string terminus

[Dan of SC]

I've only built a few guitars, strictly amateur but I've always wondered why Martin guitar headstocks fan out at the top, rather than taper inward so the strings go more straight across the nut to the tuners( I've seen some guitars made with the headstock tapering down), but many more that copy the Martin. Could it be that giving the string a sharper turn at the nut gives the string a more definite stopping point? And should the bridge pins be as close to the saddle as feasible so the strings make a sharper turn as they cross the saddle for the same reason? Anything to all this or am I splitting hairs?

[HHP]

Its a choice made for aesthetic, not sonic, reasons. Bourgeois would be an interesting test case as they offer the same models with either a Martinesque headstock or a snakehead. When I've tried them, no apparent difference beyond what you would expect with any two similar guitars. You can find a lot of very similar mandolins that use either the "V" shape or the snakehead, again, no real difference.

[John Arnold]

And should the bridge pins be as close to the saddle as feasible so the strings make a sharper turn as they cross the saddle for the same reason?

On the saddle end, there seems to be no advantage when the break angle is above about 20 degrees. A steep break angle at the saddle will tend to cause the saddle to lean forward, which can lead to damage.

[yellowesty]

I take no issue with the statement that "there seems to be no advantage when the break angle is above about 20 degrees," but wonder why are there so few steel string guitars that use a horizontal hole in the bridge (aligned with the fingerboard) to terminate each string? I have an old Ovation 12-string built that way, and it seems like a solid, simple technique that doesn't require holes in the bridge, soundboard, or bridge plate, yet it doesn't seem common.

Of course it does obviate the endless discussion about the sonic effect of bridge pins.

[JonWint]

A tie bridge, used predominantly for classical guitars, has to resist the string tension of 85 to 90 pounds trying to shear and pry the bridge off the guitar top.

The steel string guitar bridge uses the bridge plate to resist the majority of string tension which varies from 130 to 190 pounds or 250 pounds for a 12-string.

[yellowesty]

Jon -- not disagreeing with what you say, yet recognizing both that:

1) my Ovation 12-string, with a pinless bridge, has been strung at concert pitch for over 40 years (as you say, with around 250 lb-force of tension) and shows no sign of bridge lifting, and

2) a guitar's bridge, soundboard, and bridge plate being glued together over a substantial area with the glue joints predominately in shear, a pinless bridge is a fairly robust structure,

I decided to do a bit of "internet research."

It appears that Ovation, Louden, Breedlove, and Taylor, as well as a number of custom luthiers have built durable steel string guitars over the years using pinless bridges. Owners have identified both pluses and minuses for the pinless bridges.

Over the same period, some luthiers have built classical guitars with pinned bridges.

It seems that tradition and fashion have directed the mainstream toward pinned bridges for steel-string guitars and pinless bridges for classical.

And it's always pointless to argue about fashion.

[John Arnold]

Pinned bridges lift, but they don't fly off. I have seen pinless bridges come off with part of the top still attached. IMHO, that is reason enough to use pinned bridges on steel string guitars.

[Ned Milburn]

Originally Posted by Dan of SC

I've only built a few guitars, strictly amateur but I've always wondered why Martin guitar headstocks fan out at the top, rather than taper inward so the strings go more straight across the nut to the tuners( I've seen some guitars made with the headstock tapering down), but many more that copy the Martin. Could it be that giving the string a sharper turn at the nut gives the string a more definite stopping point? And should the bridge pins be as close to the saddle as feasible so the strings make a sharper turn as they cross the saddle for the same reason? Anything to all this or am I splitting hairs?

Aesthetic and historical.

Functionally, any break angle needed across the nut can be achieved by headstock angle adjustment.

Martin has no real reason to change the headstock shape, since that would be changing its "face" so to speak. Seagull, Ovation, PRS and other manufacturers, as well as many hand-makers, have chosen to route the strings straight (looking from above the fingerboard) which simplifies nut making. It is certainly easier to botch a nut slot when strings have a strong break angle left or right (again looking from above). "Ping! Ping!" while tuning G and D strings is too common and frustrating.

Bridge pins too close to the saddle is not a great idea, since the mass of wood between saddle slot and bridge pin holes is lessened and can crack more readily. John mentioned some other issues about too much break angle across the saddle.

Don't forget, form follows function. If the form is changed, sometimes function can be hampered.

[LouieAtienza]

Originally Posted by yellowesty

Jon -- not disagreeing with what you say, yet recognizing both that:

1) my Ovation 12-string, with a pinless bridge, has been strung at concert pitch for over 40 years (as you say, with around 250 lb-force of tension) and shows no sign of bridge lifting, and

2) a guitar's bridge, soundboard, and bridge plate being glued together over a substantial area with the glue joints predominately in shear, a pinless bridge is a fairly robust structure,

I decided to do a bit of "internet research."

It appears that Ovation, Louden, Breedlove, and Taylor, as well as a number of custom luthiers have built durable steel string guitars over the years using pinless bridges. Owners have identified both pluses and minuses for the pinless bridges.

Over the same period, some luthiers have built classical guitars with pinned bridges.

It seems that tradition and fashion have directed the mainstream toward pinned bridges for steel-string guitars and pinless bridges for classical.

And it's always pointless to argue about fashion.

Many individual builders and manufacturers do not rely on just the sheer strength of the glue joint to keep their pin-less bridges from flying off. There can be screws, screws and nuts, wood dowels, metal pins, pockets (and other mechanical joints), aerospace adhesives... The big trick is hiding that fact and making it appear the bridge is only held by pure sheer strength.

A "hybrid" of sorts would be Jeffrey Elliott's design (used also by MIchael Doolin) where the ball ends anchor on steel rod inset at about a 20deg. angle, at the back of the bridge. In this case the steel rods are anchored through the bridge, through the top, and into a tropical hardwood inlay in the bridge plate.

Originally Posted by Dan of SC

I've only built a few guitars, strictly amateur but I've always wondered why Martin guitar headstocks fan out at the top, rather than taper inward so the strings go more straight across the nut to the tuners( I've seen some guitars made with the headstock tapering down), but many more that copy the Martin. Could it be that giving the string a sharper turn at the nut gives the string a more definite stopping point? And should the bridge pins be as close to the saddle as feasible so the strings make a sharper turn as they cross the saddle for the same reason? Anything to all this or am I splitting hairs?

Martin's earliest Stauffer style headstocks were 6-in-line, with a straighter string pull. I can only assume the 3-a-side paddle headstock came as an interpretation of the Spanish guitar.

As to the bridge pins in relation to the saddle: I'm of the belief that excessive break angle is unnecessary. As Ned and John pointed out, the excessive forward "push" of the saddle can cause bridge failure. Not sure how well the strings would last as well. Another thing to consider would be if you want to install a UST; you may not get even or sufficient downward pressure on the saddle.

[ac]

There is a Kickstarter project designed by some folk in Germany to eliminate the issue of string bend before reaching the nut called "String Butler". The project looks certain to fail making it's goal, but their design is an interesting add-on for addressing this issue.

I've noticed some makers design their headstocks to keep the strings as perpendicular to the nut as possible from the start.

[tahoeguitar]

The two most catastrophic bridge failures I have repaired were on Ovations with pinless bridges. In both cases the bridge came partly loose because of a glue line failure, but part of the bridge remained glued and attached at the front, so big chunks of top were ripped loose along with the bridge. It didn't help that there was excessive runout in both cases. The back of the bridge was lifted a lot, nearly 1/4" or more. In one case the torn top wood extended about an inch in front of the bridge. Super... big... mess...

I've also seen a lot of lifted pin bridges, but usually these lift on the order of the thickness of a business card to maybe a little over 1/16". They fail, but not catastrophically.

The design of a pin bridge dictates that while string tension can help to lift the back of the bridge, the pins and string balls actually tend to trap the bridge against the top. Plus you get to play with different pins, making it easier to "flavor" the tone a little.

I'm a fan of the pin type bridge.

[redir]

If you actually see how Ovation glues down their bridges, right to the finish, it's pretty amazing that some of them last as long as they do. I think a steel string pinless bridge can be done right and last many many years but I don't like them personally.

I have designed both straight pull and traditional headstocks but honestly I don't think it makes a difference. On an electric guitar with a Bigsby or something like that you might have a point though. I do believe that Mr. Klepper did some studies that showed it does make a difference so ymmv.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by redir

If you actually see how Ovation glues down their bridges, right to the finish, it's pretty amazing that some of them last as long as they do. I think a steel string pinless bridge can be done right and last many many years but I don't like them personally.

I have designed both straight pull and traditional headstocks but honestly I don't think it makes a difference. On an electric guitar with a Bigsby or something like that you might have a point though. I do believe that Mr. Klepper did some studies that showed it does make a difference so ymmv.

Not me. On the contrary, I have posted multiple times that the string only has to make a single bend at the nut, regardless of the headstock shape. The idea of "straight" strings and their supposed benefit comes from seeing a three dimensional object as if it were two dimensional.

[Bruce Sexauer]

Originally Posted by yellowesty

I take no issue with the statement that "there seems to be no advantage when the break angle is above about 20 degrees," but wonder why are there so few steel string guitars that use a horizontal hole in the bridge (aligned with the fingerboard) to terminate each string? I have an old Ovation 12-string built that way, and it seems like a solid, simple technique that doesn't require holes in the bridge, soundboard, or bridge plate, yet it doesn't seem common.

Of course it does obviate the endless discussion about the sonic effect of bridge pins.

Putting 6 (or 12) holes in a row aligned with the grain fiber appears to be asking for trouble. Adding hundreds of pounds of pressure make the trouble more likely. Any flaw in the wood makes trouble more likely yet. Otherwise, I see no problem with pinless bridges except for that they TOTALLY rely on glue to hold them on.

[Tom West]

Originally Posted by yellowesty

I take no issue with the statement that "there seems to be no advantage when the break angle is above about 20 degrees," but wonder why are there so few steel string guitars that use a horizontal hole in the bridge (aligned with the fingerboard) to terminate each string? I have an old Ovation 12-string built that way, and it seems like a solid, simple technique that doesn't require holes in the bridge, soundboard, or bridge plate, yet it doesn't seem common.

Making adjustments to saddle heights on these type of set-ups certainly gives one opinions about this type of bridge.
Tom