Jim53 Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 Hello folks, I'm thinking about selling this 1979 HB and was doing some inspecting so as to be able to describe it accurately. Upon looking inside, I was reminded of this bracing which I had never seen before in any model of acoustic guitar. It's prompted me to ask if this is some kind of weird DIY fix-it or if it is typical of the way HBs of this vintage were made. I've just never seen so much lumber inside a guitar before.😊 Here's a pic of the bracing and of the overall HB. Any help is greatly appreciated. -Jim  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim53 Posted December 14, 2021 Author Share Posted December 14, 2021 I should have asked if this was the normal way a bridge was attached. Not really about the bracing. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gossmanster Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 I've never seen bracing like that, but Gibson did some strange things in the 60s and 70s to reinforce their guitars and reduce warranty work.   Some examples in this thread: https://umgf.com/vintage-gibson-bracing-library-t1364-s160.html  Alternatively, the guitar had some belly bulge and you're seeing the repair work...something like a primitive Bridge Doctor. I hope that isn't how the bridge is attached... All guesswork. I'm curious if the guitar is particularly heavy and how it sounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75 Hummingbird Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 Hi Jim . What you have there is a homemade Belly Buster ...it looks like a bit of overkill but....if the top is relatively flat why not. I am curious as to how much of a tone killer the apparatus is . It is definitely not from the factory ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 (edited) Gibson did install that Fuller brace in the J200 staring around 1962 which was an additional brace which screwed directly into the top bracing and was designed to help stabilize the top. The thing in the HB though makes that contraption look downright petite.  I agree with others though that this particular work of art was a post-production fix.   Edited December 14, 2021 by zombywoof Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfish Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 And is that the double X brace system I've heard mentioned of here? First time I've seen a photo of one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 Oooohhh, what we see here is a rare glimpse of the controversial double X - those are of course the ones behind the brutalistic bolted block-logs. Intereztingg to compare the 2 Xs - the first is fatter, isn't it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 (edited) Looks like a full square bridge plate fills up the area between the "X"'s. Hard to believe they needed an extra bolt on bracing. Looks like it's on the verge of being a solid body guitar. Edited December 14, 2021 by Dave F 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twang Gang Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 Without question a DIY fix for something. How does the guitar sound? Looks like it would be difficult to move that top at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimt Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 (edited) Never seen that before.  The bridge plate is different.    I had  a Hummingbird from that era.  The bridge plate was thick.  But not to that scale.    Edited December 14, 2021 by slimt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim53 Posted December 15, 2021 Author Share Posted December 15, 2021 Thanks guys, The pics are helpful. A few are almost exactly what I've got. I agree that it's probably overkill. That said, the top is very flat. The guitar sounds pretty good but not as good as a late model Boseman i had a number of years ago and nowhere near as good as my 2006 Martin D-28 Standard. Also, the added wood doesn't make it much heavier than the Martin. Â Looking closer, I can see a gap between the brace and the top, each brace resting on the X braces. The bolts are directly pressed against the top so that if one were to loosen them a bit, whatever change it makes to the bowing of the top would be eliminated. I'm going to try loosening them a bit to see what happens. I'll post results if I get around to doing it anytime soon. So, the double X bracing is unusual, eh? I take it from the comments, not a good thing. Still, I got a pretty good deal on the HB and I've been happy with it. Arthritis is making it harder to play narrow necks so am in the market for a nice guitar with a 1 3/4" nut width or greater. Thanks again for the comments. Really helpful!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted December 15, 2021 Share Posted December 15, 2021 2 hours ago, Jim53 said: So, the double X bracing is unusual, eh? I take it from the comments, not a good thing. Still, I got a pretty good deal on the HB and I've been happy with it. Arthritis is making it harder to play narrow necks so am in the market for a nice guitar with a 1 3/4" nut width or greater. Thanks again for the comments. Really helpful!! Just to avoid any misunderstandings, we need to clear the following : The double-X was introduced in the early 70s and is seen as one of the worst ideas in the acoustic - certainly Gibson's - history ever. It may have fortified the guitars and kept a number of tops from damage, but the sound died and the concept has never been re-used since it was dismissed aprrox. 10-12 years later. That said, it's still possible to find 2X square Gibsons which have developed their own individual fine even generous voice.                                                                                 But they remain in an alternative category - and their fate is now and again to be described as full of socks, , , which in the case above should/could be changed to full of blocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 15, 2021 Share Posted December 15, 2021 I f I recall in the earlier 1970s Gibson used a smaller bridge plate. I am not sure when Gibson went with the space filling full plate though.  The Double X bracing was a viable pattern. I owned a ca. 1940 Regal jumbo 12 string with it. But it was all about execution and Gibson gave it a bad name.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75 Hummingbird Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 Hi Jim ,the double x brace is not unusual .It was the bracing system used by Gibson generally in the 70`s ...but into the early 80`s to .The system is thought to be less toneful ,more rigid and or less appealing . To each their own , some Gibson's of this design are beautiful and great sounding guitars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 1 hour ago, 75 Hummingbird said: Hi Jim ,the double x brace is not unusual .It was the bracing system used by Gibson generally in the 70`s ...but into the early 80`s to .The system is thought to be less toneful ,more rigid and or less appealing . To each their own , some Gibson's of this design are beautiful and great sounding guitars. Exactly - there is a general consensus about this. And if someone wants to get an idea about the ratings, check'n'compare the tags. They say it all, , ,                                                                         but won't of course reveal which of the so called Norlins offer that certain attractive double-X-factor. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 12 hours ago, 75 Hummingbird said: Hi Jim ,the double x brace is not unusual .It was the bracing system used by Gibson generally in the 70`s ...but into the early 80`s to .The system is thought to be less toneful ,more rigid and or less appealing . To each their own , some Gibson's of this design are beautiful and great sounding guitars. He was not questioning the Double X bracing but the two added braces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 1 hour ago, zombywoof said: He was not questioning the Double X bracing but the two added braces. Yes, you are right - still the picture was an opportunity to talk a bit about the double X (which here looks fat/thin) and the plate. On 12/15/2021 at 1:18 AM, Jim53 said: Looking closer, I can see a gap between the brace and the top, each brace resting on the X braces. The bolts are directly pressed against the top so that if one were to loosen them a bit, whatever change it makes to the bowing of the top would be eliminated. I'm going to try loosening them a bit to see what happens. I'll post results if I get around to doing it anytime soon. Regarding the 2 extra logs, I'm almost sure they can be removed without fatal results. The top may change shape/curve, but it should be possible to compensate for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 13 hours ago, E-minor7 said: Exactly - there is a general consensus about this. And if someone wants to get an idea about the ratings, check'n'compare the tags. They say it all, , ,                                                                         but won't of course reveal which of the so called Norlins offer that certain attractive double-X-factor. . The obsession with bracing is a fairly recent development. Pretty much if you could not see it, it was not worth mentioning. These days bracing ranks probably second only to the the Tone Wood Kool Aid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75 Hummingbird Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, E-minor7 said: Yes, you are right - still the picture was an opportunity to talk a bit about the double X (which here looks fat/thin) and the plate. Regarding the 2 extra logs, I'm almost sure they can be removed without fatal results. The top may change shape/curve, but it should be possible to compensate for that. Why bother removing the additional bits ? Sell it as is 1500.00 U.S . Have a good day . Edited December 17, 2021 by 75 Hummingbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.