Can an under saddle pickup dull tone/volume??

[Monsum]

Does the element affect the acoustic tone of a guitar or does it not?

Here is what the guys from LR Baggs say about it:

Originally Posted by Caleb Elling

...all pickups will alter the tone of an acoustic guitar to some degree. In general, the M1A doesn't have much of a noticeable effect. So if you notice a tonal change while using the M1A, then you will probably notice more of a difference using an undersaddle pickup (any undersaddle pickup). The actual control unit doesn't effect the tone as much, since it is placed in a pretty firmly braced area of the guitar. Most players who do notice a difference attribute it to the UST. Many players don't notice any difference at all. In my opinion, some players just think they hear a difference. There is definitely a difference, as you mentioned, but I personally believe that if you can amplify your guitar well, it is absolutely worth it.

This is why, if you are choosing between the Anthem and Session, which both have the same relative tonal effect on the guitar (preamp size and UST)

Originally Posted by Bryan McManus

Any time something other than what the saddle or bridge are made of is put under the saddle, some change in the acoustic properties will result.
Those who are more intimately familiar with the tone and resonance of their guitar will more readily notice the change in energy transfer from string to soundboard.
To expect no change whatsoever in the acoustic properties is a little unrealistic.
There are some players who want a natural and realistic amplified sound but who are given pause by the slight change in acoustic properties that is to be expected from installing an undersaddle pickup.
(...)
Flexible undersaddle pickups, like the Element, do damper some of the highest frequencies but are also more sensitive and more natural-sounding. It would account for the slight change in acoustics when using the Element.
As you said, it is a bit of a trade-off.

The above quotes come from LR Baggs forum and if there was no difference at all in acoustic tone, these people would be the last to expect to admit it. But apparently they do.

[stevecuss]

+1 to all this. And I’ll add:

— I think a lot of discrepancy in opinion on this topic comes down to discrepancy of tonal impact. Not every guitar is affected the same amount by a UST. I have installed many USTs over the years and the first time I heard a significant impact was on my Mcilroy. I installed a Baggs Anthem, restrung and immediately heard a ‘dampening’ of tone. It was striking and led me to google the problem which is how I first learned about the common issue of tone dampening. But previously I installed a B Band UST on a sweet Ted Thompson guitar and never noticed any tonal change. The BBand is a very hard brittle element and the Baggs is soft braided which may or may not be the issue.

— Does the tone return after the saddle settles? I think it is entirely possible, but i was always bugged by he unknown. Probably the placebo affect noted by a previous post. No more UST for me in the Mcilroy.

— Andy Gullahorn did an acoustic concert for us last year and brought his old Larrivee with an old Baggs UST as his only source. His tone was incredible and quack free. Just amazing. Make sure me think that the tone really is in the fingers and many professional musicians just get on with playing while I obsess over every pickup nuance.

Originally Posted by Monsum

Does the element affect the acoustic tone of a guitar or does it not?

Here is what the guys from LR Baggs say about it:


The above quotes come from LR Baggs forum and if there was no difference at all in acoustic tone, these people would be the last to expect to admit it. But apparently they do.

[jonfields45]

Originally Posted by Monsum

Does the element affect the acoustic tone of a guitar or does it not?

Here is what the guys from LR Baggs say about it:




The above quotes come from LR Baggs forum and if there was no difference at all in acoustic tone, these people would be the last to expect to admit it. But apparently they do.

Remember good customer support knows how to not pick a fight with their customers.

[tochiro]

I have a Martin HD-28 too and have several USTs installed over the years but never heard any change of tone at all.

[varmonter]

I am from the opposite school of thought and
won't install a UST in any of my guitars. just don't
like them. or battery boxes. I use kk or soundhole
pups.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by mach5

Just installed a new under saddle PU (LRB Element VTC) in my HD-28. It seemed to dull the tone ever so slightly. Is this normal? Thanks

Hi mach5…

The Baggs element (and I used those in several guitars) can be made to produce fine amplified tone. Properly installed, it will serve players well. And yes, an under saddle pickup can dull, dampen, or alter the acoustic sound of a guitar.

When I commissioned my Olson (1992) it arrived with a Baggs LB-6 saddle pickup which is a solid brass blank with 6 individual piezo embedded in it, topped with a Micarta cap to form a saddle which can be adjusted for height and intonation. In 2000 I had an internal mic and internal stereo preamp (both Baggs) installed.

In 2005 I had the dual source Baggs unit replaced with a bone saddle, and a passive K&K dual source rig. I was amazed at how much 'stuff' the luthier removed from my guitar. I weighed it and it came to nearly half a pound…and that didn't include a 9 volt battery which also resided inside the guitar.

The preamp for the Baggs dual source systems is Velcroed to the inside back of the guitar…and is approximately 2X3 inches and over an inch tall (it IS a Class-A preamp and mixer component).

My K&K rig weighs ¼ of what the Baggs did, and leaves the saddle slot unaltered. And except for the actual pickup elements (which are glued to the bridge plate directly beneath the saddle inside the guitar), no cable nor the mic are attached to any highly active part of the guitar.

I was amazed at the change (for the better) in the acoustic tone of the Olson after removing all the extra weight. The acoustic improvements were reflected in the amplified tone as well.

My Olson with the original Baggs rig sounded so much better than any guitar I'd owned that I had failed to take into account that the saddle-pickup and internal preamps might be affecting the acoustic tone.

I decided based on that experience to no longer use under saddle pickups in any of my acoustic gutiars.

[Petty1818]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

Hi mach5…

The Baggs element (and I used those in several guitars) can be made to produce fine amplified tone. Properly installed, it will serve players well. And yes, an under saddle pickup can dull, dampen, or alter the acoustic sound of a guitar.

When I commissioned my Olson (1992) it arrived with a Baggs LB-6 saddle pickup which is a solid brass blank with 6 individual piezo embedded in it, topped with a Micarta cap to form a saddle which can be adjusted for height and intonation. In 2000 I had an internal mic and internal stereo preamp (both Baggs) installed.

In 2005 I had the dual source Baggs unit replaced with a bone saddle, and a passive K&K dual source rig. I was amazed at how much 'stuff' the luthier removed from my guitar. I weighed it and it came to nearly half a pound…and that didn't include a 9 volt battery which also resided inside the guitar.

The preamp for the Baggs dual source systems is Velcroed to the inside back of the guitar…and is approximately 2X3 inches and over an inch tall (it IS a Class-A preamp and mixer component).

My K&K rig weighs ¼ of what the Baggs did, and leaves the saddle slot unaltered. And except for the actual pickup elements (which are glued to the bridge plate directly beneath the saddle inside the guitar), no cable nor the mic are attached to any highly active part of the guitar.

I was amazed at the change (for the better) in the acoustic tone of the Olson after removing all the extra weight. The acoustic improvements were reflected in the amplified tone as well.

My Olson with the original Baggs rig sounded so much better than any guitar I'd owned that I had failed to take into account that the saddle-pickup and internal preamps might be affecting the acoustic tone.

I decided based on that experience to no longer use under saddle pickups in any of my acoustic gutiars.

I feel like the switch from Micarta to bone in general would have a dramatic impact on the tone, regardless of the pickup used. I wonder how much of the change was due to the "stuff" in the guitar vs. the new saddle material?