The three tenors - an experiment

jupiteruke said:

So I have instruments on the bench with tops that grew some time between 979 and 1734 AD, depending on which side of the plank they came from. Old wood!

Click to expand...

Yeah, but does it make any difference in how they sound?

The three tenor instruments are finished. All have very similar redwood tops and are all strung with the same strings (low-G). Oasis fluorocarbon for the 1'st and 2'nd strings, Thomastik-Infeld CF27 and CF30 for the 3'd and 4'th strings. All three instruments sound good (I do like a low-G setup). I am not a player so the comparisons are made by plucking open strings and listening for the differences.

Kasha vs. X braced
These two instruments have redwood tops cut from the same redwood board. It is a very fine grained and pretty stiff redwood. There is a tonal difference, but it is not a very large difference. The Kasha instrument has a bit more bass, particularly on the 4'th string, giving the instrument a bit 'rounder' sound. As one progresses up the strings the difference between the two instruments becomes less and less, so by the first string there is virtually no difference. Sustain is the same across the two instruments. The overall difference is such that I think unless one has a very good ear (and memory) it would be hard to tell the difference if there was a 10 minute break between playing either one.

X braced vs. X braced with a double back
The short story here is that the double back seems to make no difference. Maybe the double back instrument has a bit more base and has a bit more sustain, but that difference is well within the range of different pieces of redwood tops and/or different back & side woods. I do not think I could tell the difference when blindfolded. I do note that with either when I place my hand on the back I feel the same amount of vibration when a string is plucked so that double back does not seem to be isolating the real back.

Very interesting experiment. The double-back doesn't seem to do a whole lot and the Kasha bracing does little more than add some bass (and eliminates the option of reentrant tuning). It seems like the old tried-and-true X-bracing is the best option for most people and uses.

I salute you for your experiment. Unfortunately these things always come down to a subjective comparison rather than a quantitative comparison which is hard to do. We hear what we expect to hear.

Snargle said:

the Kasha bracing does little more than add some bass (and eliminates the option of reentrant tuning). It seems like the old tried-and-true X-bracing is the best option for most people and uses.

Click to expand...

I don't see how Kasha eliminates the option of reentrant - just that it would provide no benefit for reentrant. I like the aesthetic of the Kasha so it could still be worth doing just on that basis.

Jim Hanks said:

I don't see how Kasha eliminates the option of reentrant - just that it would provide no benefit for reentrant. I like the aesthetic of the Kasha so it could still be worth doing just on that basis.

Click to expand...

I may have "misspoken" Let's just say that Kasha bracing seems to provide no particular benefit for reentrant tuning.

Those are stunning looking instruments. I like those non-concentric rosettes. You just gave me an idea for a build I have on the bench right now. Thanks for sharing your work.