I Tried An Experiment That Boosted My Guitar's Volume

[MThomson]

I was reading an article from Ervin Somogyi the other day that also explored why he used a wider saddle. https://esomogyi.com/articles/princi...cs-and-design/

He discusses it in terms of improving the coupling of the string energy to the bridge. It seemed to me like it had a potential relevance to the experiment discussed.

[Mike McLenison]

Originally Posted by Dru Edwards

Mike (OP) - I've never seen this before and based on your findings I'm intrigued. Can you confirm that when you added the 2nd saddle you changed nothing at the same time, i.e. same strings?

I changed nothing. I loosened the strings, took out the bridge pins and tightened them back up when the new saddle was finished.

[martingitdave]

Originally Posted by Corndog

I'm trying to make sense of this. To me the secondary "bridge" actually reduces the break angle on the bridge. Clearly the break angle from the second bridge to the pin hole is sharper but it appears to be transferring that tension to the bridge as mostly side load.
The greater downward force created by the second bridge is after the fact, so to speak, in that the string is vibrating between the bridge and the nut and not the bridge and the second bridge.

It’s pretty easy to calculate with engineering statics that I took in college. If only I could remember college. Lol

[Alan Carruth]

Trevor Gore, who has done a lot of work on guitar acoustics, claims that having the string wrap around the saddle works better than having it contact at a point. In this he directly contradicts Somogyi. I suspect that it's best to have both sufficiently solid contact just at the front edge to stop vertical motion at that point, and also to wrap around at least some, which may help with horizontal motion. I've been working on an improved monochord to look at various aspects of the string signal, and am finding that to be the case. It's certainly true that the devil is in the details...

[Dogma]

Originally Posted by Alan Carruth

Trevor Gore, who has done a lot of work on guitar acoustics, claims that having the string wrap around the saddle works better than having it contact at a point. In this he directly contradicts Somogyi. I suspect that it's best to have both sufficiently solid contact just at the front edge to stop vertical motion at that point, and also to wrap around at least some, which may help with horizontal motion. I've been working on an improved monochord to look at various aspects of the string signal, and am finding that to be the case. It's certainly true that the devil is in the details...

Alan,
Can you please clarify what you mean (or what TG means) by "wrap around?" I know there are many bridge/saddle configurations but am not conjuring a mental image of what this means.
Thanks!

[wisedennis]

Originally Posted by Mike McLenison

I had this idea based on a luthier claiming slotted bridge holes held in place with non-slotted bridge pins results in better tone. I tried another approach. I added an additional bone saddle to put behind the Martin saddle. It's lower in height of course and was a bit tricky to make by hand as I had to put a radius on the bottom of the saddle to match the bridge curvature since it's just laying on top. The back of the strings ride over and pin it down before entering the hole. Seems to sound bigger if that's possible for a Martin. My bridge pins are titanium.

have you “re-routed “the saddle slot to be bigger? Or simply placed extra piece of saddle without creating a slot for it?

Thanks

[TennesseeWalker]

Interesting -

To make to curvature on the insert, I should imagine removing the strings and pins,
laying down a piece of sandpaper on the bridge then rubbing the insert on the paper would help facilitate making the fit

- - - just a thought.

[MThomson]

Originally Posted by Alan Carruth

Trevor Gore, who has done a lot of work on guitar acoustics, claims that having the string wrap around the saddle works better than having it contact at a point. In this he directly contradicts Somogyi. I suspect that it's best to have both sufficiently solid contact just at the front edge to stop vertical motion at that point, and also to wrap around at least some, which may help with horizontal motion. I've been working on an improved monochord to look at various aspects of the string signal, and am finding that to be the case. It's certainly true that the devil is in the details...

I took from reading the Somogyi article that he preferred a prolonged contact between string and saddle rather than a pint contact too which suggests they agree. Obviously I may be misinterpreting something.

[seannx]

Would be interesting to do an experiment using some kind of device to mechanically and consistently strum the strings, with the guitar in a stand, keeping all the mic distance and position the same along with the recording settings. Then record the guitar’s sound first with only the original saddle, next with the additional one, and finally just the original one again. The suggestion to use the second one over a UST is very intriguing.

[Liam77]

the next step would be a fully bone bridge

[sinistral]

Originally Posted by Alan Carruth

Trevor Gore, who has done a lot of work on guitar acoustics, claims that having the string wrap around the saddle works better than having it contact at a point. In this he directly contradicts Somogyi. I suspect that it's best to have both sufficiently solid contact just at the front edge to stop vertical motion at that point, and also to wrap around at least some, which may help with horizontal motion. I've been working on an improved monochord to look at various aspects of the string signal, and am finding that to be the case. It's certainly true that the devil is in the details...

I was going to post the same article as MThomson. From the below quote, I found that Somogyi and Gore were in agreement, and support the OP’s findings.

The average saddle is 3/32″ to 1/8″ wide. I use saddles that are 3/16″ or more wide because it makes a saddle wide enough to offer adequate intonation compensation on a steel string guitar. The rationale for intonation compensation is the subject of another talk, but I want to say one thing about the contact characteristics between the strings and the saddle. If you have two virtually identical guitars one of which has the strings resting on a single high point of the saddle, and the other with the strings resting on a significant portion of the saddle’s top, I think you’ll find this second guitar works better. There is a better and more efficient coupling of kinetic string energy to the saddle by virtue of that extended contact. I can’t prove this, but I suspect if you pay attention to it you’ll get better results.

[redir]

65% louder? I don't buy it. How did you come to such a conclusion?

Slotted bridge holes held in place with non-slotted bridge pins results in damage to the bridge plate but would be impossible do prove has better tone.

Psychoacoustics is a very interesting topic though.

[Steve DeRosa]

So did I - mine works better :

[Coler]

Am I wrong to think that the modified bridge lengthens the string and increases tension, which may have an effect?

[Matts67]

Originally Posted by redir

Slotted bridge holes held in place with non-slotted bridge pins results in damage to the bridge plate but would be impossible do prove has better tone.

I thought the opposite was true, at least according to Bryan Kimsey, John Arnold, etc.