Martin's new Liquidmetal bridge pins?

[Aaron Smith]

Originally Posted by AllThumbsBruce

LiquidMetal is a company based on the zirconium-based bulk metallic glasses invented by my PhD advisor. Due to their amorphous, non-crystalline structure these materials have high strength and low damping while being pretty light. So they might make good bridge pins. They have been used in golf clubs and electronic cases as well as some military applications.

Wow. Amorphous, non-crystalline, high strength, low damping, light...

Sounds a lot like the thermopolymers used in regular old bridge pins.

I say this partially in jest, I'm sure it's a neat material with cool properties. I'm just stretching my engineering brain to figure out how any of those properties would make the slightest difference for tone.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Aaron Smith

Wow. Amorphous, non-crystalline, high strength, low damping, light...

Sounds a lot like the thermopolymers used in regular old bridge pins.

I say this partially in jest, I'm sure it's a neat material with cool properties. I'm just stretching my engineering brain to figure out how any of those properties would make the slightest difference for tone.

The advantage might be durability, not a tonal effect.

[bostosh]

Originally Posted by JonWint

Not MIM. Amorphous alloy.
"Liquidmetal® alloys belong to a class of highly engineered materials called Bulk Metallic Glasses (BMG)."
www.liquidmetal.com. ​"

Their website seems to say these materials are Fe based with alloying, how much would they weigh?

[Earl49]

Originally Posted by Aaron Smith

.....I'm just stretching my engineering brain to figure out how any of those properties would make the slightest difference for tone.

That often happens when analytical engineers run up against marketing hyperbole. My engineering "BS" detector went off too.....

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by Aaron Smith

Wow. Amorphous, non-crystalline, high strength, low damping, light...

Sounds a lot like the thermopolymers used in regular old bridge pins.

I say this partially in jest, I'm sure it's a neat material with cool properties. I'm just stretching my engineering brain to figure out how any of those properties would make the slightest difference for tone.

The easiest way to think of this with engineering considerations; The ball end of the string is touching the base of the bridge pin.

The string is vibrating, thus anything that touches the string, or anything that touches the bridge pin should have some impact. Whether that impact is significant, that is the question.

On some of my guitars(but not all) it has been significant enough for me to notice.

[DenverSteve]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

..... if bridge pins make that much of a difference, why would something better that cost so little not already be employed by a guitar builder?....

That has long been my position on all things after-market like in the automotive industry but...(see below)...

Originally Posted by srick

Which implies that C.F. Martin thinks that zirconia-based bridge pins create a big enough improvement to be marketable. That's very interesting!

I don't see Martin making any changes that they don't believe contribute significantly to the tone, volume and/or sustain of their instruments. It is possible that it is a "sum-of-the-changes" thing where the new bridge pins work in concert with a new bridge plate, and other changes, that in total create a symbiotic relationship that the pins alone don't. I am keeping an open ear for more information. I'll watch for evaluators, like Spoon Phillips, to weigh in after testing.

[JimmerO]

Personally I much prefer a "pin-less" bridge like the Ovation design. I bet they've already had the 3-4 db increase built into them all along. I know when I restring an Ovation it takes much less time for the strings to settle in and stop gong flat.

I love Martin guitars. They are iconic and an American Treasure. Do other builders make equally nice and in some cases better guitars...sure. But Martin guitars will always have place in the acoustic guitar world. There's a reason that people describe other guitars as "better than a Martin" or "as good as a Martin."

[michaelnel]

Sonic enhancements by the marketing department.

[ii Cybershot ii]

I'm going to chalk this all up to marketing as well.

That's because, fortunately, the sound you hear from a guitar comes from the strings vibrating between the saddle and nut.

If the strings between the nut and tuners, or between saddle and bridge pins were vibrating strongly enough to create sound, they'd be horribly out of tune with the rest of the guitar. Try strumming between the nut and tuners for an example of this.

If somehow the bridge pins form a "unit" with the bridge and various other parts of the top, I guess there could be some alteration of the sound. However the effect would be incredibly minute. Acoustic guitars are braced such that the bridge area is pretty stiff, stiff enough to withstand the constant pull of 160+lbs of pressure. It's the rest of the top, especially the lower bout, that vibrates and projects the most sound.

[Wade Hampton]

As I’ve mentioned on here before, I’m agnostic about the possible tonal benefits of bridge pins. The only pins I’ve witnessed that have an undeniable impact on the tone of the acoustic guitars they’re mounted in are brass pins, and those have an effect I truly dislike.

That said, I remain open to the possibility that maybe Martin has an interesting innovation here. As a company they’re traditionally hesitant to make big claims about these things, so if they say there’s something there, maybe there is.

Time will tell, and the marketplace will determine whether the guitar-buying public thinks these innovations are worthwhile.

As I stated in my earlier post in this thread, I’m FAR more interested in the implications of their fleetingly mentioned composite bridge plate than I am in some “liquid metal” bridge pins, because while the tonal impact of bridge pins is minor at best, the bridge plate is extremely important. No way around it.

Maybe it’s because bridge pins can be easily experimented with and replaced that they seem to grip the imagination of so many folks on this forum. But the bridge plate is under the hood, and has a much more profound influence on the sound.

To me, endless discussions about the real or imaginary effects of bridge pins is kind of like rhapsodizing about whitewall tires making your car go faster. By contrast, bridge plates are closer to what sort of engine is powering your automobile: do you have the engine from a 1965 Corvair under that hood, or is it from a Corvette?

In other words, the importance of the internal structure of the guitar is several orders of magnitude greater than the importance of the bridge pins.

Which is why it puzzles me that - among all the fiendishly detail-oriented guitar gearheads who post on this forum - the idea of a composite bridge plate has attracted almost zero interest compared to the excitement generated by these so-called “liquid metal” bridge pins.

If one of them has a major impact on the sound, it won’t be the bridge pins.


Wade Hampton Miller

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

As I’ve mentioned on here before, I’m agnostic about the possible tonal benefits of bridge pins. The only pins I’ve witnessed that have an undeniable impact on the tone of the acoustic guitars they’re mounted in are brass pins, and those have an effect I truly dislike.

That said, I remain open to the possibility that maybe Martin has an interesting innovation here. As a company they’re traditionally hesitant to make big claims about these things, so if they say there’s something there, maybe there is.

Time will tell, and the marketplace will determine whether the guitar-buying public thinks these innovations are worthwhile.

As I stated in my earlier post in this thread, I’m FAR more interested in the implications of their fleetingly mentioned composite bridge plate than I am in some “liquid metal” bridge pins, because while the tonal impact of bridge pins is minor at best, the bridge plate is extremely important. No way around it.

Maybe it’s because bridge pins can be easily experimented with and replaced that they seem to grip the imagination of so many folks on this forum. But the bridge plate is under the hood, and has a much more profound influence on the sound.

To me, endless discussions about the real or imaginary effects of bridge pins is kind of like rhapsodizing about whitewall tires making your car go faster. By contrast, bridge plates are closer to what sort of engine is powering your automobile: do you have the engine from a 1965 Corvair under that hood, or is it from a Corvette?

In other words, the importance of the internal structure of the guitar is several orders of magnitude greater than the importance of the bridge pins.

Which is why it puzzles me that - among all the fiendishly detail-oriented guitar gearheads who post on this forum - the idea of a composite bridge plate has attracted almost zero interest compared to the excitement generated by these so-called “liquid metal” bridge pins.

If one of them has a major impact on the sound, it won’t be the bridge pins.


Wade Hampton Miller

This erroneous point is reflected in the content of the subject title of this thread also. A new composite bridge plate is a *major*, almost historic development for this company. I’m glad I got in before the change over, being a traditionalist and all that.

[BOOSE]

Well if the chaps at Martin are claiming that these pins are making a difference, then i for one am going to take notice.

As pointed out the new bridge plate material is more of a thing that interests me.

I wonder if this new composite plate will stop them getting chewed up, i've seen a lot of chewed up plates on some great guitars and always check or have them checked before i buy.

So if it makes a difference to sound in a positive way AND it strengthens the plate then i'm on board Martin!!

[B Chas]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

Call me stupid but if bridge pins make that much of a difference, why would something better that cost so little not already be employed by a guitar builder?
...I'm listening.

Newer Ryan guitars use titanium pins and a a different bridge plate material.

[bostosh]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

That said, I remain open to the possibility that maybe Martin has an interesting innovation here. As a company they’re traditionally hesitant to make big claims about these things, so if they say there’s something there, maybe there is.
Wade Hampton Miller

I would believe the integrity and experience of the man in charge there.
He knows what he is doing, trust me.
I was there last Tuesday and heard and touched the pins

[tippy5]

Originally Posted by B Chas

Newer Ryan guitars use titanium pins and a a different bridge plate material.

If the bridge plate and the string is so pivotal to vibrating at the point of contact could there be a different string end that would pin the sound plate even more than a guitar string's ball end?

Then there's the Lowden's string through. Is the bridge Lowden's sound plate?