# Instruments and Equipment > Videos, Pictures & Sound Files >  Should Bryan Kimsey scallop my guitar?

## Chris Gray

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjUp...ature=youtu.be

----------


## barry

To me, the scalloped guitar may sound a bit more open for chording.
But the un-scalloped guitar has better clarity, definition, and over-all punchiness.

----------

Chris Gray, 

j. condino

----------


## j. condino

Any reputable luthier can perform this task; it is not complicated nor mysterious. People have been doing it for decades. 

It will void any warranty and don't come back crying in two years if the whole thing falls apart. 

The issues with a 1970s Martin are more than just the braces. If you don't like it, I'd say you should look for another guitar rather than messing with this one.

There is one local fellow around here who sells a ton of snakeoil & removes so much material that Martin has issued a tech service warning to not work on any instruments he has touched. They sound great for 18 months until your entire guitar implodes. Unfortunately he has done this to dozens, if not hundreds of otherwise vintage instruments that will never be the same...

Think of it as a wonderful excuse to buy another guitar at a time when prices are fantastic for buyers.

----------

Chris Gray, 

dhergert, 

John Soper, 

Skip Kelley, 

sunburst

----------


## sunburst

I've seen guitars that people spent a lot of money to have ruined.
I've removed reasonable amounts of wood from the braces of 70s Martins (when they needed considerable work otherwise) and heard precious little difference in the sound before and after.

----------

Chris Gray, 

dhergert, 

j. condino, 

Skip Kelley

----------


## rcc56

Starting sometime in the early '60's, most Martin guitars gradually became heavier in build. By the mid '70's, they had become quite heavy indeed.  The changes to the instruments encompassed more than just the braces.  One factor is that the finishes were applied significantly more thickly.  The backs and sides may also have become a bit thicker; but somebody with a Hacklinger gauge will have to confirm that.  And then there was what I call the famous "Martin tone inhibitor,"  which was the very large rosewood bridge plate that came in about 1968.

Shaving braces on these instruments might help a little bit in some cases, but the problems go deeper.  Changing the bridge plate might [or might not] help more, but it is a difficult and risky job.

Mr. Kimsey does have a good reputation, and if you choose to do the work, it will be done competently.  The question is whether the results will be significant enough to justify the expense.

----------

Chris Gray, 

j. condino

----------


## Chris Gray

Thanks all, but I don't think you understand the question. The natural top (1st guitar) in the video IS my guitar. He's already modded it. Just trying to decide if he should "lightly" scallop the braces. I personally think it sounds really good as is and I'm ready for him to send it back!

----------

Joey Anchors

----------


## rcc56

If you like the instrument as-is, you might be better off leaving it alone.  There is a risk that you might not like it as much if you have additional work done.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## BradKlein

> Thanks all, but I don't think you understand the question. The natural top (1st guitar) in the video IS my guitar. He's already modded it. Just trying to decide if he should "lightly" scallop the braces. I personally think it sounds really good as is and I'm ready for him to send it back!


I'm impressed with Kimsey's thoughtful open-minded treatment of the questions. It sounds like you've mostly made up your mind, and there's a lot to be said for taking the most 'conservative' approach to modification that you're still happy with.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## sliebers

Or, find someone crazy enough to do this...  I swore to never do another.  I repaired one of my own builds about a year later the same way.  Someone sat on it and cracked the X braces.  Twice is enough for one lifetime.

https://www.fretboardjournal.com/pho...0-martin-d-18/

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## Buck

Bryan is conservative in thought and execution of these modifications.  I do know some who take it too far, but I have not known of his modifications resulting in later failure.

He's done some work on a couple of my guitars, including a '72 D-18.  I acquired this guitar in a trade in 2013.  My intent was to have Bryan hotrod it a bit, and then I'd sell it.  Still have the guitar, so there's that.  Among other things, it's a great guitar for international travel, as it has no BRW or ivory on it.

Todd's 1972 D-18 story


This video is from 2014.  I later had Bryan remove the popsicle brace and replace the IRW bridge with Honduran rosewood.  IMO it's even better now.

----------

Jill McAuley

----------


## Chris Gray

That was a good read Scott. Thanks for sharing! The D18 I sent to Bryan is a family heirloom. My uncle barely played it. I received it when he passed in '91 & it's since been my main player. I met Bryan @ the Southwest Mandolin summit and have been begging him to look at it since. I knew it needed frets and a neck reset. Mine wasn't messed up enough to need all the work you put into yours!

----------


## Chris Gray

> Bryan is conservative in thought and execution of these modifications.  I do know some who take it too far, but I have not known of his modifications resulting in later failure.
> 
> He's done some work on a couple of my guitars, including a '72 D-18.  I acquired this guitar in a trade in 2013.  My intent was to have Bryan hotrod it a bit, and then I'd sell it.  Still have the guitar, so there's that.  Among other things, it's a great guitar for international travel, as it has no BRW or ivory on it.
> 
> Todd's 1972 D-18 story
> 
> 
> This video is from 2014.  I later had Bryan remove the popsicle brace and replace the IRW bridge with Honduran rosewood.  IMO it's even better now.


Mine is a '72 as well Buck. I had Waverly's on it. Bryan did a neck reset, refret, moved the bridge back, replaced the bridgeplate, nut replacement & replaced the pick guard. Should I have him scallop it?

----------


## Buck

> ...Should I have him scallop it?


I would.  Bryan can do a lighter or heavier scallop, plus he does not normally scallop the tone bars.  To my ear you end up with a guitar that's a bit more responsive, stronger bass, but without losing the punchy tone in the trebles.  Too much scalloping and guitar gets "woofy".  Bryan gets no where near that point.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## sliebers

> That was a good read Scott. Thanks for sharing! The D18 I sent to Bryan is a family heirloom. My uncle barely played it. I received it when he passed in '91 & it's since been my main player. I met Bryan @ the Southwest Mandolin summit and have been begging him to look at it since. I knew it needed frets and a neck reset. Mine wasn't messed up enough to need all the work you put into yours!


Thanks Chris.  This was a special case, where the guitar was essentially destroyed.  Not anything I'd recommend for anything in good playable shape to start with.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## rcc56

Fun and games.

My latest project:  a 12 string with good wood and a 4" x 14" bridge plate made of 1/4" plywood.
The original configuration:

 

I removed the bridge plate, the 2 lower ladder braces, and the 2 oddly placed sound hole braces.  I installed a V, the point of which intersects the center of the ladder brace below the sound hole, 4 wing braces, 2 vertical sound hole braces, and 2 tone bars.  The configuration is similar to a pattern Gibson used on a few Nick Lucas and L-1 guitars built circa 1929.  I also reduced the thickness of the back braces, the upper ladder brace, and the ladder brace below the sound hole.  I will re-install the back today.

The final configuration before re-voicing:

  

I thinned the tone bars slightly and extended the taper of the ends of all the new braces after these pictures were taken.
I erred on the side of caution-- it's a 12-string, and will have to stand ~250 lbs. of constant string tension over the long term.
I also made an extra horizontal brace that would butt up against the bridge plate, which I can install later if it is needed.
I may make some final adjustments after it has been strung up for a while.
I re-used the braces that were removed to make the tone bars and wing braces.  The 50 year old European spruce is as hard as a rock.

A note-- this instrument was originally assembled with white glue, which is difficult to remove.  I used a small amount of vinegar to aid in the disassembly process.  It helped, but caused some discoloration of the plates.  I will not use it again.  I was able to get rid of some of the discoloration, but not all of it.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## pops1

I just finished one that I got from ebay. It was restored, ugghhh. The bracing, which was supposed to be X, was a small X behind the bridge and all were 2X4's. The bridge was jacked up with extra wood in front of the saddle and totally unplayable. He wouldn't take it back, so I cut the back off, which was too small and the restorer simply pulled the body to fit, causing the top to bow up significantly. I cut the bracing off, made new X braces, new bridge plate, transverse braces, you get the idea. Then I cut the back off a junker in the shop that was rosewood, but laminated, so it matched the sides. He had a mahogany back and rosewood sides. I installed the back, used the binding that came with it since I was able to get it off in one piece and wasn't sure how this was going to turn out. Then had to remove the fingerboard as it was so thin and still unplayable. I planed the neck flat, made a shim for the fingerboard, and put it all on. Took all the extra crap off the bridge, filled the saddle slot and rerouted a new one. I may still refret it and possibly make a new fingerboard since his is mahogany, but right now I am having a fun time playing it. It sounds great with a very clean balanced sound. It is a lovely parlor with a 12 1/2" lower bout and multi colored purfling and rosette.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## j. condino

I'd like to believe that the guitar market as a whole has matured enough to understand that these are vintage instruments of a finite quantity and that we've all learned from our past mistakes modifying, experimenting, and destroying them enough in the past. The common belief that if a small modification produces a small result often turns into, "Lets hog out more", in the process wrecking it. It is not a linear progression.

I say that in hindsight. In 40 years as a luthier, I'm guilt of destroying plenty in the past. Perhaps my most famous lack of judgement was helping a friend install a Floyd Rose tremolo in a 1959 Les Paul around 1983 because, "Nobody gives a $#!& about those old guitars and you couldn't get a gig without one back then...". I could have paid for my house if I still had that guitar unaltered today...

If you want to get experimental, build your own instruments and celebrate the innovation characteristics; don't wreck any more old ones.

----------

Chris Gray, 

Mandobar

----------


## rcc56

While I heartily agree with James, I don't worry too much about folks who re-work old Kay and Harmony instruments.

And I'm not too worried about re-working an old Goya 12-string with a 4" x 14" piece of plywood in it.  For the record, the list price on the guitar when it was built in 1968 was $260.  An all original example in pristine condition _might_ bring $400 or $500 today.  I paid $150 + shipping.  With any luck, it will become a good utility instrument rather than a toneless piece of junk; and hopefully better than an old D12-20 [which have bridge plates which are much too large].

For the record, I do not scallop braces on old Martins, or re-top and re-neck old Gibson mandolins just because they are F-4's or F-7's and weren't built with long necks.  I will very occasionally replace a failed bridge plate, but I won't do this on Martins with the oversized rosewood plate because the risk of un-intended damage is too great.  I'll leave that job to others.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## Buck

I could be wrong...it's happened...but I don't see there ever being a great demand for unaltered 1970's D-18's.  They made many thousands of them, and while the basics are there, several things can be made better for both sound and playability.  Just looking at the numbers, in 1971 Martin made 5,254 D-18's, and in 1961 they made only 675.  The 1970's Martin Dreadnaughts are not rare, and I don't think they'll ever be sought after as collectibles.  With a few modifications they're much better instruments, but with age and charm that hard to get in a new instrument.  Especially true if you start with one a bit worn or in need of repair anyway.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## rcc56

Well, 70's Martins have gone up, though only modestly, believe it or not.  Ironically, the prices on mid to late 60's models have gone down.  You can't predict the market.

As far as modifying them, it's a judgement call.  If the work is done correctly and the instrument holds together, it currently does not have a favorable effect on its value.

A friend of mine had the braces scalloped on his 1971 D-28S.  The verdict on that particular instrument was that the work improved the bass response, but only slightly.  Otherwise, he didn't perceive any other noticeable changes.  He might have gotten more noticeable results by replacing the famous Martin tone inhibitor, otherwise known as the oversized rosewood bridge plate, with a maple plate of more reasonable dimensions.  But pulling one of those large bridge plates without damaging the finish or the inside of the top is a difficult and risky job.  I've done it once, and would rather not do another one.  That's a job that Bryan Kimsey has done many times, and he's probably better at it than most other repair people.

If I recall correctly, Bryan had a prominent disclaimer on his website about not being able to guarantee the long term structural integrity of guitars that had certain modifications.  In other words, scallop at your own risk. 

His website is down today.  I hope he is doing all right.

Removing the "popsicle" brace [under the fingerboard] is not a good idea.  Martin had very good reasons for installing that brace. 
 They did it because many guitars made during the short period that they were built without it developed serious top cracks adjacent to the fingerboard shortly after they were built.  I have seen this problem on several modern guitars by individual builders that were only a few years old.  Any cracks of this nature should be repaired immediately, and that area of the top reinforced to prevent the problem from re-occurring.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## Jeff Hildreth

No.

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## goose 2

I have known Bryan for many years.  We used to pick a lot together and camp together at Winfield when he comes. Through our network of mutual friends/pickers I have played untold number of guitars he has worked on including several of my own. I have not played one yet that he did not improve the sound and playability of. He does a nice mandolin set up too btw.

----------

Buck, 

Chris Gray

----------


## Buck

> His website is down today.  I hope he is doing all right.


He knows about the site issue and is fixing it.





> Removing the "popsicle" brace [under the fingerboard] is not a good idea.  Martin had very good reasons for installing that brace. 
>  They did it because many guitars made during the short period that they were built without it developed serious top cracks adjacent to the fingerboard shortly after they were built.  I have seen this problem on several modern guitars by individual builders that were only a few years old.  Any cracks of this nature should be repaired immediately, and that area of the top reinforced to prevent the problem from re-occurring.


If that was the intended purpose of the popsicle brace, or "top plate" as Martin calls it, it didn't work out very well as many guitars with the brace crack along the fretboard especially when overheated.  

Removing it can't be such a horrible thing because you can order a Custom Shop Martin without it.  They do nothing else to reinforce that area.  When Bryan removes the popsicle brace, in inserts a trapezoidal brace that extends just outside the fretboard footprint to reinforce that area without restricting the top movement in the upper bout.  

Martin builds many Authentic Series guitars without, but they have larger neck blocks like the originals.  That adds to stability as well.

All that to say that Bryan's work is not undertaken without considering ramifications for the future.

----------

Jill McAuley

----------


## rcc56

No brace is meant to prevent damage from overheating.  Unless you want overbuilt instruments like 70's Gibsons.  And they are still susceptible to heat damage.

There are many causes for fingerboard edge cracks.  One common cause of fingerboard edge cracks that is sometimes overlooked is a loose neck block.  Repair people should always inspect the block's glue joint when an instrument comes in with edge cracks.  There are quite a few other causes as well:  shock, compression, over-stringing, rapid humidity changes, lack of reinforcement, and plain old fashioned wood failure.  That area of the top, along with the area around the bridge, are the highest stress points on all string instruments.

If Bryan is reinforcing the area under the fingerboard joint, that's good.  That area should always be reinforced.  And reinforcement is essential when edge cracks are repaired.

Martin has been known to do many things over the years that were not very smart.  Those of us who have worked on many of them have been known to talk about it for hours, but I'll not start listing them here.  That having been said, in most cases they have fixed their errors, though sometimes it has taken them a while to address them.  At any rate, their professional level instruments appear to be built pretty well these days.  I have seen some of their recent issue budget instruments that were not engineered very well.

----------


## j. condino

At the ASIA symposium last summer, I got in a lot of Martin nerdiness conversations with the guys who run the place. Above everything else, I'm amazed that a relatively small local company has the ability to build 120,000 guitars in a single year. 120,000. 120 %$#@!^& thousand. That fact alone is amazing. 

The next is how can I get a $20,000 upgrade charge just for using hot hide glue building the same old guitar I've been building for decades....

I always suspect that the soundboard cracks on the edge of the fretboard were from a simple reason- pounding in the frets with a hammer. While there may not  be immediate damage, they cause small micro cracks right along the confluence of two different density materials. When the humidity changes, that is the first place for stress relief; crack open. 

All other things being the same, I prefer the 1930s sound with no upper transverse brace. On my personal guitars, I never add one and I never glue that part of the fingerboard down to the soundboard. It makes a small difference in the voice and with a bolt on neck, it all dissassembles in about two minutes so I can show the design to students when needed. It was an old habit I picked up from Kim Breedlove about 20 years ago at the custom shop when we'd build up 1/2 dozen guitars a day and then at night when everyone left, I'd take them all apart and swap out necks to learn the different voices. When you swap out a mahogany, maple, rosewood, walnut and a myrtlewood neck all on the same body several hundred times a year or more, you learn a lot and develop some strong opinions about voice and sound and subtleties on a production line...

----------


## Jeff Hildreth

My "no" response has nothing to do with Bryan Kimsey, I would simply not scallop the instrument.

----------

Chris Gray, 

j. condino

----------


## Buck

rcc56, no argument with any of that.  My main point was to clarify that Bryan's approach is not reckless - and there are repairmen out there who make reckless modifications.  Other than the removal of the popsicle brace, which he replaces with the trapezoidal brace, his modified guitars are not as lightly built as the 70's HD-28's just as they left Nazareth.  If those HD's are holding up fine, Bryan's work should too.  

It's been 6 years since the work on mine and no issues so far.  I don't expect any.  A friend was over a couple weeks ago and we played guitars, swapping back and forth for the afternoon.  After playing the '72 next to the 30's, 40's, and 50's D-18's, he said he wondered why we spend so much money chasing tone.  Of course the answer is because there is a difference, but side by side the modified '72 does really well.  And if I couldn't afford the others, I'd live a happy musical life with just the '72.

----------

Jill McAuley

----------


## sunburst

Just some musings about the cracks that develop along side the fingerboard extender.
When Martin began to make guitars with 14 frets clear of the body they didn't bother to sit down and re-draw the body shapes. They left the lower bout and waist shapes and positions more-or-less as they were in the 12-fret guitars and simply flattened the upper bout to allow for 14 frets clear. Not only does that make the guitars rather awkward looking (we're used to seeing those shapes, but if you look at them critically the proportions are less than ideal) but it also compromises what was a sort of vaulted arch in the original shapes. A vaulted arch is better at distributing the force that the strings pressing the neck heel against the body.
Now, Gibsons (many of which were drawn for 14 frets and became known as "slope shoulder") and earlier Martins also develop extender cracks, but I don't think it happens as often as in the squashed-down-upper-bout shape of 14 fret Martins.

As for the popsicle brace, I seldom put one in guitars that I build, but to me there is no reason worth removing one from an existing guitar. The top moves in it's normal modes of motion regardless.

----------

j. condino

----------


## rcc56

A thumbnail history of Martin popsicle braces:

Originally, all Martins made at least as far back as the 1860's had a popsicle brace.
When Martin introduced their 14 fret models starting in 1929, they shortened the shoulders of their guitars, reducing the amount of space between the sound hole and the neck joint.

For the first few years of production of the 14 fret models, they left the popsicle brace out, because they thought it was unneeded to support this reduced space.
The 12 fret models continued to be built with a popsicle brace.

Within a few years, many of the guitars built without popsicle braces developed problems and were returned to the factory for repairs.
As a result, a popsicle brace was once more installed in all Martins beginning sometime in the late 1930's.

A "hybrid X" or "A-frame" bracing pattern was introduced on model D-1 in 1991, and continues to be used on lower level models.  While these instruments do not have a popsicle brace, the area beneath the fingerboard is reinforced by two short braces set at an angle.  And starting sometime around the introduction of adjustable truss rods as standard equipment, most standard model Martins now have a block beneath the fingerboard.

About 20 or 30 years ago, some buyers became obsessed with the idea that the lack of a popsicle brace was essential to the "pre-war golden era sound."  As a result, some owners starting having the brace removed from their old guitars, or had new guitars built without the brace.  Some of the instruments without the brace hold up, some do not.

I was not aware that Martin is once again building some instruments with the old bracing pattern that do not include that brace.  We'll see how it works out.

----------


## Buck

> I was not aware that Martin is once again building some instruments with the old bracing pattern that do not include that brace.  We'll see how it works out.


The first modern Martin built without it was the limited edition D-18 Golden Era from 1995.  Despite the similar name, that's not the same guitar as the 1999 and later D-18GE.  From 2005 forward they've been building Authentics without the popsicle brace - for models based on 1930-1937 14 fret guitars.  Other Authentic Series models use the brace, just as the originals did.  I haven't seen or heard of one with a fretboard crack.  That failure may exist, but it's certainly not prevalent.  My 2005 is the 26th one made and it has no structural issues to this point, and I've drug it around to festivals, camping, the beach etc.  I don't abuse it, but I don't baby it.

I'm not personally convinced that the popsicle brace prevented cracking at the fretboard edges.  Those early 14 fret guitars already had a larger neck block and the upper transverse brace as support.  As far as failures go, it does not seem to be more prevalent on the pre-1939 guitars compared to post-1939 guitars.  Plus we have many modern builders making Martin-type guitars without that brace.  It's likely that most of those don't live the same hard lives as some of the early Martins did, but they don't show up with cracks there.  Given the difference in care and treatment, that may prove nothing at all.

----------


## rcc56

When they do crack, it's job security for me.

The last one I repaired was a recent guitar made by a very competent builder.  It did not have the brace.  There was a crack on both sides of the fingerboard.   I laminated two pieces of spruce together with opposing grain, ~0.200" thick, cut it into two strips about 1/2" wide, rounded off the edges, and installed a vertical strip under each crack rather than making a popsicle brace.

It sounds like overkill, but the stability of this part of a guitar is essential and I did not want the cracks to go active again.  The guitar was back in for a set up earlier this year, and the repair is holding up well.  The owner, who is a very proficient player, did not notice any adverse effect on the sound.

----------


## Mandobar

I’ve seen some very poorly modified Martins over the last 25 years, done by a variety of well known individuals.  Some with bubbled tops, swollen bellies, caved in tops, oversized bridges, etc.  I suppose there is a learning curve to these types of mods, but I steer clear of them, and so do a lot of dealers.  I can understand repairs, but if you are looking for a different sound and or response from a particular instrument, why not buy something that better suits your tastes?

----------

j. condino

----------


## Jeff Mando

Bryan Kimsey is a good person.  I have emailed him questions and he is willing to share his knowledge.

His knowledge and experience is in one specific area, 70's D-size Martins.  You can read his website, but basically he specializes in neck resets, resetting the bridge to the correct position (most were off by 1/4 inch at the factory causing intonation issues), refrets, and optional brace scalloping.  I would guess in this particular era of Martin guitars, he probably has as much experience as anybody around.  Probably hundreds of guitars, at this point.  He doesn't do a lot a crack repair or any refinishing to speak off.

One the plus side, he is taking a popular, affordable era of Martin guitars and improving them for a reasonable cost.  Keep in mind, the "70's" were the era of Martin when players began to say, "hey, this new Martin I got doesn't sound as good as my old one!  What's up with that?"  This was a huge factor is starting the whole "vintage guitar thing."   I say reasonable cost, because 99 percent of those guitars will need a neck reset anyway, if they haven't had one, so figure that into the cost.  He mentions if you buy a mint guitar and pay top money and add in his services, you will have more in the guitar that you will ever be able to get back.  He also mentions if you can get into a beater guitar, you will come out better, cost-wise.  I should add that I have owned several 70's D-size Martins and always thought they sounded pretty good to start with, so IMHO he is working with good raw materials, at least....

The way I look at it is I don't see how much scalloping the braces is going to effect the value of the guitar at all, probably no more than a fret job or a neckset.  In fact, in this era of boutique builders, etc., being able to say Bryan Kimsey did the mods might actually be a good selling point, if you were trying to sell.  OTOH, will it turn a 70's Martin into a prewar Martin?  No, obviously, but you might enjoy playing it more with his improvements.  Also, can you find a newer boutique guitar that already sounds better than a modified 70's Martin?  Absolutely, but that's not the point here....and they don't have the Martin name.....

----------

Chris Gray

----------


## Buck

> Ive seen some very poorly modified Martins over the last 25 years, done by a variety of well known individuals.  Some with bubbled tops, swollen bellies, caved in tops, oversized bridges, etc.  I suppose there is a learning curve to these types of mods, but I steer clear of them, and so do a lot of dealers.  I can understand repairs, but if you are looking for a different sound and or response from a particular instrument, *why not buy something that better suits your tastes?*


With the clear that statement that I'm not trying to talk anyone into anything, here are my reasons....

I come from a background of tinkerers and hotrodders.  We modified everything - trap guns, motorcycles, tractors, boats.  You name it, we think we can make it better.  Even among that group there are things we don't tinker with beyond normal maintenance, things like vintage instruments, prewar shotguns, and the like.  When it comes to "utility items", anything is in play.  

With respect to these 70's Martins, they have a lot going for them.  Many of them have nice looking wood, solid mahogany necks, and basically good structure and design.  The real downsides are (or may be) excessive relief with the square tube neck, large IRW bridge plate, and intonation problems related to bridge placement.  Correct those things and you're in business.  Of course, you can go a couple steps further like I did with removing the popsicle brace, and scalloping the X-braces.  I left the tone bars alone.  In every instances where I've been able to try before and after, after has always been a significant improvement.  A good guitar to a very good guitar.

The other thing is the neck.  Martin does not reproduce those vintage neck shapes on any modern guitar.  I prefer that shape to anything they are currently making.  I'm very happy to take on the project to get that neck.  

Old wood sounds different than new woods.  These guitars are 40+ years old.  You can't exactly reproduce that, and Martin didn't make many scalloped guitars during that period, and none in mahogany.  In Dreadnaughts, it was the HD-28 only, and not until 1976.  You can order a Custom Shop guitar from Martin, but you won't get exactly the same neck or the age.

Cost is a reasonable consideration too.  If you shop carefully for examples that already need a neck reset and frets, then buy then at a reasonable price, all of the necessary work and the modifications can be completed for $2k or less.  The performance of the guitar you get for that price is considerably above anything comparable.  My opinion of course.

Again, no intention to persuade anyone to undertake this sort of thing, but I hope you might view it as something other than a crackpot idea at least.  "first-hand experience"  :-)

One other thing, I've never had ANY trouble reselling a guitar modified by Bryan.

----------

Chris Gray, 

doc holiday

----------


## rcc56

Todd, have you ever pulled and re-set a neck?  Repaired a split X brace?  Made and installed a bridge of any kind?  Opened up an A-4 that had a large shard pulled away from the inside of the top and grafted in new wood?  Replaced the bar frets on a valuable pre-war Martin?  That's first hand experience in lutherie.

I am out of here.  I've got to finish glueing the back on the guitar I just re-braced, cut a new saddle slot in the bridge and re-glue it, and get the shop cleaned up for the fret job that's due in on Wednesday.

----------


## Buck

> Buck, have you ever pulled and re-set a neck?


No.




> Repaired a split X brace?


No.




> Made and installed a bridge of any kind?


Yes.




> Opened up an A-4 that had a large shard pulled away from the inside of the top and grafted in new wood?


No.

I do most minor setup work, up to and including fretwork on some instruments.  I have a short list of repairmen I pay to do the rest, and I know my limitations when it comes to repairs.


I'm not sure what any of that has to do with firsthand experience with the results of modifications by Bryan Kimsey.  That was the original question.  I have experience with Bryan's work.  Many guitars, mine and others, over many years.  I don't have to have done the work to understand the risks and rewards.  I'm an engineer.  I review and assess all kinds of things that I don't personally create.  That doesn't diminish my admiration of those who do the work, but neither should not crafting the product with my own hands disqualify me from understanding it.

----------

ccravens, 

doc holiday

----------


## sunburst

It is just coincidence that I have a 1975 D-35 on the bench right now with a top that was just short of ruined. All of this and more came out from under the top.

----------

j. condino

----------


## Buck

> It is just coincidence that I have a 1975 D-35 on the bench right now with a top that was just short of ruined. All of this and more came out from under the top.


Just short of ruined how?  

Bryan won't scallop the lighter bracing of a D-35, and I'm certain he didn't ADD a bridge plate on top of a bridge plate and then install a Bridge Doctor.  :-)

----------


## sunburst

> Just short of ruined how?


Looked like a relatively "straight forward" remove bridge dr., remove 2 bridge plates, replace bridge and bridge plate. 
Here's a look under the bridge, and after removing all the extra wood and remains of the original bridge plate.

----------


## Jeff Mando

Doc Watson mentioned in interviews his old Martin had the bridge reglued so many times they had to "inlay" spruce!

Back in the days when heavy gauge strings were all that people played....

----------


## Buck

> Looked like a relatively "straight forward" remove bridge dr., remove 2 bridge plates, replace bridge and bridge plate. 
> Here's a look under the bridge, and after removing all the extra wood and remains of the original bridge plate.


So many projects are like that.  Seems easy until you start....

----------

j. condino

----------


## rcc56

Good luck, John.  I did one something like that some years back.  Like yours, they didn't leave me as much old spruce to graft to as one would wish for.  May the spirit of creative carpentry guide you in the direction of an artistic repair that will hold.

----------


## Steve 2E

Back to the OP, I would say no. No disrespect to Mr. Kimsey, but I prefer the tone of the natural top. I wouldnt do any further modifications. I honestly like the difference in tone between both guitars and wouldnt want to change either one.

----------


## sunburst

> ...May the spirit of creative carpentry guide you in the direction of an artistic repair that will hold.


This isn't the first time I've run into this sort of thing, and I've fixed them in several different ways depending on the value of the guitar, customers desires (and budget), and how the rest of the structure is holding up. I think this one will be solid if somewhat homely (I had to make an oversize saddle-back bridge).

----------


## j. condino

John, I like the embedded title of your  photo: "platejunk"...

Another $100 quoted repair job that will cost you $500 of bench time; I feel your pain.....

----------


## HoGo

> John, I like the embedded title of your  photo: "platejunk"...
> 
> Another $100 quoted repair job that will cost you $500 of bench time; I feel your pain.....


I wonder if you HAVE to continue the work after you discover mess like that. Here in EU you can in such case send new quote to customer and he can either agree or disagree and take it back paying for the part of work that has been done so far.
I personally would just refuse the work on such "surprise" instrument. It may be full of other landmines and if it fails later even from damage you didn't work on you may be the one blamed...

----------


## pops1

I had to do one of these several years ago, it is still playing as far as I know. There was much more going on with the one I did, I don't know who did the previous work, but if it wasn't for a friend of mine I wouldn't have done it.

----------


## sunburst

> I wonder if you HAVE to continue the work after you discover mess like that...


I would not HAVE to, I suppose, but rest assured that the estimate on this one will cover the work. I was expecting the price to come in well under the estimate.
The guitar was given to the owner by a family member and he is spending enough on this repair to buy a pretty good guitar.

----------


## Buck

> I wonder if you HAVE to continue the work after you discover mess like that. Here in EU you can in such case send new quote to customer and he can either agree or disagree and take it back paying for the part of work that has been done so far.
> I personally would just refuse the work on such "surprise" instrument. It may be full of other landmines and if it fails later even from damage you didn't work on you may be the one blamed...


I don't believe we have any specific laws obligating the repairman to do anything, but of course prices could change once it is known that additional work is required. I've had a few unexpected things pop up, but I've never had a repairman refuse to complete the project.  If that happened, it would disappoint me to learn that I'd picked the wrong repairmen.  I really want someone who can handle anything, and I'm very happy to pay more when unforeseen conditions require additional work.

This is a perfect example of things that can't be known until you start taking things apart.  I bought a 1943 000-18 a while back.  When it arrived, I found a replaced and oversized bridge plate, along with plugged holes from bolts (right through the X-braces) and plugged bolt holes in the bridge.  The work was pretty clean, but undisclosed by the seller.  I was concerned about what was between that plate and the bridge.  Since the seller did not want to negotiate a lower price, I returned it for a full refund.  Risk is OK if the price is right.

That said, the concealed conditions John pictured is not something you'd have to worry about with Bryan's work. Interesting for sure, but a different issue.

----------


## Mandobar

Consumer laws vary state to state.  You’d be surprised at what some states have embedded in their commercial code to protect their citizens. I’ve learned one thing in life, never say never.

----------

j. condino

----------


## V70416

Tried(not very hard) to stay out of this discussion since I know so little of the topic at hand. 

I am very favorably impressed with the knowledge and experience being shared here so freely. Thanks to all posters.

2007 I was in New Mexico. Dropped off a '69(?) D-12-35 at Bryan Kimsey's shop.
 It needed some set-up TLC. From what I can read of the worksheet provided he:
reset the neck,
removed and reglued the bridge,
replaced (gigantic) rosewood bridge plate with maple
removed and rebraced(?) popsicle
adjusted individual strings in the nut
crowned and polished frets

I wish I knew how to post pics of the zip lock baggie full of material that was removed from the top. It's a lot!
And it looks to me like it was done so cleanly. Just little whiskers of spruce clinging to the bridge plate. And then only in a few areas.

My 12-stringer is always tuned down 1/2 step. It has remained as nicely playable as any 12-string can be for
well over a decade. 

Mr.Kimsey did a world of good for that guitar. The price was very reasonable too. 

Glad I had that work done. It is a true belly-piano. 

I like that he provided a worksheet with what was done and the cost per each action.

Whether or not you decide to have your guitar scalloped you can rest assured it is in good hands
with Bryan Kimsey.

Again,I am awed at the shared experiences and knowledge of the luthiers here on the Cafe. 

Luthiers perform critical duties in their work. Seems even more precious these days.

----------

Buck

----------

