I can only repeat a previous post: Go Ruckers!
2 Likes
You already got the response to your question (which by the way is irrelevant to Andrew’s post): original Ruckers weren’t made from G though they were made from C chromatic bass or short octave.
However, Ruckers-ish harpsichords from G are doable and in fact thery are made often. They require a substantial re-framing, which makes them less “Ruckers-ish” than desirable, IF and when (often) they are made 2x8’.
Such undesirable reframing can be avoided or lessened to the bare minimum if one makes 1x8’, 1x4’ as in the original and as I advocated.
By “Ruckers-ish” I mean a harpsichord with the same scaling, string diameter, plucking points than the original.
Same registers 1x8, 1x4.
Then with the same characteristic case joints, the toolbox (if intended as a point of voluntary weakness of the case), the non-glued-only-pegged rear baseboard.
Same soundboard back furniture. Same bridges and double bridgepins. Same distance bridge-bentside.
Then a harpsichord from G could add nothing to the internal framing or maybe only an angle reinforcement tail-spine or tail-bentside if felt needed.
Go Ruckers, with or without the damn G! 
Dom
@Dennis this is irrelevant to my post. It was to appreciate a fine instrument, not to discuss compass and disposition. Just appreciate the playing and instrument (or not!).
This is called thread hijacking and you know it’s against forum policy.
Start a new topic to argue these points, or add to the existing one.
1 Like