be more 'responsive' but I'm not sure that's an advantage.
Perhaps in a double-backed system it would work?
Always an interesting subject, at least. :-)

[Tom West]

Can't speak of what is on Howards mind but I think this bracing will work in a strong monopole mode similar to the monopole mode on the top thus reinforce the sound of the top. Somogyi does a video where he talks about the top and back working together. It's like the the output together is more than the sum of the parts. Gore in his books talks alot about similar bracing and the top and back working together.Myself I'm still trying to get a handle and the smarts to try this type of bracing.
I see Ken has posted the Somogyi video Part 2 on Voicing and Tap tuning. Worth while having a look.
Tom

[Ray Ussery]

I'm a "New-bee" for sure...but I sat down and played Wayne Henderson's #400 for a half an hour...He pattern's his guitars after the 1937 Martin with a few brace shape tweaks on the top of His 000's to satisfy his own taste in sound with His finger picks..but as far as I can see and He says so and I believe him, ALL of His backs are ladder braced to the exacting spec's of that era..as are the tops of the D's....and of course the old growth RW and Red Spruce He has didn't hurt either.. but I have NEVER heard a better guitar ever, you could "Feel" it in every nerve in your body..it's something one has to experience to understand...His backs always go on last. He's really never fiddled with success...no pun intended!
This doesn't mean that anyone else's design wouldn't sound as good or better...Just my subjective experience and .02 or what ever this New-bee's opinion is worth.. :>)

Ray

[ken cierp]

Well you'd need to replace the back on one of Wayne's instruments to hear the effect. I do know he varies a bit from the vintage insturmnets re: top bracing and sanding etc. So there is feel and experience involved as well -- bottom line his and all other guitars are a vast combination of elements and varibles -- no "Magic Fairy Dust"/silver bullet. Not to say that using Wayne's constuction features would not be a great model -- it certainly would be.

I may have mention this already in this thread, but by simply moving the back of the guitar away from the player torso has a quantum effect on sound quality and volume -- any guitar! Some day I will finish my "isolated" double back design -- in other words the reflective inner back is suspended and does not touch the outer back layer.