The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > Build and Repair

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 09-30-2013, 02:20 PM
Ned Milburn Ned Milburn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dartmouth, NS
Posts: 3,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk of Funk View Post
You know what? if you make Tusq bridges and nuts and pins, then I would imagine that it wouldn't be too tough to change the recipe slightly just to change the mass. So, one would expect that if it made such a difference they would offer different densities of their products.

Maybe there is some truth to it, maybe brass would make a difference, and it is impossible to make density differences great enough with Tusq to make a difference, but if there was such a difference between bone and Tusq due to weight, I would imagine there would be different densities of Tusq available.
conventional plastic though is really soft, so I could definitely see a difference between that and Tusq or bone for sure.

I would imagine that bone and Tusq would only offer very subtle differences though.
Most builders attempt to lighten bridges, rather than make them heavier. This is one reason amongst several why brass bridge pins are not ubiquitous. Alan has posted a good explanation.

The question was "why the different tone", not "how much will the tone differ" and not "which sounds better".

For saddles, not just the density, but the stiffness (which relates to density but not 100% directly) is important in transmitting the vibrational energy with low loss (low dampening).

Bridge pins have a different function than the saddle, and other than gross mass differences, changing pin material will likely have little effect on the final tone.
__________________
----

Ned Milburn
NSDCC Master Artisan
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-30-2013, 03:04 PM
CoolerKing's Avatar
CoolerKing CoolerKing is offline
FKA matthewpartrick :)
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: North Havana
Posts: 5,344
Default

My hearing sucks so bad I can't tell a difference. However, I am a sucker for a relatively inexpensive way to dress up a guitar, and bone pins feel so "right."
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-30-2013, 07:46 PM
Jim.S Jim.S is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Darwin, Australia, 12.5 degrees south of the equator
Posts: 1,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post

I'm very skeptical of any claims that one or another sort of bridge pin material 'transmits sound' better, or whatever. I note that almost everybody making the claim has some sort of stake in the outcome (they make fossilized dingo dung pins and want you to buy them). There is also, so far as I know, no really good test data on any of this where, for example, they control for the weight of the pins, and use double blind testing (with the dingo dung you also need to plug your nose...). I'm not saying its not possible, but from what I know of the way these things work, I'm going need some pretty strong proof.
Looks like this time Alan is wrong, wrong, wrong. There is no need to "plug" your nose, most of my customers comment that the fossilized dingo dung (which I will refer to a FDD from now on) has the sweet smell of a breast fed babies breath. Due to the soil content here (very acid) the FDD is very rare and this is one reason for the high price. Other reasons are that the FDD removes all of the bark sound from your instrument and gives it an extended howl (great for that true outback sound). I do have a few pin sets left from my last trek into Arnhem Land but you will have to be quick. From as little as $120US + postage your guitars tone will be greatly enhanced.

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-01-2013, 01:29 PM
Alan Carruth Alan Carruth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,180
Default

Thanks Jim. Note that I didn't say the FDD pins smelled bad; I just said you'd have to plug your nose so you wouldn't smell them. In this case it's the ineffable sweetness that clues people in (how's that for a save!).

For real weight you'd want to go with Tungsten, or Depleted Uranium. The DU not only helps smooth out the trebles, but it can keep you warm o' nights. Some folks claim it helps them find the guitar in the dark. The main drawback is the Energy Department paperwork.

HDD Canada wrote:
"For saddles, not just the density, but the stiffness (which relates to density but not 100% directly) is important in transmitting the vibrational energy with low loss (low dampening)."

Damping, the rate of energy dissipation within the material, has no direct relationship with hardness. Redwood and Brazilian rosewood both have similarly low damping, but one's much denser. Lead has a higher damping factor than aluminum.

It makes a lot of sense to think that a harder saddle material would transmit sound differently from a softer one, even irrespective of intrinsic damping. The one time I tried to actually measure the difference, though, I couldn't see one. I used bone and HDPE saddles in both a steel string and a Classical guitar. I thought I was hearing a difference (and if I can hear it, you could!), but the measurements turned out the same. It's plausible that I was hearing what I expected to hear, and there was actually no difference. It's also plausible the my measurement setup simply wasn't up to the job of finding a difference that was there. The only way to resolve it is to do more experiments, in my copious free time....

Last edited by Alan Carruth; 10-01-2013 at 01:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-01-2013, 02:01 PM
redir redir is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Mountains of Virginia
Posts: 7,657
Default

I like the look of plastic anywhere on a beautifully hand made guitar so it's wood or bone for me. I suppose if I could actually hear that plastic was superior I could get over it. I got over it for pick guards because they are practice. I make mine out of wood none the less. But nothing says cheap like plastic bindings, pins and nuts and saddles.

I've done my own unofficial testing by ear and could not tell a difference that was enough to be an eye opener anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-01-2013, 03:31 PM
Ned Milburn Ned Milburn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dartmouth, NS
Posts: 3,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
Damping, the rate of energy dissipation within the material, has no direct relationship with hardness. Redwood and Brazilian rosewood both have similarly low damping, but one's much denser. Lead has a higher damping factor than aluminum.
In my experience with both lead and aluminum (not a whole lot, but I have had chunks of lead and aluminum lying around in the home), lead is softer (and obviously denser). This is in agreement to your statement that lead has higher damping than aluminum. But neither would be my choice for a saddle. ;-)

Redwood and B.rosewood aren't standard saddle material, and although I have never tried, I dare say that a redwood saddle will dampen the sound a heck of a lot more than B.rosewood (ie: softer material dampening more than a harder material when used as a saddle). As vibrating plates, however, there is a different aspect of "stiffness" (getting into elastic/Young's modulus etc) that could explain and also give rise to similarities you mention in damping between red and rose woods.

Although admittedly, I myself brought saddles into the original bridge pin conversation (mixing apples and oranges), we must be careful not to mix oranges and bananas (saddles and vibrating plates), since the functions of vibrating plates and saddles are quite different.

It actually appears that we are on the same page with this, but just elucidating different properties of materials used in different applications on the guitar.
__________________
----

Ned Milburn
NSDCC Master Artisan
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-01-2013, 03:43 PM
The Old Anglo The Old Anglo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Orlando,Fla
Posts: 389
Default

Appels,Bananas and oranges?,sounds like Obamacare to me now.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-01-2013, 05:19 PM
cspencer cspencer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 729
Default

Here's an unqualified suggestion: pins sticking up as with Martins sound different to pins flushed. Perhaps same argument as slotted and unslotted pins
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-01-2013, 07:23 PM
Jim.S Jim.S is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Darwin, Australia, 12.5 degrees south of the equator
Posts: 1,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
(how's that for a save!).
Note to myself....must remember not to read my own thoughts into someone else's words when they are not really there. If I listen rather than think I may just learn a little more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by redir View Post
I like the look of plastic anywhere on a beautifully hand made guitar so it's wood or bone for me.
Assuming that's a typo and you mean don't, then I am a bit the same Redir, I do like natural materials but the guitar I am building at the moment will use plastic pins, not because I can't afford a set of bone or ebony but because I want my total bridge weight to be as low as I can get it. Plastic can be a great pin material depending on what your aims are.

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-01-2013, 07:30 PM
redir redir is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Mountains of Virginia
Posts: 7,657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim.S View Post
Note to myself....must remember not to read my own thoughts into someone else's words when they are not really there. If I listen rather than think I may just learn a little more.



Assuming that's a typo and you mean don't, then I am a bit the same Redir, I do like natural materials but the guitar I am building at the moment will use plastic pins, not because I can't afford a set of bone or ebony but because I want my total bridge weight to be as low as I can get it. Plastic can be a great pin material depending on what your aims are.

Jim
Woops yeah typo... Like I said, if the science is sound then I am totally on board. There is an appropriate use of any material when it is the best fit. Bindings are just not one of them

In all fairness to craftsmanship though I have to say that I did build an electric guitar for some one who just had to have Ivorid bindings so of course I did it. It was not an easier than wood. It was different than wood and I was used to wood but it has it's own intricacies and was a lot more difficult then I thought
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-02-2013, 11:30 AM
Monk of Funk Monk of Funk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 962
Default

Cheap plastic, I'll agree is very unsightly, but I don't mind the look of Tusq personally.

Although bone I'll agree, would look more boss.

I'm not messing with my taylor though.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-02-2013, 11:41 AM
Alan Carruth Alan Carruth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,180
Default

Ned Milburn wrote:
"Although admittedly, I myself brought saddles into the original bridge pin conversation (mixing apples and oranges), we must be careful not to mix oranges and bananas (saddles and vibrating plates), since the functions of vibrating plates and saddles are quite different.

It actually appears that we are on the same page with this, but just elucidating different properties of materials used in different applications on the guitar."

Damping is always tricky in any case. Even when the word is used correctly (it's often used wrong, although not by you!) you have to be careful abut how it is working in a particular case.

A good example of this is strings. Nylon has higher intrinsic damping than steel, and that accounts for part of the way nylon strings differ from steel. However, a vibrating string also has to move some air in the process, and this 'viscous' damping adds more to the loss in nylon strings because they're fatter than steel strings, and need to move more air, all else equal. Since damping usually cuts down on on the high frequencies faster than the lows nylon strings simply have less energy in the upper partials than steel a second or so after the pluck. The difference might not be so great in a vacuum, but then, you would not be able to hear the guitar in a vacuum, so that's moot.

That viscous damping can fool you. I used to think that balsa wood had very high damping: the thin pieces I go at the hobby shop all 'thudded' very convincingly. Then I got a piece about 2-1/2 inches square and ran a test on it. The damping was not much higher than a lot of spruce. Those thin sheets just have to move a lot of air, and don't have much mass to store the energy for doing so.

Conversely: when I first got hold of some I thought Persimmon had low damping, but when I tested a piece it was actually more like maple than a rosewood. Then it occurred to me that I had to hit the stuff pretty hard to be able to hear it, since it was so heavy, and that meant it had a lot of energy to dissipate, so it kept going for a while.

I'd think that, to the extent that losses in tension and compression are major contributors in a material, it would not make much difference whether we're talking about bending waves in a plate or compression in a bridge. Some of the same types of damping will be in effect in both cases. It would probably be difficult to sort it all out, though.

And, to get it back to the original subject of pins: damping in the pins should not matter anyway, since there should be no vibration going on there. (this should get things going!)
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-02-2013, 11:52 AM
Tone Gopher Tone Gopher is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,278
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HCG Canada View Post
For saddles, not just the density, but the stiffness (which relates to density but not 100% directly) is important in transmitting the vibrational energy with low loss (low dampening).
Regarding "stiffness relates to density but not 100% directly"...

How 'bout almost not at all? Lead and 1100 series aluminum are both dead soft. 7000 series aluminum is several times stiffer and has nearly the same density. Tantalum has stiffness approximating that of 7000 series aluminum and is several times more dense.

Bottom line: stiffness and density may correlate with variations within a single composite material (such as bone) but do not correlate in metals.
__________________
Go for the Tone,

George
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:22 PM
Monk of Funk Monk of Funk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 962
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
Ned Milburn wrote:
"Although admittedly, I myself brought saddles into the original bridge pin conversation (mixing apples and oranges), we must be careful not to mix oranges and bananas (saddles and vibrating plates), since the functions of vibrating plates and saddles are quite different.

It actually appears that we are on the same page with this, but just elucidating different properties of materials used in different applications on the guitar."

Damping is always tricky in any case. Even when the word is used correctly (it's often used wrong, although not by you!) you have to be careful abut how it is working in a particular case.

A good example of this is strings. Nylon has higher intrinsic damping than steel, and that accounts for part of the way nylon strings differ from steel. However, a vibrating string also has to move some air in the process, and this 'viscous' damping adds more to the loss in nylon strings because they're fatter than steel strings, and need to move more air, all else equal. Since damping usually cuts down on on the high frequencies faster than the lows nylon strings simply have less energy in the upper partials than steel a second or so after the pluck. The difference might not be so great in a vacuum, but then, you would not be able to hear the guitar in a vacuum, so that's moot.

That viscous damping can fool you. I used to think that balsa wood had very high damping: the thin pieces I go at the hobby shop all 'thudded' very convincingly. Then I got a piece about 2-1/2 inches square and ran a test on it. The damping was not much higher than a lot of spruce. Those thin sheets just have to move a lot of air, and don't have much mass to store the energy for doing so.

Conversely: when I first got hold of some I thought Persimmon had low damping, but when I tested a piece it was actually more like maple than a rosewood. Then it occurred to me that I had to hit the stuff pretty hard to be able to hear it, since it was so heavy, and that meant it had a lot of energy to dissipate, so it kept going for a while.

I'd think that, to the extent that losses in tension and compression are major contributors in a material, it would not make much difference whether we're talking about bending waves in a plate or compression in a bridge. Some of the same types of damping will be in effect in both cases. It would probably be difficult to sort it all out, though.

And, to get it back to the original subject of pins: damping in the pins should not matter anyway, since there should be no vibration going on there. (this should get things going!)
I don't know how much of a difference it would make, or even if it would be a good thing, but, are there music studios that are purposefully built high up where the air is thinner in order to capture the different sound that thinner air would provide?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:26 PM
bnjp's Avatar
bnjp bnjp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,426
Default

I upgraded the ebony pins in my 2000 Taylor 314kce with bone pins from Bob Colosi, and I noticed a rounder/warmer tone. I know that's subjective, but there was a tone improvement.

the awesome thing about a bridge pin swap...is that you can easily reverse it if you don't like it.
__________________
Bryan
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > Build and Repair

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=