Making my first SADDLE from a blank: Can you advise?

[BothHands]

John Arnold and Ned Milburn and Charles and anybody else ==

I have the guitar strung and the strings do contact the ebony 'ridge line' at the transition from upper bridge (saddle plane) to lower bridge (pins plane). With the new lower action it plays and sounds like a much, much better guitar. I'll post specific results/specs later, but for now, THANK YOU ALL FOR GETTING ME TO THIS POINT.

I've been listening for the potential reduced volume/projection and (God forbid!) the Sitar Simulation Syndrome (SSS) due to low break angle. At first I thought The Blasted Sitar was upon me, BUT...I had not yet trimmed the long ends off my new (John Pearse Phosphor Bronze Light) strings. The boingy, sproingy sitar-like timbre turned out to be several of those long string ends vibrating against one another. I cut them all off at the tuning posts and no more 'sitar"


Here are several diagrams to illustrate my next question:


Image 1 below shows a red shape at the bridge's 'ridge line' representing the intended string ramps. In this scenario, standard bridge pins would be used, with no slotting. It seems I can get away with leaving everything AS IS, but I'm willing to work for the maximum this guitar has to offer. Please tell me if YOU think any of the measures I outline here will have a positive impact worth the effort (and FEAR) involved.

Image 2 below shows the effects of cutting the string ramps and slotting the bridge pin holes. The string now inhabits the slotted channel and the bridge pin would be rotated 90-degrees or 180-degrees so the string does not engage the pin's slot.

Image 3 below depicts my "thinking outside the box" a bit. I don't know if this is actually how things would work out, or if this would be as beneficial as I imagine it would... It appears to me that IF you cut the bridge pin slot at an angle, and cut that angle only to the half-way point of the hole's depth, it would increase the string's break angle considerably because the string would exit the bridge much closer to the saddle.

In this scenario, the string has two break angles, and I have no idea whether that will adversely affect the tone or the 'physics' in some way. I'd appreciate any and all opinions. And though it's not a lot of work (especially for you guys) it's going waaaaay beyond anything I've ever dared do to an acoustic guitar, so please warn me off if this is not likely to improve the guitar's sound or playability in any meaningful way.

Image 4 below is the same as Image 3 except the angled slotting is combined with a traditional slot so a solid bridge pin can be used. I imagine the process being: 1) Cut the traditional slot parallel to the front side of the bridge pin hole, and THEN 2) Cut the angled slot in the upper half of the combined wood thickness.

[BothHands]

Well, here's what I have, so far.

As purchased (used) with bone saddles, the action was much too high:
E = .124" at Fret 12
e = .113" at Fret 12 (plus there was a wood shim under the 'e' end of the saddle for approximately .123" e-string height, crazy)

New saddles made from a Graph Tech TUSQ blank, the action measures:
E = .090" or about 5.5/64" per the ruler (I was aiming for .094" or 6/64")
e = .077" or about 4/64" per the ruler (I was aiming for .078" or 4/64")

It plays much better and sounds much better, like a different guitar. When the action was so high, fingerstyle techniques were difficult and some sounded bad. The tall action seemed to limit sustain. I'm relieved to see this guitar living up to the potential I recognized (or imagined) when I bought it.

THE PHOTO
Yeah, I made the wound-sting saddle too short from left to right: TINY saddles, my first saddle ever, the lighting was insufficient and I was working late at night - a bad combination, BUT...it works just fine.

I researched online before trying this. Ultimately I followed Frank Ford's "Making a new Saddle" at FRETS.COM because it demystifies the process - kinda lets the air out of it compared to some other sources of information. The length of my wound-string saddle is short (dammit) but the thickness is dead-on, so the saddle doesn't move around in the slot. Mr. Ford mentions in his tutorial that achieving the perfect length isn't necessary, so I just chalked it up to "experience" and moved on to the b-and-e-strings saddle. Notice how well the second one fits, so I must be making progress.

All strings except the b string rest on the transitional step between upper bridge (saddle) and lower bridge (pins). See the shadow below the b string in the left-side view. The guitar plays well now, and sounds quite good, but maybe it'll sound BETTER if I form a string ramp under each string. So I intend to do that according to John Arnold's instructions.

Nobody replied to my illustrated post above.
Ned Milburn and others have already said they think the existing string break angle looks okay. I want to get the BEST sound possible out of this guitar, so if anybody thinks slotting at an angle would be of real benefit, please tell me (see the 3rd illustration in the post above). I'm too chicken to do it myself, but I could have it done...

NOTE THE LACK OF BRIDGE PINS. The prior owner of this guitar must have had the bridge pin holes reamed for aftermarket pins - and then put the original cheap plastic smaller-diameter pins back in before selling off the guitar. A class act... So I tried Murrmac123's TECHNOFRET Alternate String Anchoring System (ASA) for $8 USD (and that includes enough aluminum discs to outfit two guitars). I like Murray's system a lot and it's either an improvement or maintains the status quo. I just can't say exactly what effect it has on this guitar because I made several improvements all at the same time:

1. Had a crack in the top repaired (glued and cleated). It was a short crack that ran from the corner of the fretboard (treble side) to the sound hole (and maybe continued along the treble side of the fretboard...). I think it was causing a small secondary resonance/vibration...that I no longer hear.

2. Replaced the bone saddles with Graph Tech TUSQ, and at a much better, lower string height.

3. Murray's ASW no-pins system, which transfers string vibration to the bridge plate very effectively AND...keeps those ball ends from digging into and ruining your bridge plate (avoid a serious repair, sez I).

4. Replaced original dead strings with Elixir Nanoweb PB Lights. Liked them but they seemed to lack "zing" when playing middle strings at the middle of the neck. Sounded kinda muffled, like strings that are nearly spent. Replaced the Elixirs with John Pearse Phosphor Bronze Lights. Sounds very good now.

As purchased, this dreadnought sounded light in the bass (for a dread) and extremely powerful (too much) in the treble. There was also a sort of "brittle" timbre in general. The way things are now, the tone is much more balanced and much richer: I don't notice the former lack of bass resonance, and the treble strings, when played up the neck, no longer deafen my right ear.

Yeah, maybe my playing is starting to mesh with this instrument, but clearly the guitar itself sounds and plays much, much better now. And as I become more familiar with it, I'll bet this guitar will serve me as well as most guitars costing four times the investment I have in it.

[Ned Milburn]

String ramps is all I would suggest if you want to try more. I don't think you will get any noticeable or measurable extra sound quality out of slotting the bridge pin holes, either "standard" or "standard plus an angle".

Good on you to have gone past your fear factor and made your split saddle. Glad that you have good results to share.

[BothHands]

Originally Posted by Ned Milburn

String ramps is all I would suggest if you want to try more. I don't think you will get any noticeable or measurable extra sound quality out of slotting the bridge pin holes, either "standard" or "standard plus an angle".

Exactly what I hoped you'd say! Whew...

Originally Posted by Ned Milburn

Good on you to have gone past your fear factor and made your split saddle. Glad that you have good results to share.

Thank you, Ned. Yeah, it's daunting; these guitars seem (to me) to be such delicate, refined constructions where most aspects are very real factors in the resultant sonic signature and playability. I know...you who have lots of experience see all of the cause-and-effect clearly, and how practical it all is. Looks mighty different the first time around, though...

I appreciate the advice and guidance.