Bridge pins

[Alan Carruth]

Wade is right about removing bridge pins. With a properly slotted bridge the ball ends should seat nicely in the bridge plate. you use the pins as toggles to keep the strings in while they're being pulled up to pitch, and then you should be able to remove them without losing the string.

I disagree about the sound though; from what I've seen it does change, at least a little bit. In effect you've made a 'port' in the top. It's small, but it's also in a very good spot to 'vent' pressure from several air resonant modes, so it can alter the tone. If you pull out the pins and then tape over the holes you block the port, and isolate the effect of the change in mass.

vindibona1 wrote:
"But here's something for you to try if you dare... Place your finger on any string behind the saddle and before the pins. Pluck the strings. You feel vibrations? Si o no?"

Sure; they feel just like the ones I feel when I put my finger on the bridge behind the pin. Even if the string were rocking up and down with the saddle as a pivot point, which doesn't seem to be happening on my guitar, that motion has to stop where the string hits the bridge. It could change the sound, but not by being transmitted through the pins.

"I don't need to show you data."
I've studied this stuff for decades myself. I know about the difficulties with getting good data. I still trust good data more than I trust my ears. You may not not feel you need data, but you're not going to convince me without it.

[Rodger Knox]

I've followed these bridge pin threads with great interest. I'm of the opinion that other than mass, pin material makes no difference. I'm also of the opinion that there may be someone somewhere with hearing acute enough to distinguish the minor differences in weight and balance of the bridge that different pins might make. I can believe vindibonda1 may be that person. The problem I have with these theories is that 99.99% of listeners can't hear them, so there is no difference, in the context of average listeners.

[robj144]

Originally Posted by vindibona1

A couple things...

Scientific testing, while providing a guide for continuity from the standpoint of the psychological effect of sound is almost useless. There are too many complexitites involved that are linked that would be very difficult to measure. Our ears are not reliable from one standpoint, but from another standpoint the only thing we CAN rely on. And while the human suffers from "psycho-sensory adaptation" and often, if not usually has perception skewed by what sounds they were exposed to prior to listening to current sounds, one can still hear and perceive balance and harmonics in context.

I can imagine tests being done that would eliminate the complexities involved. It's not that hard in a controlled environment.

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by martingitdave

I think the mass of the pins, applied to the bridge, is what we are hearing. I didn't realize, until I experimented, how little mass on the bridge or the head-stock can alter the tonal performance of the guitar. It's fascinating.

I think "mass" is part of the equation if linked to density. I think it's the density and possibly hardness of the materials that contribute. I really don't have a technical answer. I have just played with it enough to have an idea how different materials tend to respond.

Originally Posted by bufflehead

If you're skeptical but still have an open mind, try a little experiment. Put your pinky on the bridge pin anchoring the first string, the high E, and then play any of the other strings individually, starting with the low E. What you'll feel, assuming you have normal sensitivity in that pinkie, is vibration. Those pins function as part of the soundboard. They vibrate even when the string they anchor isn't being played. Indeed, they vibrate more intensely than most other locations on the soundboard.

When you change the density of the pins, you've altered the soundboard, and you've done so at the most critical place where the board is transforming string vibration into noise.

What I hear most in changing pin materials--all my guitars have ebony pins--has less to do with the tone and more to do with overtone. Granted, not everyone hears this, but then again not everyone can detect the overtones in a given guitar, just as not everyone can hear the difference in sound when bridge pins are changed. And some very fine guitarists don't have that level of auditory sensitivity. Nothing wrong with that; we all have different talents.

One can talk ad infinitum about the various components of a soundboard: bridge, saddle, bracing, finish, torrefaction, pick guard and, of course, top wood material. But ultimately we should remember to consider the soundboard as a collective unit, the product of all those components working together. To insist that the bridge pins make absolutely no contribution to the synergy of the soundboard is, it seems to me, a bit naive.

Ding ding ding ding ding... We have a winner. Bufflehead- you couldn't have restated what I'm saying better. Yes, the pins affect the harmonics. And I think the impact of the harmonics of the total sound are what we tend to overlook. What makes a Taylor different than Martin, different than a Gibson? Perhaps mostly harmonics. And if not mostly, significantly.

[rick-slo]

IMO a good example of the distinction between naïve and naïvety.

[robj144]

Originally Posted by vindibona1

I think "mass" is part of the equation if linked to density. I think it's the density and possibly hardness of the materials that contribute. I really don't have a technical answer. I have just played with it enough to have an idea how different materials tend to respond.



Ding ding ding ding ding... We have a winner. Bufflehead- you couldn't have restated what I'm saying better. Yes, the pins affect the harmonics. And I think the impact of the harmonics of the total sound are what we tend to overlook. What makes a Taylor different than Martin, different than a Gibson? Perhaps mostly harmonics. And if not mostly, significantly.

I don't know about the pin thing, but harmonics are the entire reason why all strong interments sound different. The strings all produce the same harmonics. It's the timbre, the harmonic spectrum, of the entire instrument that gives the unique sound to each instrument, not only guitars.

[Rodger Knox]

It should be pretty easy to detect any differences in the frequency/response curve (a sort of "sonic fingerprint" of the guitar) due to changes in bridge pin weight. An audible difference should be measurable, although some things are easy to hear but hard to measure.

Suspend or support the guitar so that it free to vibrate. Put a cloth under the strings to damp them, tap the bridge, record that into Audacity, and display the frequency/response. It will have peaks and valleys, with a pretty strong peak at about 100, another about 200, and maybe a couple more out to 1000, and then there are a lot of them. This is where the differences you are seeking lie. Of course, the primary peaks influence all their harmonics, so altering them also alters their harmonics. I suspect quite a few here have a guitar stand, a computer with a mic, and Audacity or some similar free software capable of the analysis. I'd be interested to see the results.

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by Rodger Knox

It should be pretty easy to detect any differences in the frequency/response curve (a sort of "sonic fingerprint" of the guitar) due to changes in bridge pin weight. An audible difference should be measurable, although some things are easy to hear but hard to measure.

Suspend or support the guitar so that it free to vibrate. Put a cloth under the strings to damp them, tap the bridge, record that into Audacity, and display the frequency/response. It will have peaks and valleys, with a pretty strong peak at about 100, another about 200, and maybe a couple more out to 1000, and then there are a lot of them. This is where the differences you are seeking lie. Of course, the primary peaks influence all their harmonics, so altering them also alters their harmonics. I suspect quite a few here have a guitar stand, a computer with a mic, and Audacity or some similar free software capable of the analysis. I'd be interested to see the results.

While I get what you're saying, you cannot derive anything from that type of experiment because you need all the components to come to any practical conclusions. Also, one of the issues in judging one has is the psycho-sensory perception issues as one's perception can change based on what immediately preceded in the acoustic environment. Knowing how a guitar should sound in comparison to others is sometimes a help, especially if you are trying assess which one you like better. If you make a change on a guitar and it suddenly sounds as good or better than a guitar that you might consider "your favorite" you know you're headed in the right direction... until you take it too far. Assessing the properties solely of the pins will tell you little. It's how they help the strings and guitar itself respond producing the sound, complete with overtones.

The thing is, that if you're happy with the way your guitar sounds or you think you're getting the absolute most that you expect from it, then you probably shouldn't bother with this stuff. But if you're curious or feel a need to give your guitar an extra "something" then it might be worth it to see what this stuff does.

[Alan Carruth]

Roger Knox wrote:
"It should be pretty easy to detect any differences in the frequency/response curve (a sort of "sonic fingerprint" of the guitar) due to changes in bridge pin weight. An audible difference should be measurable, although some things are easy to hear but hard to measure."

Roger is on the right track: I do that sort of 'impulse testing' a lot. It's a nice 'snapshot' of the guitar's sound: useful , but not comprehensive. There are drawbacks, of course. A snapshot can help you find somebody at the airport, but won't tell you a lot of things you might like to know, such as whether they bathe regularly....

Last year I made a 'matched pair' of mahogany and Red spruce OMs. I made them as much alike as I could, with all the wood cut 'in flitch' and tight tolerances on things like weight, resonances, and so on, as much as that's possible (it IS still wood, after all). Impulse tests gave spectra that were virtually indistinguishable up to 1000 Hz. 'Blind' tests showed that people had no particular trouble telling them apart, although they were, of course, quite similar. Differences that did show up in the higher frequency range could be attributable to differences in actual output, or simply to small changes in mode shapes due to local variations in wood properties that could shift the direction of the sound output. The setup I use simply could not distinguish this. This sort of uncertainty can be reduced; all it takes is time and money. Note I said 'reduced', not 'eliminated'.

I'll keep trying to make a real matched pair, but I'm not overly hopeful. If we could that would go a long way toward settling these disagreements about the influence of things like bridge pins: you could do a simple A/B test with only one variable changed. Dream on....

[rickenboom]

Originally Posted by dgt178

.....um.....were you responding to MY question??......I'm fully aware of TUSQ bridge pins, saddles and nuts......it's the TUSQ compensated bridge you mentioned that I've never heard of......

Yes DGT178, I meant saddle. Why not call it “bridge-saddle” by international convention?

[dgt178]

Originally Posted by rickenboom

Yes DGT178, I meant saddle. Why not call it “bridge-saddle” by international convention?

......the bridge and saddle are two different components......when reading comments, I don't think it's fair to assume.....for all I know...maybe TUSQ does make a compensated bridge......hence, my response.....cheers...

[AcousticDreams]

One could assume that since the ball end of the string is touching the bridge pin, that bridge pins would have an effect on the tone. As the string is...vibrating if you will in or through the bridge pin. In some form of manner, the bridge pin is now part of the string.

If you believe that a pound of sand and a pound of Metal will not sound the same when you hit them, then mass should Not be the only criteria for effecting sound.

If you believe that an equal weighted mahogany top will sound different than a same weight spruce top on an acoustic guitar. Then Bridge pins, which are also part of the top, should then sound different regardless of just mass.

If mass were the only factor in sound...then I am sure someone could invent synthetic material that would sound as good as wood

This old timer...who has changed out hundreds of pins back and fourth on his guitars....Can hear the differences.

Some guitars it makes little difference. Possibly having to due with the luthiers bracing design. Honestly I do not know why it works on some guitars and others not so much. All I can tell you is that it does.

This is a no brainer... we are not talking huge amounts of money to experiment.

On a personal note, I wish to thank the forum for all these wonderful conversations. I have learned so much from the forum. I have tried things that I would have never tried, if it wasn't for all of the great discussions.

Science is wonderful. I like science. But everything in the universe has not yet been discovered. Or at least that is my hope. otherwise life would be a bit boring wouldn't it?

Everything makes a difference...or at least that is what NASA tells us. ha ha

[scriv58]

I don’t know about no tonal harmonic complexity or what not, I just know changing bridge pin material does not reduce the complexity of the Scott Joplin rags i’m learning

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by Alan Carruth

vindibona1 wrote:
"But here's something for you to try if you dare... Place your finger on any string behind the saddle and before the pins. Pluck the strings. You feel vibrations? Si o no?"

Sure; they feel just like the ones I feel when I put my finger on the bridge behind the pin. Even if the string were rocking up and down with the saddle as a pivot point, which doesn't seem to be happening on my guitar, that motion has to stop where the string hits the bridge. It could change the sound, but not by being transmitted through the pins.

"I don't need to show you data."
I've studied this stuff for decades myself. I know about the difficulties with getting good data. I still trust good data more than I trust my ears. You may not not feel you need data, but you're not going to convince me without it.

Alan...
When people come to buy your guitars do they look at the data or play your guitars and listen to how they sound???

HOW pins do what they do... How Tonerite does or doesn't affect "opening" up... How different strings sets affect a guitar's sound . Do parabolic strings help the way a guitar top vibrates? HOW V bracing works doesn't matter one iota. It's about the outcome, not the process. If I can get a buffalo horn pin to make a guitar string sound more articulate is it important at all how the mechanics of it works- if replacing an existing pin with a buffalo horn pin consistently adds articulation to the sound of the string? If I can consistently dampen an overly bright string with African Blackwood or a bone pin with brass insert, does it matter- if the result is relatively consistent?

Have you ever clamped a substantial capo onto the top a headstock and noticed that the tone, or at least the resonance of the guitar changed? If your theory is correct, then the capo being clamped on the other side of the tuning pegs away from the vibrating surfaces, and far away from the top of the guitar shouldn't make any difference whatsoever. But you know as well as I do, that it will change the resonance and tone to a degree. The term I've seen you use often recently is "wolf tone". And you know very well that a string mute, Fender's Fat Finger or any other mass will change the tonal node and consequent "wolf" tone and has nothing to do with strings or body shape or the top's wood species.

The science of it all may make sense to a guitar builder who needs some direction and consistency in his builds, but you're never going to be 100% consistent because every piece of wood is unique. Guitar "TWEAKING" isn't the same as building. It's one part art, one part science and one part voodoo. Having a good ear, knowing what to listen for and knowing what to expect is 99% of it and when it comes to tweaking will trump raw science almost every time. After that it is having the tools to apply the knowledge that you've acquired to get to the desired sound. And it's all about nuance.

The only thing that matters is the sound. How you get there, through traditional and non-traditional means IMO is of little to no import. At the end of the day it's about the sound of guitar, but most importantly the music.

[Alan Carruth]

Knives&Guitars wrote:
"One could assume that since the ball end of the string is touching the bridge pin, that bridge pins would have an effect on the tone. As the string is...vibrating if you will in or through the bridge pin. In some form of manner, the bridge pin is now part of the string."

Well, that's the question, isn't it: does the string 'vibrate' in some way where it touches the pin? I've done a lot of work measuring the way strings vibrate, and I'm not at all convinced that any sort of vibration that would make a difference continues behind the saddle. I keep asking for data that show it does, and not getting any. Instead, people assume that there is such a vibration and make claims based on that.

Meanwhile, if you can find a guitar with a properly slotted bridge that will allow you to remove the pins without losing the strings there's an experiment you can try. Remove the pins. Block up the holes with tape. Weigh the pins and add that much mass to the bridge using something like poster adhesive. Is there a major change in the sound? This is actually a very bad experiment, since it is not 'blind' and can't be made so: you will hear what you think you're going to hear. Also, with all of the time that would elapse in changing things people in a 'blind' test would not remember the initial sound well enough to make a valid comparison. That's why truly 'matched' guitars would be so useful.

vindibona asked:
"When people come to buy your guitars do they look at the data or play your guitars and listen to how they sound??? "

Obviously, they go for sound and feel.

I've been involved in music in one way or another for over sixty years, but I'm primarily a singer, and not really a musician. As an instrument maker I'm making tools for musicians, and I have to know how they work in order to make good ones. I can't afford to get caught up in a lot of smoke and mirrors, so for me that means understanding at least some physics.

One thing I learned a long time ago was that everybody hears things differently. The corollary to that is that it's not my place to tell anybody else what they're hearing. I know well that what a guitar does and what it sounds like are often very different. Again, my job is to figure out how to make a guitar do what it takes to make is sound like what my customers want. The only people who can judge my success or failure are the customers, which is one reason I have the return policy I do. I've returned deposits on a couple of guitars over the years because they didn't sound like what the customer wanted. I've never had any problem finding another buyer.

So, vin, I will try not to post anything about what you say you're hearing when you change bridge pins, or anything else. I will, however, comment whenever I see something that doesn't line up with how that sound gets produced as I understand it. I will say that guitars are very complicated beasts, and that we are far from understanding them as well as we'd like. As you found with trumpet mouthpieces, sometimes the smallest detail can matter. That's why something as small as changing bridge pins can have an effect. But until you can show me that the end of the string vibrates where it touches the pin, and that vibration is transmitted through the pin, I'm sticking with attributing the effect to mass. It's the simplest explanation that fits the facts I know.