www.KitGuitarsForum.com

I spent the afternoon with a file making notches in the side kerfing for the back braces.

Is there a less tedious way to do this?

Use a template to mark your brace positions. The template would also allow you you mark the kerfing for the notches. If you're consistent about the thickness of the brace ends, you would just rout where you marked. I use either my inlay tool, or laminate router to notch the kerfing. You can use a dremel too.

Marking just got a hole lot easier with a tip from another. Use a dental tool with a bent end to mark the lining with the plate in position. Then use a Dremel or other router to cut the pockets, and square up with a small chisel

flickr dot com/photos/ruby1638/49601988372/in/album-72157678301955987/

flickr dot com/photos/ruby1638/40697256585/in/album-72157688488198220/

you can scroll left and right, and text is below

Ed

Related to this, some people carve the notch all the way through the side, others just notch the kerfing and leave the side as-is.

What are the pros and cons of each technique?

If your top is, say, .11" and the ends of your braces are 3/16", then your binding will have to about .29". The standard width is .25", and I have been making mine a little less. So you have to take into account if the binding will cover everything. You can always add a purfling to cover, but it reduces your options.

I have also heard the argument that if the guitar changes shape with humidity, the end of the braces may poke out and push off the binding, although I have no experience with that.

Remember that some of the best sounding guitars ever made, 30 and 40's Gibsons, had the the brace ends shaved down to almost zero as they hit the binding, thus removing the need to do this step.

Ed

rcnewcomb wrote:Related to this, some people carve the notch all the way through the side, others just notch the kerfing and leave the side as-is.

What are the pros and cons of each technique?

I used to go through the side. I tuck now.

There's nothing wrong with either technique. You do have to be mindful of the depth of your brace ends if you cut through the sides. If you leave more than a total of ~ 6mm on the end of a brace + top thickness, you run the risk that your binding won't cover your brace. So, you only make them ~ 4mm deep. When I tuck, I can leave them a little thicker, making them sturdier and more secure.

Also, I've had the side break a bit while going through it. Luckily, it was fixable and the binding/purfling covered it.

It's because of these reasons, plus I consider it more polished for my builds, that I tuck the braces, without going through the sides. plus, I feel they're glued better, since my hhg will glue each side of the brace, as well as the end.

You're notching both ways. You either go through the sides, or not, so you just stop short of the rim.

If you decide to go through the sides, do so in 2 or 3 passes, deeping your cut with each pass.

I use the halo templates
here is how I use my inlay tool but a dremel will do fine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TljZnsNsOl0

I don't understand this notching business. Taylor makes a routed channel inside the kerfing so as to allow the soundboard to move more easily. No notching is possible with that. And Taylor is focused on keeping guarantee work minimized. If braces needed to be captured lest they come free, it'd seem as if Taylor would be giving themselves a problem, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Do we have another chapter of the copy-Martin playbook?

phavriluk wrote:I don't understand this notching business. Taylor makes a routed channel inside the kerfing so as to allow the soundboard to move more easily. No notching is possible with that. And Taylor is focused on keeping guarantee work minimized. If braces needed to be captured lest they come free, it'd seem as if Taylor would be giving themselves a problem, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Do we have another chapter of the copy-Martin playbook?

I don't know about "copy-Martin playbook", but I've restored Martins, Gibson, Washburn, Kay, Harmony, and others without identification. All have had braces that either tuck into the kerfing or go through the kerfing and sides.

All x-bracing schemes originated with Christian Martin since he never patented his x-bracing pattern, so it stands to reason that most manufacturers tuck or tucked their bracing, in one form or another. If I remember correctly, Taylor's relief route is patented.

It's great that you brought up how Taylor does their bracing. It gives the op another option. I and others addressed his question, as asked. No one is pushing a Martin only scheme.

i switched blues creek halo templates and forms and it improved my notches by a lot and took far less time. They worked. They are useful for not only marking but actually gluing on the braces. I wax paper them and let my fish glue set up with templates on the braces in the go deck. I leave for a while then pull them out just in case they want to get stuck while the fish glue goes to the next day. Then the notches in your rim will be exactly lined up.