Official Luthiers Forum!

Recently, I was browsing through David Schramm's site, and read in his Online Apprentice section (the link for that area now appears to be down) on his current Miguel Rodriguez build that MR favored cedar as a bracing material, even with his spruce-topped guitars. Schramm did not specify what type of cedar, although I'm assuming he's referring to the WRC variety, rather than cedro.

At last year's 10-string Guitar Festival, I had the opportunity to examine several fine guitars. Most of them had spruce bracing, regardless of the top material. An Eric Sahlin with a spruce top had cedar bracing, and a Paulino Bernabe, also with a spruce top, had what looked to me like cedro bracing.

After examining the Bernabe, I built a 10-string with a cedar top and Bernabe-style bracing using cedro for the bracing material. This guitar was the only classical I've built where I haven't used spruce bracing. I wasn't all that pleased with the guitar's sound at first. It took a while to open up -- longer than I was used to with my other builds, but by the time I sent it to the client, it was beginning to sound much better. That was about seven months ago. I talked to the client a few weeks ago, and she remarked about how great the guitar sounded now. Good to know. I have attributed the rather slow opening up period not to the bracing material, but to the bracing design. Bernabe's design is a lot different from most traditionally braced classicals. He uses fewer braces, but they are much larger than what one would see on a traditionally braced top.

So, anyway, I guess I'm still curious about the choice of cedar and cedro for a top bracing material. Have any of you used either? If so, what are your impressions? For that matter, I'm curious if folks have a preference as to the type of spruce they use. I have used Euro and white spruce. I've avoided sitka, although I do use the hybrid Lutz stuff, like what Shane sells.

Best,

Michael

_________________
Live to Play, Play to Live

I have used Western Red Cedar on 4 steel string builds. I like it for a finger style ok but am not as happy on a strum/picker it also does not seem to chisel as well as spruce, but my chisel mahve needed a touch up at the time. Cedar seemed to open up quicker than spruce in my experiance but I would suspect that the tops had more to do with that than the braces.

I'm surprised the classical experts have not chimed in "YET"

I'm sure there will be more coming!

_________________
Peter M.
Cornerstone Guitars
http://www.cornerstoneukes.com

Funny, the timing of this. I was just lying awake night before last considering the viability of redwood as a brace material on classicals...

I'll watch this thread closely to see what transpires.

This one looks like it could be cedar...

This pic from the Schramm siteRCoates38854.8908912037

[QUOTE=RCoates] Funny, the timing of this. I was just lying awake night before last considering the viability of redwood as a brace material on classicals...

I'll watch this thread closely to see what transpires.

This one looks like it could be cedar...

This pic from the Schramm site[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's a Rodriguez copy. I can tell by the bracing.

Regarding redwood as a bracing material, the second guitar I built, which was definitely an experiment but still a nylon string, has a redwood top and redwood bracing. But I used a lattice pattern of my own design. It worked fine, but since a lattice-braced top is, to me, well outside the realm of "conventional" bracing, I didn't include it in my above discussion.

I'm thinking that, since redwood is often characterized as being somewhere in between spruce and cedar in terms of optimum top thickness, that it would probably work fine as a bracing material.

One way to find out, for sure. Live dangerously and build a guitar with redwood bracing.

Best,

Michael

_________________
Live to Play, Play to Live

[QUOTE=Michael McBroom]I'm thinking that, since redwood is often characterized as being somewhere in between spruce and cedar in terms of optimum top thickness, that it would probably work fine as a bracing material.[/QUOTE]
It's always been my understanding that redwood needs to be left the thickest of the three you mentioned. Its longitudinal stiffness vs. its weight is very good, but it's a very light wood, so something has to give somewhere. I'd think that, to last for the long term, redwood braces would have to be left higher in cross-section than spruce or WR cedar.

I have used both cedar and spruce as bracing material in my classical guitars. I have had good results with either. I do tend to leave the braces a bit larger if they are cedar.

Carlton,

I have a copy of the old LMI catalog, which was not just a catalog, but which also contained a host of interviews and comments from various well-known builders. My comments regarding the intermediate nature of redwood were based upon what I read in the LMI catalog. Or, eh, just to add a caveat -- what I recall reading from the catalog. I've noticed that, once I passed the half-century mark, my memory sometimes plays tricks on me. I'll look up references, if you like, though.

I have a bunch of redwood tops in my tonewood stash, and the better ones are quite stiff -- stiffer than spruce. Although your point is well taken. Given redwood's relatively low density, it certainly wouldn't hurt, I would think to leave the braces a little taller and perhaps with a bit more of a peak to them.

Robbie,

Have you been able to notice any difference in sound between the two bracing materials?

Best,

Michael
Michael McBroom38855.8770601852

_________________
Live to Play, Play to Live

[QUOTE=Michael McBroom] I've noticed that, once I passed the half-century mark, my memory sometimes plays tricks on me.[/QUOTE]
Hah! Well, I'm with you there, my friend. I've got that LMI catalog, too (actually, both of them). I'll see if I can find mine, and check out what they say. Thanks.

Michael,

I did notice that the cedar bracing, which I used on cedar tops, was a bit "looser". There are so many variables that it was hard to tell the overall affect though.