Official Luthiers Forum!
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Placing the bridgeplate
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=9244		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  James Orr [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:40 am ]
Post subject: 
Hi everyone

I've been trying to figure this out on my own but decided to just fess up and ask for help. I'm having trouble figuring out where to locate the bridgeplate on this guitar due to a new scalelength and bridgeplate design.



Here you can see what's going on. I've eyeballed (but carefully) where the saddle's going to be on this guitar. It puts the front of the bridge a hair past the front of the bridgeplate per my old layout. How much plate do I
want in front of the bridge?

Here's a shot from of my shop just to make a few of you smile.

James Orr39031.7004861111
Author:  Dave White [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:47 am ]
Post subject: 
James,

How about you work out where the bridgeplate would have been in relation to the saddle/bridge for the old scale length - say measure the front edge of the bridge to the front edge of the bridgeplate - keep the bridgeplate the same width and move it up into the X brace until the distance from the front of the new bridge position to front edge of the bridgeplate is the same. The shape to meet the X brace legs will need to be accordingly adjusted.

Hope this makes sense.
Author:  James Orr [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:49 am ]
Post subject: 
I'll sound bad here, but I don't remember the old scale length.
Author:  Dave White [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:56 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=James Orr] I'll sound bad here, but I don't remember the old scale length.[/QUOTE]

Dude

I usually have about the same amount of bridgeplate in front of the front edge of the bridge as I do behind, so if you are using the same width bridgeplate as before, just position it accordingly.

Let me guess - you don't remember the width of the old bridgeplate Dave White39031.7060300926
Author:  Steve Saville [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:57 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=James Orr] I'll sound bad here, but I don't remember the old scale length.[/QUOTE]
Dude,
That is bad. It is so bad it sounds like something I would do!   

I'm sorry I can't be more help right now. I'll try to remember check some of my plans and let you know what is done. If I don't remember, PM or email me.SteveS39031.7905555556
Author:  Alain Lambert [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
I do as Cumpiano recommends: the bridge patch extend 1/8 in front of the bridge and 1/4 below the back edge of the bridgeAlain Lambert39031.8851851852
Author:  James Orr [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks guys. Alain, I took a second look in Cumpiano/Natel. and just
saw that as well. Their bracing chapter could've been organized better.
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
James, your "rule" casts some doubt on whether you should be modifying any plans. So does your question. One short answer is to put the patch where it will extend 1/8" beyond the front and rear edges of the bridge.   But guitar designs are not meant for piecemeal modifications. It's all connected. If you shorten the scale (as you apparently are doing), the location of the X and all the other braces changes. I start with bridge location and lay out the bracing based on that starting point.

Now, you may build a nice guitar taking those plans and just moving the bridge and plate, even though the bracing is designed for a different scale. But you will be getting a wrong conception of how the elements of a design tie together.

Maybe you should ask James Ashjian. He seems to be accurate to within 1/8", more or less. Howard Klepper39032.1488773148
Author:  D Stewart [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
Gee Howard, I guess that you are not impressed by the accuracy of a wooden yardstick? Hopefully James has suitable "rules" to use when it counts, don't you James?
Author:  James Orr [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
No, I like to eyeball it most of the time. Some of these more detailed
things could use the yardstick.James Orr39032.1917361111
Author:  Colin S [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
Howard is, as usual, right. Change one distance, all of the others change as well. If you redraw it changing the poition of the bridge to the new scale length replace the X in the right position then the position of the bridge plate should just fall in to place.

Colin
Author:  Dave White [ Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Howard,

You make a very valid point about needing to understand about how all of the design relationships work as this gives you the freedom (should you want it) to go out of building to strict plans and making your own.

I do suspect, however, that some of the "set plans" that are used so religously today came about by a series of little "excursions" similar to those that James is contemplating. I'd love to read the book that explained in great detail precisely why the standard Martin plans are what they are (X brace position, angle etc etc etc) in terms of exactly how they all inter-relate, what was intended and what was achieved.
Author:  Serge Poirier [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 2:57 am ]
Post subject: 
James, you're a NEAT FREAK! That shop is too clean!
Author:  James Orr [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Thank you, Serge. I maintain it rigurously!

Howard is partially correct. He's correct about needing to adjust or
understand various things.

Unless he was the inspiration for Good Will Hunting, he is not correct
about the numerous conclusions he came to about what I'm doing or not
doing, understanding or not understanding, methodically measuring or
not methodically measuring. My response was meant to be as equally
ridiculous and cocky.   

I could have gone on and on about how skillful I am, made up a story
about how expensive my multiple machinests rules were, other methods
I'm also using to measure, yada yada yada; but I don't have the need for
the validation. Those of you who've been chatting about these things
with me behind the scenes know what I'm working through with the
thing. That's enough for me. It's my guitar. I was just asking about the
bridge plate.     
Author:  crazymanmichael [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:51 am ]
Post subject: 
despite the somewhat dismissive and sarcastic aspects of howard's post, technically he is essentially correct. the design does have to tie in.

and the various comments regarding the bridge plate's position relative to the bridge are valid.

thus, whilst you might get away with moving the bridge toward the sound hole as indicated in your photo since it appears the pin holes will be clear of the braces and so forth, i doubt that you will get the best result that your materials might otherwise give you.

i notice that the fb you show has already been slotted. is it cut to your proposed new scale length?
Author:  Howard Klepper [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:25 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=James Orr] Thank you, Serge. I maintain it rigurously!

Howard is partially correct. He's correct about needing to adjust or
understand various things.

Unless he was the inspiration for Good Will Hunting, he is not correct
about the numerous conclusions he came to about what I'm doing or not
doing, understanding or not understanding, methodically measuring or
not methodically measuring. My response was meant to be as equally
ridiculous and cocky.   

I could have gone on and on about how skillful I am, made up a story
about how expensive my multiple machinests rules were, other methods
I'm also using to measure, yada yada yada; but I don't have the need for
the validation. Those of you who've been chatting about these things
with me behind the scenes know what I'm working through with the
thing. That's enough for me. It's my guitar. I was just asking about the
bridge plate.     [/QUOTE]

James, your first reply was cute, and I took it as you intended.
The above is nasty and uncalled for.

What numerous conclusions are you talking about? You could be a skilled machinist or a nuclear physicist, and I still would not see any false "conclusion" in my post.

I offered you good advice, and good humor. If you only want your specific question given a specific answer and no other advice, even when the question implies that you are going wrong, that's fine. But you have excluded me from among your advisors. Howard Klepper39032.5728472222
Author:  JJ Donohue [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Boy, I hate when this happens! We're lucky to have guys like Howard and Mario and others who stop by from time to time and would sure like to see them more often.

What makes these guys so valuable is that they've earned their stripes through a lot of years of trial, error, and conclusions that are almost always based on fact. Sure, they're taskmasters and suffer fools lightly (please, I'm not referring to anyone as a fool). I can't tell you how many times I've been reamed over the years by Mario, in particular as well as others who come from the same personality spectrum. Sometimes it's hard to not take it personally when chastized in public but sometimes it's a lesson well learned if we just listen and take note of the real message. We all have a tendency to accept criticism from those of the opposite personality spectrum who seem to have more patience...but they all have wisdom and knowledge that I take to the bank...and really, that's why we're here.

I only make this point because if we get overly defensive and fail to listen to the messages from those who have a lot to say, this forum will lose the wisdom and knowledge from that high-level segment. And if you really listen closely, they are often trying to make their points with a little subtle dash of humor.

"That's my opinion...I could be wrong"...Dennis Miller

Author:  stan thomison [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:57 am ]
Post subject: 
Mzrio, Howard, Rick Turner!! and several others!!These are guys with the "bones so to speak." They are "Grizzled Veterans" by their experience, not by how many post they have made, not saying anything. I gotta go from here now also. Hope see some of you down the road at shows or something. These are my views and not reflective of others I associate with. Was a nice 3 year run.
Author:  James Orr [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:36 am ]
Post subject: 
Howard, it's possible that I've made a mistake about your intentions. I
don't mind admitting it and am sorry if I have. The tone in these
sentences makes it seem as if you don't think I'm actively thinking about
what I'm doing with this guitar or that I'm even competent and there's
nothing to draw any of it from when I'm just asking a simple question
about space in front of the bridge plate. John Mayes sent me some things
to play with and between the lines, I was asking how I might work with his
bridge plate without bugging him a week after he lost his friend.    

- James, your "rule" casts some doubt on whether you should be
modifying any plans. So does your question.

- But guitar designs are not meant for piecemeal modifications.

- the location of the X and all the other braces changes.

- Maybe you should ask James Ashjian. He seems to be accurate to within
1/8", more or less.

Now come on. That's not sarcasm.
Author:  TonyKarol [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:57 am ]
Post subject: 
EVERYTHING about making guitars was figured out by trial and error ... CFMartin himself probably made a few guitars with wierd bracings, then burned them after they collapsed, or sounded like Ovations !!! (Hey Larrivee willingly admits he heated his home one winter with Flying V bodies he couldnt sell - but he has never burnt an acoustic !! ). He (back to CFM) was somewhat of an inventor .. he created things, and anyone who creates things, myself included, KNOWS that poop happens along the way, and things need to be changed, modded, fixed, or even trashed (I like to burn things !!). Someone wanted to read a book on how all this stuff was designed, angles and all .. well there isnt one .. its all in some dead guys head. All we have to go on are the relics they left behind.

Now for some humor.. any guitar maker who is only accurate to 1/8 more or less shouldnt have given up his day job as a drywaller ... But at least they have special mud to cover the gaps ... plus paint
Author:  JJ Donohue [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:13 am ]
Post subject: 
James...With all due respect, I believe that an explanation of your big picture would have been appropriate in your first post. Absent that, I also felt, as did others who responded, that knowing where to place the bridge plate was somewhat obvious. Maybe the big picture has merit but in light of the question regarding BP placement it's easy to understand the skepticism based on the initial question. Without putting words in Howard's mouth I'm sure that's why he reacted the way he did and furthermore tried to steer you in a direction that he felt was appropriate. It's just unfortunate when these threads take such a wild turn and it begins to become personal. That's the last thing we need here.

My advice FWIW...Rather that parse sentences now, why not just keep it on message and either re-post with a more detailed explanation of what you're trying to do or just let it die. Otherwise, this road will lead nowhere fast and only cause more alienation.

Stan...I was surprised and sorry to hear of your intention to leave the forum. I hate to see good people leave...I hope you will reconsider.
Author:  Dave White [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:34 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=TonyKarol]   Someone wanted to read a book on how all this stuff was designed, angles and all .. well there isnt one .. its all in some dead guys head. All we have to go on are the relics they left behind.

[/QUOTE]

Tony,

That was me, and I'm longing for the day when someone invents the "sarcasm" or "tongue in cheek" emoticon that I would have used with this.
Author:  TonyKarol [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:46 am ]
Post subject: 
Sorry Dave .. It is sometimes hard to decifer plain text as serious or TIC (thats a TLA for tonque in cheek .. see i just invented that !!) I am with you on that emoticon for sure !!!

I think I also owe an apology to the tens of thousands who own Ovations, some who actually like them, sort of, well maybe a bit, OK , I'll fess up, when I was 14, all pimply and stupid, I wanted one. Well, at least most of the zitz went away .... but I never bought an Ovation !!
Author:  James Orr [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:31 am ]
Post subject: 
I agree with JJ that it's best to let this die. I felt Howard was essentially
making fun of not only me, but what I was working with. I've now
explained why but do agree that I let an angry response come out for
which I apologize again. My original question asked how much plate you
like to have in front of your bridge and believe it sufficient enough of a
question to answer on it's own. It's answered, so unless Howard wants to
work it out, I don't want to go further down rocky trails. Thanks to the
guys who did answer my original question. It was very helpful.
Author:  crazymanmichael [ Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:54 am ]
Post subject: 
jim, perhaps i shouldn't carry this on, but your next to last post indicates that you consider howard's comments regarding piecemeal alterations to designs and the need to alter the xbrace locations as sarcastic. they were anything but, and the need to consider the relocation of the sound hole, inter alia, could be added to list as well.

your initial question also caused me, and perhaps others, to wonder where your musings had taken you, and whether you appreciated the complexity of what you were proposing. now, perhaps your private deliberations with others had canvassed such issues, but your posted question certainly did not give any indication that you had thought of anything other than "where do i put the bridgeplate if i shorten the scale"(as indicated in the photo).

and in your defensive replys you still have given no indication that you had considered anything else, including the limiting effects in sound production of moving the bridge forward over the xbracing. the suggestions given re front and back overhang apply wherever the plate is located, but howard's other comments had to do with amending a design to include a shorter scale, are valid, and ignoring them in pique will not profit you in the least.



crazymanmichael39032.9599652778
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/