Compensated Saddles

[Robin, Wales]

I don't think that you could have any more technical detail than Charles has provided. So I'll just add some thoughts on playing style.

If you are playing cowboy chords down at the nut or using a capo to play cowboy chords higher up the neck (which usually involves some tuning tweeking thus negating saddle compensation) you can get away with a non compensated saddle, just a bit of a slant.

If you are a fingerstyle player playing complex chord inversions up the neck then you may want to think a little more about intonation and compensation.

95% of playing on those vintage Martin and Gibson guitars would have taken place around the nut or capo. Often because the action would have been so high up the neck you could have hung out your washing to dry on the strings, and a modern compensated nut would not have made a blind bit of difference.

More players today play up the neck and modern guitars (plus the way folks look after them) make a lower action and therefore playing up the neck possible. So a compensated saddle is of greater use now than they would have been back in the day.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by Robin, Wales

I don't think that you could have any more technical detail than Charles has provided.

No, that just barely scratches the surface of the issue, but is probably as much - or more - than most players want to know. I purposely left lots of things out in an effort to be as brief as possible.

Your point is a good one, that the demands of the music being played can determine what level of accuracy of intonation one expects from one's instrument. As you point out, if one doesn't play beyond the fifth fret, for example, it doesn't matter how good or bad the intonation is for that unplayed 2/3 of the instrument's range. That's as true now as it was 100 or more years ago.

[MC5C]

I make archtops, so compensation is a different game to flat tops, for two (at least) reasons. The first is archtop players are known for playing jazz, with complex harmonies played well up the neck, often past the 15th fret. So compensation is possibly more important. The second is that with an archtop, with a moveable bridge and easily modified or replaced saddle (sometimes even a dreaded Tune O Matic), it's really easy to set intonation to theoretical perfection, by modifying the saddle topper for each string individually, accounting for action height and string gauge.

But - I don't do that any more. All I do is get the angle of the topper right so that the high and low E strings are right (simplicity itself), add some compensation to the B string (and G string if it's unwound, which it usually isn't). I make the topper so the high E string and the wound G string have about the same amount of compensation, G string probably just a tad less. I do a smooth ramp from the G string to the low E string. This takes about 10 minutes on the bench, setting the string spacing takes longer. I do not try to finesse the compensation beyond that rudimentary approach. The reason is equal temperament and inharmonicity. The guitar is out of tune when you play it in different keys anyway, and the short stiff string length of wound strings played up past around the 9th fret makes them out of tune with themselves, let along their partner strings, so it just sounds like a guitar sounds. Not perfect, players have ways to get along with these quirks, and I don't have to fuss over an unreachable goal (making a guitar actually play in tune).

[EZYPIKINS]

All my guitars are compensated as soon as I set them up. Some folks will just shave a bit off the bottom of the saddle to get a little lower action. My approach to a set up, doesn't touch the bottom of the saddle. String by string I take down the top of the saddle. Along with the nut. To achieve the action I'm lookin for. Next, file the saddle back till intonation is achieved. Then remove the saddle. And in a vice. Smooth out the top. Cutting down to almost but not quite the depth of where the string rests. Then I'm good to go.

[SkipII]

What Charles Tauber said...

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by lar

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

Correct. It takes into account the large variation in string gauge, unlike a classical nylon strung guitar with a straight across saddle where there is little difference between gauges from bass to treble.

[ljguitar]

Hi all

I buy guitars to play them and not to pay allegiance to the way they arrived from the factory/builder.

All my guitars (including my solo-built) have compensated bone saddles in them, and periodically (every 5-6 yrs) have had the action and intonation adjusted.

[MikeB1]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Correct. It takes into account the large variation in string gauge, unlike a classical nylon strung guitar with a straight across saddle where there is little difference between gauges from bass to treble.

This is all new information for me, and I find it very interesting.

So is compensation something you never see on nylon string guitars or do you see it sometimes?

[SpruceTop]

Since the inclusion of factory-installed compensated saddles on new guitars many years ago, I've noticed an increase in the frequency (number of new guitars) that have what I term "that string-ping/sitar-thing" which is an annoying tinny ping and overtone on either the 3rd or 4th strings, and often both. This can be heard even when fretting these strings. Given the position of the compensation of these strings at the front edge of the saddle, I believe the string-ping/sitar-thing is a result of the string(s) contacting more of the downslope rear of the saddle than do any of the other four strings. This results in less downward 3rd- and 4th-string pressure on the compensated edge of the saddle and may likely cause this annoying tinniness in the tone. Although I've not done it, I believe that shaving away part of the downward curve of the saddle behind these two strings will eliminate "string-ping/sitar-thing" from these strings. Also, could these tinny overtones be more likely caused by the smaller relative diameters of the core and wrap wires for the 3rd and 4th strings?

Any thoughts on the above and what you have done to eliminate these annoying 3rd- and 4th-string tinny overtones?

[lar]

Originally Posted by SkipII

What Charles Tauber said...

Intonation of each string is probably why Somogyi uses such thick saddles (an expectation of customers spending over $40k on a guitar).

Although I heard/read somewhere that he also likes the thickness because he can reduce the stress concentration in the string at the breakpoint over the saddle - not such a high radius of curvature (as opposed to the sharp angles in the picture shown).

He started out making nylon guitars, so possibly they have more issues with strings breaking over sharp corners.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by MikeB1

So is compensation something you never see on nylon string guitars or do you see it sometimes?

Virtually all guitars in which one depresses the strings against frets have compensated string lengths. That is, the strings are made longer than the theoretical vibrating string length used to calculate fret placement.

How that increased string length is implemented is usually as I described previously: move the whole saddle parallel to the frets; move the whole saddle AND angle it; move the whole saddle, with or without angling, but with a stepped saddle for the most offensive string; move the whole saddle, with or without angling, but with each string individually lengthened within the limitations of the saddle thickness; move the whole saddle, with or without angling, using a thicker saddle that allows each string to be compensated fully.

Another method I didn't previously mention is to split the saddle into multiple pieces, such as Lowden, Takamine and others have done. That allows greater latitude for lengthening the vibrating string lengths while still using a thin saddle.

On the classical and steel string guitars that I make, I move the whole saddle, use a thicker saddle (3/16" thick) and compensate each string individually. For steel string guitars, I slightly angle the saddle if I'm cutting the bridge slot with a CNC machine. For arch top guitars that I have made, the thicker bridge allows sufficient room to compensate each string individually and the moveable nature of the bridge allows me to angle it and move it forward and back to achieve the best result.

As I previously mentioned, on steel string guitars, the "outlier" string is the second, B, string. On nylon string guitars, it is usually the third, G, string. It isn't all that uncommon to see a step in a classical saddle for the G string, doing the same thing for it that the notch for the B string does for steel string guitars.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by lar

Intonation of each string is probably why Somogyi uses such thick saddles (an expectation of customers spending over $40k on a guitar).

Makers who use thicker saddles, including me, use them to "fully" compensate each string. The obvious question is at what selling price does one expect a guitar to have accurate intonation? $500, $1000, $5000...?

The bottom line seems to be that most players either don't care, don't hear the inaccurate intonation or just accept that poor intonation is the norm - it doesn't have to be.

Although I heard/read somewhere that he also likes the thickness because he can reduce the stress concentration in the string at the breakpoint over the saddle - not such a high radius of curvature (as opposed to the sharp angles in the picture shown).

He started out making nylon guitars, so possibly they have more issues with strings breaking over sharp corners.

I haven't found nylon strings to be more susceptible to breakage due to saddle shape. If the bearing surface is a true knife edge, that does shorten string life, nylon or steel strings. If the bearing surface is too sharp, steel strings will crush/wear the knife edge to create a notch/groove, increasing the bearing surface.

The photo SkipII posted shows generous radii, steel string or nylon string. I usually make mine a little sharper than that.

[Duck916]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

Let's start at the beginning....

Thank you for this and your other posts in this thread. Very informative.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by Duck916

Thank you for this and your other posts in this thread. Very informative.

You are welcome. In-tune-ness and intonation are complex problems, problems that have kept scientists, mathematicians, instrument makers, string makers and musicians busy for centuries.

As I've discussed numerous times elsewhere, there are two different things in play here. One is determining the target pitches - the pitches we want our instruments to make. The second is how to get an instrument to accurately achieve those pitches. The first is temperament, the second is intonation.

Most modern music of Western culture uses equal temperament as the target. Equal temperament is a compromise that allows all keys to be played equally in tune and equally out of tune, without having to re-tune the instrument for each key. However, we generally hear that as being somewhat out of tune - not what we want to hear.

Intonation is how close we can get our instrument to achieving those pitches. Thus, even if our instruments achieved the pitches of equal temperament exactly, we'd still hear them as being out of tune.

Regardless, the starting point for playing in tune is accuracy of intonation - closely achieving the target pitches. If the pitches that an instrument produces are "randomly" inaccurate, with some notes randomly closer than others, accurate tuning becomes impossible and you end up chasing the out-of-tune-ness around. If the out-of-tune-ness follows a known, rational pattern, one can then begin to work around it to improve the situation. An instrument with good intonation does follow a rational pattern of inaccuracy: dealing with it is the subject of "sweetened" tunings, a different subject.

[lar]

Charles, I would be such an easy customer for you.

I usually am cussing and yelling while playing - because my fingers are on the wrong strings - so I can't even hear intonation issues. Check back with me in 10 years tho.

Thanks for the info.