Soundboard mass

[Ron Nossaman]

> No I haven't built one of those...yet.  Do you think that an argument can be
> made, then, for using a heavier wood than spruce for the ribbing in the
> treble section?
> 
> David Love

An argument can, historically, be made for anything one wishes 
to argue about. My take is that doing a one-off redesign, the 
odds of my hitting the optimal ratio of stiffness to mass at 
all points in the scale on the first shot are vastly improved 
by designing in an after the fact refinement mechanism for 
when I don't. Anything can be complicated far beyond a 
reasonable hope of practicality, but I like the simple 
approach. Using a minimum of standard materials, and shade 
tree mechanic methods, I find I can intentionally overshoot on 
the treble stiffness, and adjust back with mass with more 
control, and a higher level of dependability than anything 
else I've tried. The difference is in whether or not your 
design can be made to work to your satisfaction after it's 
built. I prefer to build in some negotiation room, where I 
can, and that means limiting the number and range of the 
variables where possible.

The difference is, I think, whether the project is to meet 
expectation and produce an anticipated and promised product 
for a client, or a "let's see what we get" personal 
experiment. Both are valid, but not interchangeable.
Ron N