Rear-shifted braced guitars loud as heck?

[good_hillbilly]

I was getting some strings in a guitar store today and they had a Tyminski D-28 there and it looked cool so I played it. It sounded good but the thing that struck me is that it was SUPER DUPER LOUD. I could not believe how loud that guitar was. I tried a couple other D-28s they had there and they were nowhere near as loud as that one. Of course you never know when strings were changed, etc., but still.

The store owner is an interesting smart guy and he offered up a theory that, when I thought about it, made sense. The Tyminsky D-28 has rear-shifted braces. As such, it's not *nearly* as bassy as some of the D-28 reissues with forward braces. I asked how it could possibly be so loud, other than of course once in a while they probably simply get lucky with a particularly good set of wood.

However, he basically said he think it's like amplification: low notes take much much much more power to reproduce. A guitar that isn't boomy is not going to translate so much of the strings' energy into the low notes, and as such will have much more energy to push into the mids and highs. Furthermore, rear-shifted braced guitars have a much smaller bridge plate because there's not much room between the diagonals if you move the X down like that, and a very light bridge plate is gonna be louder.

To a total redneck, i.e. yours truly, that actually made sense. Or am I just falling for a bs explanation?

[SongwriterFan]

I suspect that particular guitar just happened to be louder.

I haven't really noticed a correlation.

[Placida]

I think KYDave can offer valuable input to the question.

Oh, Dave ....

[Redbeard]

I can't speak to the physics, but I can say that I've played three contemporary Martins with rear-shifted bracing: a Tyminski, a Del McCoury D-18, and a 1939 D-18 Authentic. They were all outstanding guitars. I regret not buying the McCoury when I had the chance!

[Oldguy64]

I play an Alvarez with forward-shifted bracing, and one with standard bracing.
Both are incredible guitars.
Both are pretty loud.

I think it's more the guitar than how it's braced. You might get better note separation, and even tone.
The forward shifted guitar has a "cleaner" sound.
The standard has a "growl" to it.

I like both sounds. You very likely just had a very good one in hand.

[Russ C]

It makes sense to me - bass does take more energy to produce and doesn't cut through ambient noise like mids and highs.
I think you also found a better than average example.
My best guitar has fabulous cello-like bass and sounds loud when put up against most other guitars in a nice acoustic environment but I play it for me - it's not the one I'd choose to jam with. In that situation it's not so impressive.

[Treenewt]

Doesn't the Tyminski have an Adi top as well? That would certainly contribute to the power id suspect.

[JeremiahB.]

Yes the Tyminski has an Adi top with Adi bracing as well. Another difference in the bracing on the Tyminski model is that it's also scalloped which is different from the typical rear shifted bracing of a 1946 D-28 (which the Tyminski bracing is based on) or what's known as standard bracing today. At some point, Dan had the bracing scalloped on his '46 D-28 and Martin wanted to stay as true to spec as possible to Dan's own personal D-28. Hopefully, John Arnold will see this post and chime in. I'm sure he can provide all the intricacies that are specific to the Tyminski D-28.

[PTC Bernie]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the bass response is purely a function of the design and the internal volume of the guitar. He's correct that it takes more power to get the bass notes moving, you're moving a larger volume of air to produce them.

But I don't agree that the lack of bass response let's the guitar put that energy to use with the rest of the spectrum. It's not a "Power Management" kind of situation. The guitar doesn't decide where to put the energy that's produced, like the guitarist deciding how much bass or treble to dial in on an amp.

The guitar produces what it produces.

Just my less than humble opinion, but I'm sticking to it.

Originally Posted by JeremiahB.

...Another difference in the bracing on the Tyminski model is that it's also scalloped which is different from the typical rear shifted bracing of a 1946 D-28 (which the Tyminski bracing is based on) or what's known as standard bracing today...

Regarding Martin bracing positions, there are actually three. The key issue is the bracing in relation to the bridge. We often use the distance from the sound hole as reference, which works well enough for 14 fret Dreadnaughts since the geometry of the sound hole and fretboard is consistent through time.

So, for 14 fret Dreadnaughts.....

The original "forward" position is 1" from the sound hole. Notice I don't say "forward shifted" since that is the original position. The bracing was "rear shifted" in 1938 to 1 7/8" from the sound hole. It remained there until 1955 when it moved to 1 1/2" from the sound hole. For lack of a better description, I call that the "modern position" since it has been the default position since that time.

To the OP's point, I don think the rear shifted Martin have a more snappy/punchy tone than forward braced guitars.

[Long Jon]

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

Regarding Martin bracing positions, there are actually three. The key issue is the bracing in relation to the bridge. We often use the distance from the sound hole as reference, which works well enough for 14 fret Dreadnaughts since the geometry of the sound hole and fretboard is consistent trough time.

Sorry Todd, this was as far as I read, before I suddenly realised that I was starving hungry for my Sunday roast din-dins ,,,, mmmmmmmmm !

I've been out of town all week for a conference. Just got home last night. Let's blame it on jet lag and lack of coffee.

[kydave]

Obviously there are a very small number of Tyminski's to compare. I've only played two, but I've also played a couple RS Museum Editions and 3 or 4 1941 Authentics, as well as a gazillion other D-28 variations.

My Tyminski was not as loud as my HD-28V Custom (also Adi topped), but not by much.

In a group playing of the Tyminski, HD-28V Custom, D-28 Marquis and '41 Authentic, the Tyminski was the least loud, but not by much. In that particular setting, the Marquis was the loudest.

The tones varied, but not as much as you might think.

Most D-28 fans would be happy as a clam with any one of the four & not feel shortchanged in tone and volume in the least.

P.S. Don't know what the other guitars the OP compared it to that day, but the Tyminski is a bit louder & definitely has more bass than either of my older straight braced D-28's ('67 & '71).

[good_hillbilly]

Originally Posted by JeremiahB.

Yes the Tyminski has an Adi top with Adi bracing as well. Another difference in the bracing on the Tyminski model is that it's also scalloped which is different from the typical rear shifted bracing of a 1946 D-28 (which the Tyminski bracing is based on) or what's known as standard bracing today. At some point, Dan had the bracing scalloped on his '46 D-28 and Martin wanted to stay as true to spec as possible to Dan's own personal D-28. Hopefully, John Arnold will see this post and chime in. I'm sure he can provide all the intricacies that are specific to the Tyminski D-28.

Yeah the guy was saying that in his opinion rear-shifted scalloped bracing is the magic recipe for huge volume but at the expense of bass. You can get rid of some bass by not having scalloped braces at all, of course ... we all know that. The more subtle move, though, seems to be scalloping plus rear-shifting them. I would like to hear more examples of this spec.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by good_hillbilly

Yeah the guy was saying that in his opinion rear-shifted scalloped bracing is the magic recipe for huge volume but at the expense of bass. You can get rid of some bass by not having scalloped braces at all, of course ... we all know that. The more subtle move, though, seems to be scalloping plus rear-shifting them. I would like to hear more examples of this spec.

As I mentioned above, none of the rear shifted examples I've played (Timinski's, Authentics, Museum Editions) were particularly loud, relative to FS guitars of similar style.

The most consistently loud Martins that I've played many of? That nod would go to the various D-28 Marquis models I've played.

But we're talking about small degrees, not in-your-face increments.

There simply aren't that many rear shifted newer Martins (and many fewer until the past few years). The only other one I've played, besides those mentioned above was the 1942 D-45 reissue.

If you go to Martin's website and use "rear shifted" as a search term, you'll get an idea of which models included that feature (other than the originals, of course).