Is it possible to build a T-shape saddle?

[LouieAtienza]

Originally Posted by hillin

Recently I'm tuning the saddle of my parlor guitar. I would like to lower its action, but lowering the saddle too much will definitely reduce its volume and impact its tone because (to my understanding) the string break angle at the saddle became is far less than 45 degrees. Also because of the short scale length (22 3/4"), it's intonation is not very ideal. After several attempts, a special design came into my mind.



This is a T-shape saddle. Its lower part is the same as a typical one, but its upper part is much wider, as a result, 1) its rightmost edge (on the picture) can get nearer to the pins, so we can have a more ideal break angle; 2) its top is much wider than a typical one, leaving us more space to fine tune the intonation.



Will this design work? What would be its disadvantages?

Or you could just move the bridge pins closer to the saddle and ramp them!

[murrmac123]

Originally Posted by Truckjohn

One reason for reduction in volume with significantly reduced string height is because of restriction of the arc of string vibration... Aka - the distance between the frets and the strings is too short - so the string's movement is limited. It doesn't buzz when it's way too short - its just quiet and the tone isn't particularly good.

I'm slightly puzzled by this ... and I was just as puzzled when I read the same thing on Bryan Kimsey's website. Alan Carruth may have posted something similar as well.

IME when the action is WAY too low, the string rattles against the frets... slightly different , but analogous, to fret buzz.

If the "arc of string vibration" is reduced, it can only be reduced because the string is impacting the frets at some point (which I would assume to be the midpoint of the vibrating string length) . This impact is going to have an audible effect other than the mere reduction of volume.... it cannot be otherwise.

IMO, any reduction of volume resulting from lowered string height is down, purely and simply, to less torque on the bridge.

A vibrating string doesn't care how far away the frets are ... it does react to the height above the soundboard at the bridge.

[Rodger Knox]

Originally Posted by murrmac123

I'm slightly puzzled by this ... and I was just as puzzled when I read the same thing on Bryan Kimsey's website. Alan Carruth may have posted something similar as well.

IME when the action is WAY too low, the string rattles against the frets... slightly different , but analogous, to fret buzz.

If the "arc of string vibration" is reduced, it can only be reduced because the string is impacting the frets at some point (which I would assume to be the midpoint of the vibrating string length) . This impact is going to have an audible effect other than the mere reduction of volume.... it cannot be otherwise.

IMO, any reduction of volume resulting from lowered string height is down, purely and simply, to less torque on the bridge.

A vibrating string doesn't care how far away the frets are ... it does react to the height above the soundboard at the bridge.

Impacting is extreme, you can hear it. The string may also just touch the fret, hard enough to lose some energy, but not hard enough to be audible. I'm not sure I believe that, but it does seem plausible.

That assumption would be incorrect, the max deflection would be the same distance from the nut(or fret if fretted) as the original pick point was from the saddle. It's actually two waves going in opposite directions on the string.