Page 1 of 1
OM back braces - traditional or not?
Posted: Fri May 01, 2020 2:14 pm
by Morecowbell
I'm about to start the back braces on my OM. My S-M plans show the bottom two as lower and wider than the top two per the original style, but I have seen several folks replacing these with taller, thinner braces like the top two. Was thinking of keeping my first build traditional but was interested to hear any preferences from the group - thanks
Re: OM back braces - traditional or not?
Posted: Fri May 01, 2020 7:55 pm
by tippie53
those the the old style and the new ones were added in the mid 80's
I don't think it matters all that much but my preference is the low wide ones
Re: OM back braces - traditional or not?
Posted: Fri May 01, 2020 8:56 pm
by MaineGeezer
On the 3 sort-of OM copies I've built, I've made the back braces tall and thin because that's the way the luthier who taught me does it. They seem to work fine. I have no basis for comparison, however. Either tall/thin or low/wide will work.
My guitars seem to have quite "live" backs. The sound is significantly different if you hold the guitar tight to your body to damp the back vibration, or out and away from your body so the back can resonate. The lower mass of the tall/thin braces probably helps with that. But I've not tried low/wide to see what the effect might be.
Re: OM back braces - traditional or not?
Posted: Fri May 01, 2020 11:28 pm
by Stray Feathers
I was wondering about this myself (again) just today, as I looked at the back braces on my latest OM style. I have followed closely (mostly) Jonathan Kinkead's book, and he uses all tall back braces. Once again, how can you really know unless you build two the same, one with each brace style? Bruce W.