The Soundboard bit.. RC&S

[Ron Nossaman]

> Now, this relies on the fact that a wooden panel with no compression in 
> it will transmit the vibrational energy of the string in a good manner 
> (I suppose that is filtering the string input in an aesthetic pleasant 
> way with enough efficiency to deliver wanted acoustic volume).
> Wouldn't a compressed pannel even do this better (even at the cost of 
> some in time fragility)?  I know, old question, but still much energy 
> for talking about it, and always interesting to see how the thinking 
> evolves around this.  I still think, in a non authoritative manner, that 
> the internal frictions in the board will be less when compressed than 
> when not.  Anyway, the proper resonant modes of the board will be higher 
> in the compressed version, and the board vibrational response to string 
> input will accordingly be more even all over the spectrum.  Or not ?
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> Stéphane Collin.


Perhaps someone with the equipment and interest to measure all 
this stuff will someday take the time and trouble to do it. I 
doubt that will happen any time soon, as the universal 
uninformed assumption seems to be that high panel compression 
levels are necessary to vibrational efficiency of the 
assembly. Until then, speculation without experience is of 
little value in understanding how these things work. People 
have asked me "Why would you want to give up the tone just to 
build a board that doesn't go flat?" The answer is that I 
wouldn't, and don't. Through the years, I've built both high 
compression rib crowned boards and low compression rib crowned 
and supported boards, and the low compression RC&S boards give 
every indication to me to be a much more efficient assembly. 
If that were not the case, I'd still be building high 
compression boards.
Ron N