Official Luthiers Forum!

I love to study intruments of the past and am currently writing a book on Vintage Gretsch guitars. In particular, about the construction methods they used in the 50's. I had mentioned to JRessler about how Gretsch used different grain directions on very specific bracings in thier archtops.

So here is a nice topic for discusion: Gretsch used Parallel bracing instead of X bracing on all thier archtops. On every Grestch guitar I had the opportunity to inspect or get detail pictures of, the following bracing has been verified. The brace closet to the bass side has the grain running diagonally from the lower outside corner to the upper inside corner closest to the centerline. The treble side bracing has the grain running side to side.

Below is a picture of a 1959 Gretsch looking at it from the end pin. This particular guitar has the addition of what is called Trestle bracing too. That is the soundpost type structure that you see under the bracing that connects the top to the bottom. If you disregard the extra bracing in the picture for now, you will see what I am talking about. Regardless of whether the Gretsch guitar has the additional trestle bracing or just the parallel bracing, the grain structure of the bracing is the same. Diagonal on the bass side and side/side on the treble side.




This appears to be no fluke. I have inspected 100's of Gretsch guitars and they always have had this bracing/grain thing going on.

Thoughts?

_________________
Joe

One of the many things that I have learned from David Collins while hanging out in his shop is that things that we often tend to look for deep meaning when we are reviewing vintage instruments were done as they were for one reason - manufacturability.

If I was a betting man, and I am, I would bet that you are indeed correct about seeing this on every example but I suspect that the reasons behind it were the routine that they used to mill brace billets and the dimensions of the brace billets that they used. They were probably trying to optimize material utilization.

Sorry I don't mean to be a wet blanket here or negative I just see this as a function of how Gretch manufactured guitars and not something that requires demystifying. Or maybe the ghost of Stradivarius braced their guitars with Borax bottle in gloved hand trying to stay warm from the mini-ice age........

LOL! Thanks for the reply Hesh.

While I would not doubt that manufacturablitly plays a very large roll in how those old guitars were built, I am not positive on this particular topic. Here is why, I have had these braces off on several old Gretsch's waiting to be reglued. Each time, the left and right brace was interchangeable with the other. No significant difference in the shape of the bracing (it was a pressed top not carved). So if there is no difference in the shape of the brace, you would think they would come out of the same parts bin and not two different ones. I have some more pictures, but probably not on this computer.

Maybe some of the archtop guys will chime in.

Joe

_________________
Joe

Are these guitars arch top or are they laminated ( bent topped) guitars ?
jack

I agree with Hesh (I guess I kind of have to, since he referenced to me ). I think what you're seeing is braces pulled from a parts bin at random - keeping in mind that it was probably filled with braces mixed together from dozens of different boards, and a variety of cut angles. It looks to me like slab cut spruce, probably run through whatever shaper they used and chosen fairly haphazardly.

Even when you find an apparent pattern like this, I would hesitate to infer a strategy behind it unless you can hypothesize a motive for that pattern. There's no real motive I can imagine for running treble braces at about 7 degrees off flat and bass at around 20 degrees off flat. It looks like a normal results from slab sawn spruce. Even if the bass is consistently off further than the treble, it's important to remember that the odds of drawing a royal flush are exactly the same as drawing any other combination. I think it would take a great deal of careful documentation of grain angles to gain any statistical certainty that the pattern is significantly more likely to be intentional than random. Statistics often surprise us when the numbers tell us what we though was totally uncanny was actually not unlikely at all.

If there is indeed an uncanny similarity in the degree and direction of the grain slant, there may still be a reason behind it. Since there's no immediately apparent benefit to tone or structure I can think of, I would look first at reasons like supply and manufacturing processes.

Consider this hypothesis:

Gretsch receives their spruce rough, in a wide range of grades with some boards ranging up to 20 degrees off quartered. They have certain minimum criteria in receiving to grade spruce worthy of tops. The other boards are tossed off to become less visible brace stock. Due to the shape of the boards they receive, yield is usually maximized (or labor is minimized) by cutting them flat sawn. Cutting the flat boards in to braces is most easily and consistently done with the cupped side down, leaving the grain in the resulting braces always angled down in the same direction. The boards are habitually tossed in to a box from the same direction relative to the cut, went to the shaper or template pulled out in the same direction, etc.

That's just one quick idea, not really thought out and likely full of holes. I'm sure there are tons of better ideas as to how they could have ended up that way. Maybe they got their top woods in 9"-10" width, and the least quartered end was cut off to become brace stock. Then for some other reason, the majority got cut and shaped with the grain angled in a consistent direction. Who knows?

My point is that unless there is a good hypothesis as to quality-motivated intentions for a seemingly consistent pattern, it's often reasonable to first look at supply, cost, tooling, and procedures as potential reasons. It's like people romanticizing about Leo's endeavors toward ideal tone in his choice of woods, while it's more likely that he chose ash bodies because they were the cheapest hardwood around and readily available in widths that would minimize need for joining. Alder was later switched to not for tonal reasons, but because that in spite of it's slightly higher cost and less availability in good widths, the cost and labor of increased joining was found to be outweighed by the savings in finishing, as it didn't need pore filling. Necks were 4/4 flat sawn maple - no need to guess on the motives for that.

Like Fender, Gretsch was a production shop, and the cost in time and material to intentionally seek out cuts of wood at such a seemingly senseless angle would seem unlikely. It may just be chance that seems close enough to consistent that we want to believe there's some magical motive behind it. Or it could be a consistent pattern due to source of materials, tooling, or the some routine habits of a person who cut and separated brace stock all day long.

There are a lot of reasons it could be the way you've observed, but I would be very careful about wishful speculation (especially if you're writing a book). If you do find it so consistent as to be statistically unlikely to be random, I think you would really need come up with a few hypothesis to research, which I'm sure could be quite a challenge.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

You touch on very good points! That is why I asked. I have over 4000 guitars documented. About half of these guitars I have been able to inspect enough to confirm that pattern as accurate. The other half I just did not have access to the bracing to confirm. All those I looked at did have this pattern though and thats a lot of guitars. In the picture the side to side grain appears slightly diagonal, but in most examples is was pretty flat side to side. I just did not have access to pics when I posted this. I may try and post a few more. So about ~2000 guitars have had this bracing...the others I could not check. Not that it really matters, but I could post the serial numbers of all those I have checked...but it takes pages. (You can see some of my serial number documentation over at the GretschPages.)

So what I am asking is: Is there any reason a builder would have done this? I don't know enough about arcthop construction yet to say yes or no. So at least a few of you can't think of any reason for this. I wonder if that means there are none, or we just can't think of any.

Thanks,

Joe

_________________
Joe

Sorry Jack, I thought I had replied. Must not have hit the submit button. These were mostly 3 ply lamintent tops heat pressed to shape and then the braced from underneath. There were some solid carved top with the same bracing, but the majority were pressed out of plywood. The wood thickness of the top was about 3/16" thick with the ply layers all about even in thickness.

Some were even braced on the back too, but for the most part just parallell braced.

Joe

_________________
Joe

What would be the motive?

Here's the next catch. I hope you'll forgive me for my skepticism, but I can't bring myself to fully trust your observations yet. I emphasize strongly, that I mean no offense by this. I'm just not familiar with your observation and recording techniques.

Scans like the one above are wonderfully concrete, though I'm sure much too impractical to do very often. Then observing grain orientation by eye is of course a rather gray area on a shaped brace installed in an instrument. You may be able to tell by the limited visible grain pattern that one brace is pretty much flat, while another looks a bit more slanted. If you were to have scans to show the precise degree however, I wouldn't be surprised if the pattern started to seem less consistent and more random. Of course loose braces or disassemble instruments are easier, but I don't know the number of those you've had to examine.

Then there's the well intentioned and subconscious aspect of observations. If one looked over thousands of guitars and was struck with a peculiar feature that seemed to pop up, it is very easy for one to immediately zoom in on that feature when it does occur, but not take note of it when it doesn't, being completely unaware of how selective their observations have become. From situations not unlike this to more extreme cases like numerology beliefs and conspiracy theories, I think this tendency is quite common. What they share is being completely unaware of how one subconsciously cherry-picks observations, and a high level of certainty in the discovered patterns.

I emphasize again, I am not saying this applies to you or your observations, and I'm quite open to the idea that you may very well have found a consistent pattern. As a researcher yourself though, hopefully you can appreciate my skepticism of seemingly unlikely patterns until I know more about how the research was carried out. To be quite honest though, it's one of those things I think I'll have to keep in mind to personally observe as old Gretsches come through my shop.

If there is indeed a consistent pattern (and I'm not suggesting there isn't), I would be inclined to look at supplies/yield/tooling/operators as cause to the pattern before intentional engineering. It just doesn't line up with any acoustical or structural theories that immediately come to mind, and not to disrespect Gretsch, but more importantly I don't think it fits the profile of the company. Yes, they built some very good and very cool guitars, but to intentionally select and cut such a specific and peculiar grain orientation seems a very unlikely priority for a factory such as theirs. Intentionally cutting and positioning braces so specifically would take a good deal of time, lower the yield from boards - a tiny, specific nuance like that, costing more in production and with no immediately foreseeable benefit to the product, just doesn't make sense for a company like them trying to get products out the door and make a profit.

It looks like Dan Duffy is active at some of the Gretsch forums. Seems like if anyone would know, he'd be a guy to ask. Perhaps he can at least recall what kind of route spruce flowed from raw timber to bracing, perhaps shedding a bit of light on this phenomenon.

Whatever the outcome, I look forward to your book whenever it gets published. I have the Tony Bacon book (and used to have the Jay Scott one - don't know where that ended up), but I would love to see more on specific records and features. It sounds like it could be great!

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

You are once again absolutely right in your skeptisism. No doubt about it. That is why I started the research in the first place. Here is quick background.

I am actually a Gibson Les Paul kind of guy. The older the better. The Les Paul bursts have been picked to death on details. With each batch of serial numbers, you can darn near tell what type of top wood it will have or the color of the burst etc. Well after being around guitars my entire life, (we owned a guitar shop from the time I was very small until I was grown), I also loved Gretsch guitars. There is always someone (everyone) saying that Gretsch had very bad construction technqiues and would use any part laying around just to get another guitar out the door. I found it hard to beleive that the Gretsch company would be that ad-hoc about its methods. Especially if they wanted to make any real money. To make money you need to be a little more methodical (unless your just lucky). So I challanged the Gretsch community to provide me with serial numbers and that I would give them the manufacturing pattern of the Gretsch company. Hundreds of serial numbers started pouring into my email box. The original request was: If you send me a serial number, you also send me a picture of the guitar that shows clear details of what:Tuners, Bridge, Tail Piece, inlays, headstock shape, pickups, color etc. As I logged each guitar, I added this detail to the list. The hard part is determining when a guitar had been altered and when it was all original. But by watching the manufacturing patterns it actually became a whole lot less difficult to determine. What I found was that Gretsch was not so adhoc after all. They built guitars in batches just like other companies. The more popular guitars were built in sets of 100, less popular in sets of 25 or 50. Further, like any good manufacture would do, they would build all the guitars with the same body shape one after anothers. So for example we take the 16" archtop. They would build 100 Chet Atkins 6120's, followed by 100 Annivesaries, followed by 50 Tenni's followed by 25 Clippers. Than they would shift forms and build thier 17" bodies like the Country Gent and the Club. We also determined was that the parts were actually phased out and used up before a new style was added. So as the last of the fingerboards were used up that had hump inlays (for example) then and only then did they grab the boards with neo-classical thumb inlays. The one reason Gretsch look somewhat adhoc was that different models got the new features at different times. For example: A 6120 got the thumb inlays late in 1957, but the streamliner (same basic guitar) did not get the thum inlays until late in 58. They could be 2000 serial numbers apart from each other, which would make the process look more adhoc. BUT..once the gutiar did get the new boards, you did not see any after that with old boards. Make Sense? So my research pretty much nailed down to within a few serial numbers when a feature was changed.

Like you (I am guessing), I repair 100's of guitars a year. Once I started doing all the Gretsch research, most of those guitars ended up being Gretsch's. I have been sent guitars from around the world to do repair work on for one simple reason: No one else appears to have the knowledge of how these guitars were really built. Many more of you probably have better skills than I do as a luthier no doubt! But often times to repair a guitar, you have to know why it was done like that in the first place.

I know of Dan Duffy from emails and from the Gretsch forum that we both have cozy little homes at. He is a cool old dude for sure. The unfortunately thing is that memories fade. You may "think" you recall a situation but in reality it could have been something completey different. That is what I have found out about some of Dan's recoglections. The reason I say that is due to historical data. Once the guitars were all documented, it clearly showed what was really done in the 50's. That doesn't always match up with Dan's memories.

The Jay Scott book was an excellent resource back in the 90's. My current research pretty much shows that even Jay Scott was making some assumptions based on the given information at the time, but not based on Historical data like I have collected.

I currently know of two books being written on Gretsch guitars. Mine of course is one of them. Mine is solely based on the construction of the guitars. When each feature was faded in or out, what type of neck joint they used and when did they change, the color changes that occured and when etc. The other book is being written by a friend of mine on just the 6120. It is still completely base on my research but will only attempt to give the details surrounding the most popular Grestch the 6120.

Sorry for the rant: So here we are back at the braces. You right I don't have xrays of 2000 guitars. As I inspected the guitars I always pull the pickups out especially at the bridge. The pickups sit right on top of the parallel bracing. In fact the top is routed out down to the top of the bracings and the tang of the pups are fixed to that position. With the pup out, you can see the braces. The grain on the treble side brade shows lots of detail on the side of the brace, but shows very little to no grain on the top egdge. The grain on the bass side brace shows all the grain on the top edge and down the sides too. This sort of has the quarter sawn look on one side and flat sawn on the others.

Coincidence? I would think if it happend on 50% of the guitars I inspected and not the other 50% I would aggree. But it was much more like 90% of all guitars inspected. I can't say 100% because at times, it just became common to see the grain that way, so I stopped specifically looking at some point. Though, when I did look, it appears to always be this way. I completely understand skeptisim. For the world of me, I can't figure out why that would be true. That's why I asked here...where you all know more than I do. Could I have just "wanted" to see that pattern? Maybe...though I don't know why I would want to. I am pretty sure Gretsch was a low budget mass production style company that got lucky to make some pretty darn good sounding models that got a good repsonse. They certainly weren't the master craftsman we saw in Kalimazoo at that same time. Completely different styles of companies and different qualities of builds. (thus the difference in price too).


So is there any reason anyone can think of that the braces would be turned?


Here is another cool thing Gretsch did that might interest the Archtop community: They glued what looked like a popsickle stick to the inside of the top acrros the long side of the f hole. Than they covered the inside of the F hole with craft paper before putting the top on. Once the guitar was finished it was taken to the buffing wheel. Often times the buffing dude would catch the tips of the f holes on the buffer and crack the top. The popsickle stick kept this from happening by keeping the f holes solid. Once done the craft paper was removed and no finish got into the inside. If you reach into most old Gretsch guitars, you can feel the glue and sometimes a little of the wood from the popsickle stick still stuck to the top. Check by the ends of the F holes.

BTW: No offense taken. I meet this type of think all the time when talking Gretsch. Historical data is a powerfull thing.

Joe

_________________
Joe

here is the popsickle sticks I was talking about:

_________________
Joe

Thanks Joe -

Hearing that bit more about your approach gives me a good deal more confidence in your research. Sounds like you have quite a job with record keeping, and a healthy mindset about your research.

I guess all I can say is that it does seem like an odd and interesting pattern to be so consistent. I really have no theories or suggestions as to how they could have ended so consistent in such an odd way. I still instinctively lean toward the "byproduct of some method of manufacturing", but have no real clue as to how or why. Perhaps there was just an informal rule to glance at grain when grabbing braces and choose a flatter cut for the treble? What the motive would be if that were the case, I have no idea though. These are things that if you can't interview the person who worked at that station, can be difficult to do more than speculate and theorize. Tough riddle indeed. It's certainly food for thought though, and I'll be sure to keep in in mind when old Gretsches come through the shop.

Thanks again, and keep those bits of Gretsch trivia coming. This is the exactly kind of thing that really makes the forums interesting for me. I'll definitely be looking for the book whenever it comes around.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Excellent conversation Dave and all!

The book seems to always take the back seat to real work. Ha ha! I think for those who repair or collect Gretsch guitars, the book will be most valueable. For example: 1953-ealry 1957 Grestch used a offset dovetail joint on thier Jets (chambers solid body). It always seemed to break. So in early 1957 the switched over to a mortise and tennon joint simular to the modern day Les Paul. This is very important if your going to do a neck reset! Knowing which fret to pull and force steam into is very important! I have that info down to a serial number or two! That is the type of stuff I want to include in the book.

This a picture of a mid 1957 #6121 Chet Atkins Jets that I did a neck reset on a month or two ago:



Here it is after restoring the top:



and getting ready for its ride back to California from Chicago:



And here is a silver jet from a few months earlier with the dovetail instead. Notice the offset in the neck joint? The dovetails were offset to the left where there was more wood.

_________________
Joe

I think we probably lost a lot of on-lookers, but for those who are still with me:

Here is an xray of Billy Zooms 1957 Jet. You can clearly see how extensive the chambering was done. This held true until 58/59. The top only touches the edges and the two square blocks by the bridge. The rest is completey suspended by the arch in the plywood top.




This is a re-issue body, but this is very simular to the later 58/59 style routing. Big difference in tone;

_________________
Joe

Here is a little peek-a-boo from the back and front of the earlier version:

_________________
Joe

You have sawn 100's of Gretch guitars in half in order to see the end grain of the braces? Or does it show up in an X-ray, and you have X-rayed 100's? Some other method of seeing the brace end grain (are the braces cut at the pickup holes)?

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

Just my thoughts ...

In reality, i dont think it matters all that much .. take a piece of spruce thats what, 1.5 cm square - its pretty darn stiff no matter what way you glue it in. Plus , once you add in the trestles, it becomes meaningless .. that brace is now being supported by the back arch and its huge bracing as well ... its just one big truss system

_________________
Tony Karol
www.karol-guitars.com
"let my passion .. fulfill yours"

Howard,

No I only have xrayed a few (see my earlier posts). But with the pickup out, the top edge and the sides are expsosed. When no grain is exposed on the top edge of the brace, but a lot of grain is exposed down the sides, its fairly obvious that the grain direction goes side to side. On the opposite side, the grain shows equally on all four sides...which means its grain runs on a diagonal. The xrays only proved that point looking at it from the end.

Tony,

You may very well be correct on the strength of spruce regardless of grain.


Joe

_________________
Joe

I've found this post to be very interesting for the high calibre of thinking going on.

Joe - you're definitely the gretch that stole christmas! You're interest and knowledge, sustained over a long period of time is what 'authority' is all about.

David - that phenomenon you mention is known as the 'ascertainment bias'. Though I think Joe is beyond it, it can cloud many an observation and often masks objectivity.

Ascertainment bias (From Wikipedia)
"In scientific research, ascertainment bias occurs when false results are produced by non-random sampling and conclusions made about an entire group are based on a distorted or nontypical sample. If this is not accounted for, results can be erroneously attributed to the phenomenon under study rather than to the method of sampling. It is one of the most common reasons that researchers in the medical, social, or biological sciences may discover an association or correlation that does not actually exist. Ascertainment bias may be easy to recognize or difficult to detect."

This might be boiled down further by saying - it's the tendency to find things more frequently when you're looking for them.

We all have a tendency to do it, it's natural and all in all, not all that bad.

Again, a very informative discussion ....

thanks to all,
john

I think I have ascertainment bias toward finding ascertainment bias in everyone else's observations.

"The thing is you see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear". -The Rock Man

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Ha...

Thanks everyone. I asked the same question over at the MIMF and they thought the same thing. This phenominom was probably due to some manufacturing process and not by some deliberate reason. Its still interesting just the same.

I would think that maybe I have over thought this too much.

Thanks,

Joe

_________________
Joe

well, i think you're pretty generous to show us all what you've found, and if they prove to be intentional or coincidental or even irrelevant building techniques, at least we know whats going on.

It appears that there was more fore thought in the gretsch factory than we would have expected, or maybe a factory worker just liked the way the grain looked that way and just did it thinking no-one would ever know! Who's to say a manager didn't say "if possible make it like this, but don't waste too much time over it"?

Either way I'll be buying your book, it looks to be another incredible resource for repiar guys.

Please dont think the research can ever go to far! I'm loving it

_________________
www.theguitarrepairworkshop.com

Old lute makers always used braces with flat grain orientation. Has anyone here done testing to see which way a brace has the greatest strength against bending? I have done that and the flat bracing was stiffer than the quarter sawn bracing. Flat bracing is a lot harder to carve but it is stiffer.

I invite anyone to do the same and post their results. I think it may be a case of intuition displacing testing.

John