Frank: What year did the Chicago/U.S. Manufacturers start bracing for steel strings? - FRETS.NET2024-03-29T07:42:45Zhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/forum/topics/frank-what-year-did-the-chicago-u-s-manufacturers-start-bracing?commentId=2177249%3AComment%3A193261&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noYeah... its a pretty solid fe…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2020-08-31:2177249:Comment:1932612020-08-31T16:22:20.050Zel squirhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/LarrySquires
<p>Yeah... its a pretty solid feature. I haven't had any inclination to remove it. </p>
<p></p>
<p>1 of mine is a one-piece ?maple? back/sides; the other 1 of mine is one-piece ?rosewood or mahogany or some fruit wood? back/sides - not sure. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Yeah... its a pretty solid feature. I haven't had any inclination to remove it. </p>
<p></p>
<p>1 of mine is a one-piece ?maple? back/sides; the other 1 of mine is one-piece ?rosewood or mahogany or some fruit wood? back/sides - not sure. </p>
<p></p> The metallic sound is defeate…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2020-08-31:2177249:Comment:1931762020-08-31T15:51:25.291ZRoger Häggströmhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/RogerHaeggstroem
<p>The metallic sound is defeated by the thickness of the sheet metal and the sheer weight of the saddle/tailpiece. The fact that it is screwed down in the top is another reason. The hard attack is a natural consequence of the hard metal seating of the ball ends of the strings.</p>
<p>All in all, not a bad solution. Better than a standard thin sheet metal tailpiece and a floating bridge :-)<br></br><br></br>My guitar is BTW made with some kind of light colored fruit wood in the back and…</p>
<p>The metallic sound is defeated by the thickness of the sheet metal and the sheer weight of the saddle/tailpiece. The fact that it is screwed down in the top is another reason. The hard attack is a natural consequence of the hard metal seating of the ball ends of the strings.</p>
<p>All in all, not a bad solution. Better than a standard thin sheet metal tailpiece and a floating bridge :-)<br/><br/>My guitar is BTW made with some kind of light colored fruit wood in the back and sides.</p>
<p></p> Not all Imperial guitars had…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2020-08-31:2177249:Comment:1932572020-08-31T13:23:09.422Zel squirhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/LarrySquires
<p>Not all Imperial guitars had the patented feature. Other Imperial were made, as common at the time to relieve stress and alter the sound, with regular tail-pieces (and, many tail-pieces were lost and/or replaced with other non-original tail-pieces). A couple of the guitars at Charles' website look like the tail-piece had been either replaced, or removed entirely in preference of a fixed bridge/pins. I think a lot of people (for a variety of reasons) experimented with and/or prefer a fixed…</p>
<p>Not all Imperial guitars had the patented feature. Other Imperial were made, as common at the time to relieve stress and alter the sound, with regular tail-pieces (and, many tail-pieces were lost and/or replaced with other non-original tail-pieces). A couple of the guitars at Charles' website look like the tail-piece had been either replaced, or removed entirely in preference of a fixed bridge/pins. I think a lot of people (for a variety of reasons) experimented with and/or prefer a fixed bridge/pins instead of the tail-piece - especially a metal tail-piece. But, I've got 2 of these, and I agree with Roger... no real 'metallic' sound, though quite crisp on the attack.</p>
<p></p>
<p>The rest of the build was very much like a John C. Haynes. </p>
<p></p> Roger
Very interesting guitar…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2020-08-31:2177249:Comment:1931732020-08-31T12:45:13.146ZEd Minchhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/EdMinch
<p>Roger</p>
<p>Very interesting guitars. In the last example on your site - with the replacement pin bridge - it looks like the tailpiece was never attached to the original bridge, Why do you suppose the tailpiece extended as far as it did up the top?</p>
<p>Ed</p>
<p>Roger</p>
<p>Very interesting guitars. In the last example on your site - with the replacement pin bridge - it looks like the tailpiece was never attached to the original bridge, Why do you suppose the tailpiece extended as far as it did up the top?</p>
<p>Ed</p> I actually own one such Imper…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2020-08-26:2177249:Comment:1931292020-08-26T16:22:28.975ZRoger Häggströmhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/RogerHaeggstroem
<p>I actually own one such Imperial guitar, nice to have such a special one. The top is very thin and have a tendency to buckle in in the soundhole area, I dare not use any thicker strings than a 0.10 set. The bridge and tailpiece actually sounds very good on this guitar, no metallic sound at <span class="hiddenGrammarError">all</span> :-)…<br></br><br></br></p>
<p>I actually own one such Imperial guitar, nice to have such a special one. The top is very thin and have a tendency to buckle in in the soundhole area, I dare not use any thicker strings than a 0.10 set. The bridge and tailpiece actually sounds very good on this guitar, no metallic sound at <span class="hiddenGrammarError">all</span> :-)<br/><br/><a href="https://www.leavingthisworld.com/imperial-guitars-approx-c-1880-c-1900-john-church-co/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://www.leavingthisworld.com/imperial-guitars-approx-c-1880-c-1...</a></p>
<p></p> I'm a couple years late, here…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2020-08-26:2177249:Comment:1931232020-08-26T04:28:33.201Zel squirhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/LarrySquires
<p>I'm a couple years late, here. But, in 1891, Imperial guitars patented and launched what may be the first guitar advertised for steel strings, i.e. a combined bridge and tailpiece made of metal. See John Church Company, Cincinnati, Oh. </p>
<p>I'm a couple years late, here. But, in 1891, Imperial guitars patented and launched what may be the first guitar advertised for steel strings, i.e. a combined bridge and tailpiece made of metal. See John Church Company, Cincinnati, Oh. </p> I've had some Benary (Tilten…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2016-01-23:2177249:Comment:1530192016-01-23T20:04:20.369Zonewenthttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/onewent
<p>I've had some Benary (Tilten knockoffs) guitars from the late 1800s that were braced for steel. Tom</p>
<p>I've had some Benary (Tilten knockoffs) guitars from the late 1800s that were braced for steel. Tom</p> Thanks for the clarification…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2016-01-22:2177249:Comment:1533112016-01-22T17:26:22.199ZDoc Rathwellhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/DocRathwell
<p>Thanks for the clarification on the Gibson factory. I don't know where I came up with the L-5, 1922 date but <em>far as I know</em>, you're far more knowledgeable about this stuff than I. Now to scribble something new into the book ☺</p>
<p></p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>Doc</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification on the Gibson factory. I don't know where I came up with the L-5, 1922 date but <em>far as I know</em>, you're far more knowledgeable about this stuff than I. Now to scribble something new into the book ☺</p>
<p></p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>Doc</p> Gibson's first instruments we…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2016-01-22:2177249:Comment:1531042016-01-22T01:13:33.040ZFrank Fordhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/FrankFord
<p>Gibson's first instruments were made for steel stringing. Far as I know that includes Orville's handmade ones, and everything made by the factory starting in 1902.</p>
<p>And, I agree - the Larson brothers are generally credited with being among the first makers of flat-top guitars for steel stringing.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Martin started right after the Great War with Hawaiian models, notably the 2-17.</p>
<p>Gibson's first instruments were made for steel stringing. Far as I know that includes Orville's handmade ones, and everything made by the factory starting in 1902.</p>
<p>And, I agree - the Larson brothers are generally credited with being among the first makers of flat-top guitars for steel stringing.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Martin started right after the Great War with Hawaiian models, notably the 2-17.</p> Well, I'm not Frank but just…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2016-01-22:2177249:Comment:1530022016-01-22T00:39:15.066ZDoc Rathwellhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/DocRathwell
<p>Well, I'm not Frank but just to help...if I can; I believe the Larson Bros had developed the first instrument handling what we'd consider "steel string" tension, in the late 1800's. Gibson made the first factory production steel-string: the L-5, in 1922. In 1929 is when Martin started producing more steel-strings. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Hopefully Frank will pipe in to verify this...</p>
<p>Doc</p>
<p>Well, I'm not Frank but just to help...if I can; I believe the Larson Bros had developed the first instrument handling what we'd consider "steel string" tension, in the late 1800's. Gibson made the first factory production steel-string: the L-5, in 1922. In 1929 is when Martin started producing more steel-strings. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Hopefully Frank will pipe in to verify this...</p>
<p>Doc</p>