Martin’s new “skeletonized bracing”

TimmyO

A new thing:

https://www.martinguitar.com/series-inception.html#look

ICBM

Interesting!

Tannin

Martin having a go at actually advancing the art instead of their habitual living-in-the-past rehashes of old models. Good for them! 

Martin have had a few goes lately at doing new and interesting stuff. Now we just need Martin buyers to get their heads out of the past. 

PS: European Spruce, maple, and walnut. Beautiful, sustainable, great sound unless I miss my guess. 

Penn

Great idea. It’s reminds me of old aeroplanes and race cars but… how strong will it be? I suppose old fretwork on chippendale furniture lasts but that’s not under tension. 

Jez6345789

I not much of a hard core traditionalist but it does look a bit of a corporate decision making new CEO wanting to be seen as progressive and ok I have this thing in my bottom draw boss.

without seeing them in the flesh  the bracing looks pretty chunky before they play with their new laser toy.  Also why identical patterns on each brace. I also love its laser cut except the bit she has to remove with a chisel.

any way sure some people will like it. It is the Namm season

ICBM

The only thing that puts me off is the electrics. I would prefer a purely acoustic one.

ryanverbena

ICBM said:

The only thing that puts me off is the electrics. I would prefer a purely acoustic one.

Agreed - I imagine this would be the case with most "typical" Martin players. I'd prefer no cutaway as well. 

Almost seems directly targeted at converting Taylor players. 

DavidR

Anyone exploring the genre should be congratulated. As per the SC13E when it came out - innovative and brave. Well done Martin.

But - the purpose of top bracing on an acoustic is to enable thinner tops. Known beneficial bracing characteristics are strength, clever positioning, construction in the right wood (more often than not Sitka Spruce) and lightness. Are these new 'R101' braces (it was an airship) lighter inch per inch than scalloped bracing? Are they stronger?

Also, if it's Martin, will it be cheap?

Only decider is to try it I suppose. 

                            

Tannin

Yes. "Typical" Martin players buy traditional models like the D-18 and HD-28, and Martin is absolutely brilliant at extracting money from them. 

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are after Taylor players though. It is reasonable to see it as a more of a broadly-targeted product aimed at anyone who isn't hopelessly wedded to the "traditional way is the best and only way" mantra. That would naturally include Taylor players, but also players of any flavour. In particular, I imagine that they are looking for younger players. If so that is a very sensible thing to do - tradition has been a fantastic marketing tool for Martin for many years, but there is no guarantee that it will go on working forever. Smart management always a Plan B. 

Or maybe they simply think this might be a way to build a better guitar.

(PS: most buyers either want a pickup as standard, or else don't much care either way. This is why so many guitar makers include a pickup as standard on most models: it costs very little more by the time you factor in economies of scale and supply chain simplification, broadens the appeal of the guitar, and if done properly has zero impact on its acoustic sound. Bit of a no-brainer really.)

ArchtopDave

It's a good job guitarists, and now Martin, suffer from memory loss.

Additionally, if they use lasers to cut wood so well, how come the Ad shows such an untidily cut X-Brace (I can do a lot better than that with a bit of care and a handsaw, as @TTony ; can confirm).

To me, this style of bracing reminds me a bit of Viennese style bracing.  Did  not the famed Founder of Martin Guitars work and study under probably the most famous (and innovative) Viennese maker of guitars, and other instruments, Johann Stauffer? 

bertie

I understand why they'd experiment for tonal and sonc resons  but they mention "weight relief"  but the braces are twice the size of other braces,  the wood on top of the "hex skeleton" is a normal brace. 

Soupman

Smells like....snake oil...  

Tannin

DavidR said:

Anyone exploring the genre should be congratulated. As per the SC13E when it came out - innovative and brave. Well done Martin.

I agree.

But - the purpose of top bracing on an acoustic is to enable thinner tops. Known beneficial bracing characteristics are strength, clever positioning, construction in the right wood (more often than not Sitka Spruce) and lightness. Are these new 'R101' braces (it was an airship) lighter inch per inch than scalloped bracing? Are they stronger?

Generally, makers favour Red Spruce for bracing (also known as "Adirondack") - or at least say they do; I often wonder if a lot of the "Red Spruce" bracing guitar makers put on the spec sheet isn't Sitka. After all, no-one is ever going to be able to prove it isn't.

Red Spruce does indeed have a higher strength to weight ratio than Sitka, but the difference is marginal. And if it comes to that, Western Red Cedar, gram for gram, is comfortably stronger than either.But is the strength-to-weight ratio particularly important for bracing? Atkin clearly don't think so - all Atkin guitars are braced with what they coyly call "redwood", which is in fact Baltic Pine (also known as "Scots Pine"), a timber not as strong as Sitka Spruce but 30% heavier! (And while I've never played one myself, I only hear good things about Atkin.)

But let's assume the weight of bracing does matter. What then is the point of Martin's R-101 style braces, which sacrifice a bit of strength and save not very much weight, when far more advanced construction methods are readily available?

Here, for example, is the bracing of my Mineur baritone. It is much stronger than any plain wooden bracing can be, much lighter, and above all can easily be curved for (according to the designer) superior structural and acoustic properties. These particular braces are made from King Billy Pine and carbon fibre, but any light, easy-to-bend timber would do. 

Are these new 'R101' braces (it was an airship) lighter inch per inch

                            

Actually, i think you'll find the bracing of the R100 was significantly lighter and stronger. But then we don't have pictures of that one after a crash because (as know if I am any guess) it was well-made and airworthy and didn't crash. 

Also, if it's Martin, will it be cheap?

Of course not.

WezV

I was actually considering something like this since getting the laser cutter, looks like they had exactly the same idea.

Acoustic body design is always a careful balance of weight and stiffness - this makes perfect sense

S56035

ICBM said:

The only thing that puts me off is the electrics. I would prefer a purely acoustic one.

Absolutely this.  I'm looking for a new acoustic and I'm sick of seeing pickups I'll never use!

bertie

would carbon fibre not be a good material  just  for bracing ?  (yes Im aware of all carbon fibre geetars)

Tannin

^ In general, carbon fibre (and other very high strength, low weight materials such as Kevlar) are employed for performance-critical tasks in combination with very light, relatively low-strength materials such as end-grain Balsa, expanded polystyrene foam - or indeed King Billy Pine as shown above. 

Typical applications for these very high strength, low weight combinations are racing cars, light aircraft (especially gliders, where strength and weight are everything), and racing yachts. But there is no reason musical instrument makers cannot learn from other crafts. (Again, see above. Falcate bracing - as on the baritone soundboard pictured and also on my older concert-size guitar - is nowadays a well-established textbook technique for luthiers. Lots of different makers use it,. We have yet to see the mass production factories start using it, but that is bound to happen before too long. 

TimmyO

bertie said:

would carbon fibre not be a good material  just  for bracing ?  (yes Im aware of all carbon fibre geetars)

I think Garrison did something like that at one point 

menamestom

ICBM said:

The only thing that puts me off is the electrics. I would prefer a purely acoustic one.

The only thing that puts me off is the £4,150 price tag.

Martin Certified Wood Series | GPCE Inception Maple - Peach Guitars

It does make me wonder, this is marketed as sustainable but in reality the kind of people who will buy this will have a load of other acoustics already and really just want the latest thing.  Guitars are only sustainable if they are your only/main instrument rather than one of many.

Roland

Tannin said:

Are these new 'R101' braces (it was an airship) lighter inch per inch

                            

Actually, i think you'll find the bracing of the R100 was significantly lighter and stronger. But then we don't have pictures of that one after a crash because (as know if I am any guess) it was well-made and airworthy and didn't crash. 

Nevil Shute, the author, was the Chief Calculator for the R100. He notes in his autobiography “Slide Rule” that the airframe was constructed using spirally wound duralumin tubes, with steel cable bracing.

guitarjack66

S56035 said:

ICBM said:

The only thing that puts me off is the electrics. I would prefer a purely acoustic one.

Absolutely this.  I'm looking for a new acoustic and I'm sick of seeing pickups I'll never use!

There are plenty of acoustic guitars without pick ups to choose from. I have three of the cheaper ones but there are thousands of more expensive guitars out there the same.