Acoustic Saddle Materials

[[J.K.]]

So I've been curious about saddle materials lately, mostly because I had only ever considered them in two broad, generic categories: "bone" and "synthetic." Basically, the reduction served me well enough as I cared more about playing than construction, and up until a couple years ago I'd been dedicating 90% or more of my time on electric guitars.

Now that I'm learning more about acoustic ancillaries, I'm curious what saddle materials are out there and how they compare. Again, I know comparison is combatively subjective, so I'm not looking for "better vs worse" so much as a relative sense of how well the carry low vibrations and whether they emphasize or dampen trebly harmonic.

Here's what materials I'm aware of, barring some of the more unique and economically ludicrous options out there:
Plastic

• Tusq
• Graphite
• NuBone
• Corian
• Micarta
• Bone
• Horn
• Ivory
• Ebony
• Brass
• Mythicized chimerical antlers*
  (* At least I hear about these a lot from players whose income and collection exceeds their usage.)

All else equal, has anyone experimented with them much? I've been looking for something that dampens harmonics but still transmits sound well. I remember upgrading from some synthetic bone material to actual bone once when I was feeling very traditionalist, and found it added a very slightly uneven timbral influence, but that was a long time ago when my ears' palate was less refined. I begrudgingly swapped it back for a plastic saddle later, and was surprised to find it was perfectly neutral and fine sounding.

Anyway. Have a go. Tell me about your saddles (or nuts, if that's what gets you off).

P.S. Thanks, YamahaGuy!

[Silly Moustache]

Hi, you forgot unicorn horn!

Elephant ivory used to be common, but it is now illegal to buy/sell in civilised countries.

I believe that cattle bone is the most consistent and effective material.

There is a chap in the US called Bob Colosi that has (or still does?) offer "fossilised" walrus saddles.

Edit: I've just found his website and am horrified to see that he still offers elephant ivory ! Surely that is illegal!

Tusq and corian etc., (plastics) are cheaper because (I guess) they can be molded - i.e less production labour.

[rokdog49]

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

Hi, you forgot unicorn horn!

Elephant ivory used to be common, but it is now illegal to buy/sell in civilised countries.

I believe that cattle bone is the most consistent and effective material.

There is a chap in the US called Bob Colosi that has (or still does?) offer "fossilised" walrus saddles.

Edit: I've just found his website and am horrified to see that he still offers elephant ivory ! Surely that is illegal!

Tusq and corian etc., (plastics) are cheaper because (I guess) they can be molded - i.e less production labour.

Here's a website that may explain why ivory can still be offered as a saddle material. It appears there are some exceptions and gray areas.
Personally if Bob has some ivory from a dead pachyderm killed a long time ago and wants to sell it and its legal, I'm not gonna' get my shorts in a wad over it.

The website:
fineartshippers.com

And another:
fws.gov

[vindibona1]

There is no "better vs worse". It all depends on your guitar. When we buy a guitar we usually get it because it sounds good as it is. But many of us either want that little extra out of it or get rid of some minor thing we hear.

The three most common saddles are bone, micarta and TUSQ. Each has it's own nuance. Bone saddles are great, but can be hit or miss because they vary in density from piece to piece. Also, there can be a noticeable difference between bleached and unbleached bone (I've experienced that).

While micara and TUSQ offer consistency, bone typically offers more warmth and thickness in sound. Both of my Taylors, one that had micarta and one with TUSQ have both been replaced by bone saddles, one bleached and one unbleached. The bleached saddle really added depth to my 614ce while an unbleached saddle added more warmth to my 814ceDLX but probably wasn't as dramatic a change; probably because the 614 started with a TUSQ saddle, (see videos below).





So again, there is no better or worse. It's what you like.

[Mandobart]

An actual experiment would entail testing different saddle material on the same guitar while keeping everything else unchanged, then documenting quantifiable results audiographically (a printout of the before and after audible/vibrational properties - volume, sustain, harmonic content,etc.). In that case I'll doubt you'll find anyone here on the AGF with that kind of data.

Like most I can only share my experience.which includes plastic vs bone saddles on my flattops (I like the sound and wear properties of bone better). My archtop has a brass saddle tune-o-matic bridge on a rosewood base, which I think sounds at least as good as the ebony bridge and saddle that preceded it. Of course I'm also using retro monel .013's on it now; strings were phosphor-bronze before. I have some archtop mandolins with ebony bridges and some with rosewood, and I like both equally well in terms of intonation, tone, volume and sustain. My banjos have one piece ebony topped maple bridges. My fiddles all use one-piece maple bridges.

[AcousticDreams]

Quote:
"I've been looking for something that dampens harmonics but still transmits sound well"

I make my own saddles from Non-preshaped blanks. I have experimented with several different materials via the same guitar.

If you want to dampen the harmonics and let the Fundamentals show through, try Black Horn. This works very well for your particular request.

I like harmonics, so I am not using Black Horn. I also tried it on another guitar as well and it did the same thing, dampen the harmonics.

[YamahaGuy]

Two comments
1) try "go advanced" to change the title
2) Yamaha FG160e (maybe it was FG180e) used an aluminum saddle

[Wade Hampton]

J.K., what I have found is that the tone that individual players get out of different saddle materials has as much to do with their right hand attack, string alloy and pick choices as anything else. That said, you can achieve consistent results for your own playing and achieve the tonality you’re aiming for.

For me, the preferred first choice for a bridge saddle is always bone. Probably 90% of my guitars have bone saddles. While there can be the problem of uneven vibrational transmission with a bone saddle, especially when there’s an undersaddle pickup being used, it’s easy enough to find a bone saddle blank that won’t cause that problem: you just hold the bone piece up against a strong light. This procedure is called “candling,” and what it does is show you whether there are any dark spots within the bone piece that indicate anomalies in density. If one saddle blank has some inconsistencies, you pick up others and candle them until you find a nice clear piece.

It’s easy; my repairman and I have never had to look at more than two or three saddle blanks to find good ones. As it happens, most of the time we only have to candle one, as the first one we grab will be just fine.

Even if there are some density differences within a bone saddle, if you’re not using an undersaddle pickup it scarcely matters. It’s only when you need to accurately transmit vibrations to an underlying piezo that it truly makes a difference; acoustically most bone saddles sound about the same.

As I mentioned, bone saddles are always my first choice, but - for me, anyway - bone saddles can be too harsh-sounding on some guitars, accentuating the treble response more than I want it accentuated. So after I’ve tried a variety of different string alloys on a guitar and determined that, no, the string alloy isn’t the problem, the next saddle material I’ll try is Tusq (sometimes called “Graphtech,” after the company that manufactures it.)

In my experience, Tusq/Graphtech brings down the treble response just a tad, kind of like rolling off the treble control on a PA board a couple of notches.

If Tusq doesn’t give me the tone I want, I’ll try a micarta saddle, which rolls off the treble a couple of notches further.

That’s the procedure I’ve been using for some twenty or twenty five years now, and that’s what works for me.

I’ve lined this out in previous discussion threads, only to have other participants write, in effect, “You’re crazy!! Tusq increases the treble response, not decreases it!!” or “You’re nuts!! Bone saddles make guitars sound warmer!!”

All I can say when folks choose to dispute the results I’ve gotten is to explain that these are are the results that I have consistently gotten using the strings that I prefer with the picks that I use and hearing with the two ears that I have:
start with a bone saddle; if that’s too trebly, try Tusq; and if that’s still too trebly, use micarta.

Naturally, your results might vary because of your own playing attack, pick material or playing style. Those are variables that I obviously have no control over. But for me there’s a clear tonal succession from bone to Tusq to micarta that has been consistent regardless of these guitars’ various tonewoods or manufacturers.

Hope this helps.


Wade Hampton Miller

[Wade Hampton]

Just to add to what YamahaGuy wrote, to correct the spelling in the thread title hit the “edit” button at the bottom of your post, then hit the “go advanced” button when that appears. That will allow you to change “acoustid” to “acoustic,” or if you choose you can change the thread title entirely, to:

“J.K. is so devastatingly good-looking that women can’t resist him.”

That might not elicit the information about bridge saddle material that you’re looking for, though....

Your call.


whm

[JKA]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

Just to add to what YamahaGuy wrote, to correct the spelling in the thread title hit the “edit” button at the bottom of your post, then hit the “go advanced” button when that appears. That will allow you to change “acoustid” to “acoustic,” or if you choose you can change the thread title entirely, to:

“J.K. is so devastatingly good-looking that women can’t resist him.”

That might not elicit the information about bridge saddle material that you’re looking for, though....

Your call.


whm

Wade, I'm begging to suspect you are really Jasper Carrot using a pseudonym

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by JKA

Wade, I'm begging to suspect you are really Jasper Carrot using a pseudonym

I have no idea who Jasper Carrot might be. For a while I did have an oddball co-worker named Jasper, who complained about anything and everything, used a rope for a belt and was always trying to borrow money from the rest of us. He was definitely more than a little weird, and I always wondered whether being saddled with the name Jasper at birth might have contributed to that.

True story.


whm

[JKA]

Wade
Jasper Carrot is a guitar playing English comedian in a similar vein to Richard Digance...not as nuanced as Jake Thackeray but a funny musician nevertheless.

Not sure if any of these have made it across the pond as their humour is very 'English'

[Wade Hampton]

Ah, okay. None of those names are familiar to me, but that doesn’t mean much.


whm

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

J.K., what I have found is that the tone that individual players get out of different saddle materials has as much to do with their right hand attack, string alloy and pick choices as anything else. That said, you can achieve consistent results for your own playing and achieve the tonality you’re aiming for.

For me, the preferred first choice for a bridge saddle is always bone. Probably 90% of my guitars have bone saddles. While there can be the problem of uneven vibrational transmission with a bone saddle, especially when there’s an undersaddle pickup being used, it’s easy enough to find a bone saddle blank that won’t cause that problem: you just hold the bone piece up against a strong light. This procedure is called “candling,” and what it does is show you whether there are any dark spots within the bone piece that indicate anomalies in density. If one saddle blank has some inconsistencies, you pick up others and candle them until you find a nice clear piece.

It’s easy; my repairman and I have never had to look at more than two or three saddle blanks to find good ones. As it happens, most of the time we only have to candle one, as the first one we grab will be just fine.

Even if there are some density differences within a bone saddle, if you’re not using an undersaddle pickup it scarcely matters. It’s only when you need to accurately transmit vibrations to an underlying piezo that it truly makes a difference; acoustically most bone saddles sound about the same.

As I mentioned, bone saddles are always my first choice, but - for me, anyway - bone saddles can be too harsh-sounding on some guitars, accentuating the treble response more than I want it accentuated. So after I’ve tried a variety of different string alloys on a guitar and determined that, no, the string alloy isn’t the problem, the next saddle material I’ll try is Tusq (sometimes called “Graphtech,” after the company that manufactures it.)

In my experience, Tusq/Graphtech brings down the treble response just a tad, kind of like rolling off the treble control on a PA board a couple of notches.

If Tusq doesn’t give me the tone I want, I’ll try a micarta saddle, which rolls off the treble a couple of notches further.

That’s the procedure I’ve been using for some twenty or twenty five years now, and that’s what works for me.

I’ve lined this out in previous discussion threads, only to have other participants write, in effect, “You’re crazy!! Tusq increases the treble response, not decreases it!!” or “You’re nuts!! Bone saddles make guitars sound warmer!!”

All I can say when folks choose to dispute the results I’ve gotten is to explain that these are are the results that I have consistently gotten using the strings that I prefer with the picks that I use and hearing with the two ears that I have:
start with a bone saddle; if that’s too trebly, try Tusq; and if that’s still too trebly, use micarta.

Naturally, your results might vary because of your own playing attack, pick material or playing style. Those are variables that I obviously have no control over. But for me there’s a clear tonal succession from bone to Tusq to micarta that has been consistent regardless of these guitars’ various tonewoods or manufacturers.

Hope this helps.


Wade Hampton Miller

Wade, you're spot on regarding potential harshness with bone. I had a bone saddle installed in my AJ and I took it right back out and put back whatever was the original material. Bone made it sound thin and clanky; like a completely different guitar.

[fazool]

Originally Posted by vindibona1

..

Wow, I was surprised by the significant differences in that video.

I wasn't expecting them to sound THAT different, and the Tusq (which I prefer) sounds so tinkly.