Compensated Saddles

[TRU]

So, if compensated saddles are so clever and important, do folks with 100% vintage Gibsons and Martins have tuning/intonation issues that folks with trendy tusq saddles do not?

(fyi, i know very well what a compensated saddle is and its purpose)

[charles Tauber]

Are you trolling or is there something specific you wanted to discuss?

[TRU]

... do folks with 100% vintage Gibsons and Martins have tuning/intonation issues that folks with trendy tusq saddles do not?

perhaps i should have set it bold or underlined for ya.

[Brucebubs]

I must admit I was a little surprised to see the bone saddle on my new Historic 1957 SJ-200 was not compensated but I was later told that's how they come from Gibson - no tuning issues.
My Guild F-412 also has an uncompensated saddle.

[TRU]

Those bridge pins may be bone too, no?
BTW...M'GAWD would I love to have the guitar that you have!
Well done, amigo.

[Brucebubs]

Originally Posted by TRU

Those bridge pins may be bone too, no?
BTW...M'GAWD would I love to have the guitar that you have!
Well done, amigo.

Yes, bone nut, saddle and pins.
That's the 4 bar insert moustache bridge - the pins are actually set closer to the saddle on the 2 bar insert bridge.

[TRU]

Your first pic looks like a 4 bar on a darker top...but your second pics show 4 bars on a quite natural top.
Which one do you own?

[Brucebubs]

Originally Posted by TRU

Your first pic looks like a 4 bar on a darker top...but your second pics show 4 bars on a quite natural top.
Which one do you own?

Those are just some pictures off the web I had saved, I see they both have compensated saddles too! - here's me playing mine.(Vintage Sunburst)

[TRU]

Originally Posted by Brucebubs

Those are just some pictures off the web I had saved - here's me playing mine.(Vintage Sunburst)

WoWoWoW ... she's a beaut!

[lar]

Since the saddle is skewed /angled, would that be considered a type of compensation (for intonation)?

[dnf777]

No guitar is perfectly intonated. The angled saddle has served as an adequate compromise. Not sure if its any better or worse than the shaped saddles or even the two-piece saddles.

[TRU]

Originally Posted by lar

Since the saddle is skewed /angled, would that be considered a type of compensation (for intonation)?

I suppose it would, and upon inspecting vintage acoustics it appears that their bridges were angled back then too.
If every guitar made used to have a straight 90 degree angled saddle then I would fully embrace a new saddle design...beginning with an off-set angle, and (today) ending with an off-set + compensated saddle.
My question is, Why the offset?
Is the bone saddle on a vintage 1957 Gibson SJ-200 giving people tuning/intonation fits?
Should folks with UNcompensated saddles freak out and run to their local guitar techs?
Should guitar techs tell everyone, "Nooooo, you are wasting money if you pay me to replace this saddle."
I can't tell if a compensated saddle is:
1) Necessary, and something guitar makers should've realized long ago
2) Ehhh, whatever
3) A marketing play that really only makes the buyer feel secure
I don't know the answer. Thus, my question.
Sorry for the long reply, friend.
I just hope others read through this completely.

[gfspencer]

I will put a compensated saddle on any of my guitars. It will not hurt the value of the guitar.

[TRU]

Originally Posted by gfspencer

I will put a compensated saddle on any of my guitars. It will not hurt the value of the guitar.

But if you didn't ... would problems ensue?

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by TRU

My question is, Why the offset?
Is the bone saddle on a vintage 1957 Gibson SJ-200 giving people tuning/intonation fits?
Should folks with UNcompensated saddles freak out and run to their local guitar techs?
Should guitar techs tell everyone, "Nooooo, you are wasting money if you pay me to replace this saddle."
I can't tell if a compensated saddle is:
1) Necessary, and something guitar makers should've realized long ago
2) Ehhh, whatever
3) A marketing play that really only makes the buyer feel secure
I don't know the answer. Thus, my question.
Sorry for the long reply, friend.
I just hope others read through this completely.

Let's start at the beginning. Guitars at least since the early 1800's have had fixed frets - once placed, they can't be repositioned or slid up or down the neck. (Early guitars and related instruments did not have fixed frets.) With very few exceptions, the frets are placed/spaced in accordance with equal temperament. That is, they are laid out and placed according to a mathematical formula.

The starting point for calculating/laying out where the frets are placed is based on a vibrating string length of the open/un-fretted strings. That length is referred to as the scale length.

The mathematical formula assumes that the vibrating strings behave "ideally". That is, that if you shorten a string by an amount given by the formula you will get a specific pitch. In the real world, strings don't behave as the "ideal" strings that are assumed in the mathematical formula.

If one placed the two end-points of the vibrating string - the nut at one end and the saddle at the other - in accordance with the scale length, the fretted notes will sound sharp. In short, the instrument will not play in tune and will play out of tune by different amounts on each string and at each fret.

String instrument makers have known for centuries that they can combat the out-of-tune-ness by making the actual vibrating string length different than the theoretical vibrating string length (scale length) that was used to place the frets. To make the actual vibrating string length different than the theoretical string length one can do either or both of moving the position of the nut - defining the actual vibrating string length at one end - and/or moving the position of the saddle - defining the actual vibrating string length at the other end. In modern terminology, moving the nut is referred to as compensation at the nut while moving the saddle is referred to as compensation at the saddle, or just "saddle compensation".

To keep this as short as possible, and since it is less often implemented, I won't further discuss string compensation at the nut. That leaves string compensation at the saddle.

The pitch at which a string vibrates is inversely proportional to its length. That is, if you make a string longer, its vibrating frequency (pitch) goes down. Given that placing a saddle at the theoretical position given by the scale length results in fretted notes that all play sharp, moving the saddle to increase the actual vibrating string length counters - or "compensates" for - the increase in pitch the results from fretting a string. That is, if you lengthen a string by just the right amount - without moving the frets - you exactly balance the amount by which depressing the string excessively increases the pitch with the result that the fretted note plays the pitch you want. Virtually all modern guitars - those made in at least the last 100+ years - have moved the saddle to increase the actual vibrating string length. Doing so makes the instrument play better in tune than if the saddle was placed at the position of the theoretical scale length. It is a first approximation of applied compensation.

But, there is a catch. The catch is that each of the 6 strings on a (typical) guitar have different properties and is tuned to a different pitch and tension. The practical implication of that is that EACH string needs to be increased in length by its own unique amount. That is, each string requires its own amount of compensation to play in tune. One way, the most common, is to angle the saddle so that the strings that tend to need more compensation get more compensation. This provides a second approximation of applied compensation, better than simple lengthening each string equally (i.e. a straight-across saddle). Many older guitars used this approximation.

But, there is a second catch. That catch is that using a straight, angled saddle assumes that the amount by which each string needs to be lengthened lies on a straight line - a linear increase in string length from one string to the next. In practice, they don't. The biggest outlier from the straight-line-approximation is - on steel string acoustic guitars - the second string, the B string. (On electric guitars it is usually an unwound 3rd string and on nylon string guitars, also the 3rd string.) Due to the tension on the string, its diameter, etc. to play in tune it needs to be longer than either of its two neighbours - the E string and the G string. Thus, the next level of approximation involves staggering the B string position of where it breaks over the saddle so that it is as long as the width (thickness) of the saddle physically allows. This gives a step in the saddle at the B string. On many steel string guitars, the saddle is not wide (thick) enough to provide the full amount of length that is necessary to fully compensate the B string. Thus, on many guitars, even though "compensated", The B string still is too short and plays sharp.

The next level of approximation is to recognize that although the discrepancy from one string to the next is not as large as for the B string, one can increase the ability of the guitar to play in tune by fine-adjustment of the other five strings of where, exactly, each of them breaks over the saddle. One often sees this as a "wave" profile on the top of the saddle, positioning the breaking points individually for each string. Again, this is within the physical limitation of the width (thickness) of the saddle. Many guitars are equipped with a 5/32" thick saddle which, on many guitars, does not provide sufficient latitude to fully adjust the breaking position (actual vibrating string length) of each individual string.

The last level of approximation is to use a wider (thicker) saddle that is sufficiently thick as to allow full compensation - as much as each individual string needs - to play in tune. There are some makers who do this, but most of the large manufacturers do not.

Which level of successive approximation do you need? That depends largely on your ears and how discerning you are.