Bone vs ebony pins

[Bruce Sexauer]

I struggle to lower the weight of my tops, the bridge, and the bridge plate as much as possible. This is because mass in the enemy of response to the strings' absolutely limited inertial potential. While plastic pins are often lighter than the ebony pins I use as my standard, they deform over time, often very little time, and I like the way ebony looks. Bone and ivory (especially fossilized ivory) weigh enough more than ebony to make an easily perceivable difference. While it is true that more weight on the top can diminish uneven response, it does so at the cost of overtones and the immediacy of response in the beginning of the tonal envelope. I like to think I have done what it takes to have a seriously balanced guitar before it leaves the shop.

I am doing a refret on a 19 year old guitar of mine and it came in with what I think are bone pins. I weighed them, and I weighed a set of the Gurian ebony pins I originally supplied it with.

[RonMay]

Originally Posted by Bruce Sexauer

I struggle to lower the weight of my tops, the bridge, and the bridge plate as much as possible. This is because mass in the enemy of response to the strings' absolutely limited inertial potential. While plastic pins are often lighter than the ebony pins I use as my standard, they deform over time, often very little time, and I like the way ebony looks. Bone and ivory (especially fossilized ivory) weigh enough more than ebony to make an easily perceivable difference. While it is true that more weight on the top can diminish uneven response, it does so at the cost of overtones and the immediacy of response in the beginning of the tonal envelope. I like to think I have done what it takes to have a seriously balanced guitar before it leaves the shop.

I am doing a refret on a 19 year old guitar of mine and it came in with what I think are bone pins. I weighed them, and I weighed a set of the Gurian ebony pins I originally supplied it with.

If weight is that important to you for the reason's you stated, then you should go with 'pass through bridges"

Ron

[Rudy4]

My own personal opinion is the weight of six bridge pins doesn't vary enough between wood or synthetics to matter.

Real Ivory pins would be rare enough to not figure into the evaluation of the effects of their use.

What I don't get at all is the players that order and install solid brass bridge pins to "enhance performance".

[Bruce Sexauer]

Originally Posted by RonMay

If weight is that important to you for the reason's you stated, then you should go with 'pass through bridges"

Ron

The back of the bridge needs to be more substantial in order to take the stress of 160 lb of string tension, obviating the savings in pin weight. Besides that, the bulk of my work is vintage inspired, and bridge pins are THE thing.

[bnjp]

I did an experiment with a solid top/laminate back guild a while back and found the bridge pins made more difference than anything else I changed (also made a bone nut and and bone saddle). The original plastic pins had more volume and the bone was more balanced. I didn't try ebony, but you could easily buy both and try them. I would guess ebony would be brighter/snappier than bone.

[Victory Pete]

Interesting discussion. I prefer bone over ebony for looks and tone, not sure what exactly is different but I like the tone I get when using bone.

[Rudy4]

My suspicion is that pin material influences sound more if the bridge is unslotted and the ball end actually lodges against the pin. Part of the energy the string transfers to the instrument is from the longitudinal force the string carries to the ball end. That energy would be coupled less or more efficiently if the ball transferred energy to diverse pin materials.

My preference is for slotted bridges where the pin is more about the cosmetic appearance and of little importance in anchoring the string end. In the case of the slotted bridge you can often remove the pins with no effect on the string staying in place. You could remove or swap out pins to verify how much pin mass might change the tone or volume of the instrument.

[Victory Pete]

There certainly are a lot of variables, one being the taper or lack thereof of the pin holes. All my Gibsons and Martins had straight holes. I came up with a procedure to give them a taper. I coated the inside of the holes with 2 coats of Fish Glue, I then put in the taper with a 5 degree reamer. They all got bone pins also. All of the guitars had an improvement in their sound.

[Alan Carruth]

Rudy4 wrote:
"My own personal opinion is the weight of six bridge pins doesn't vary enough between wood or synthetics to matter."

Peter Schickele said that: "Truth is just truth; you can't have opinions about truth". The reality is that bone pins to weigh more than wood ones, in general, and that small differences in the weight at the bridge can make perceptible changes in the sound.


At various times I've weighed more or less 'standard' pattern bridge pin sets, that came is as follows:
plastic - 3 grams
ebony - 5 grams
bone - 8.5 grams
brass - 26 grams
'Power' - 31 grams (with all the washers)
I'm told that 'Liquid Metal' pins weigh ~16 grams/set

I have had experiences where altering the mass at the bridge by as little as two grams made the difference between a sound that was 'too bright' and 'just right', and one can measure objective output changes that correlate with that.

One could continue, but somebody just came to the door....

[redir]

Wow that is quite a significant difference.

How about cutting the pins off a bit? They probably protrude farther then necessary to hold a string in place.

I might have to try this experiment this weekend.

[Bruce Sexauer]

I believe I am right (ha) when I say that as long as nothing is loose, all parts of the bridge act as one monolith. That’s everything between the string fulcrum and outside perimeter of the bridge footprint, including the saddle, the pins, the string and the ball ends, the bridge plate, and the bridge itself. While there is some flex in the bridge system, it is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. The material the ball ends are made from could play a part, but I don’t think there is a greater variable, once the guitar is complete, than the bridge pins.

Those who follow my custom shop “blog-thread” will be aware of what some call the “Sexauer tone-bar variation”. The point of this variation is that it drops between 3 and 5 grams of weight from the belly of the guitar top, when I use it. While there may be other structural factors besides this weight drop, it does make a clear difference in the tonal quality of my work. IMO, of course. This weight difference is easily reversed with bridge pins alone!

[Victory Pete]

Originally Posted by redir

Wow that is quite a significant difference.

How about cutting the pins off a bit? They probably protrude farther then necessary to hold a string in place.

I might have to try this experiment this weekend.

That's a good idea, pins usually extend a bit past the ball.

[John Arnold]

One tech known for fossil ivory setups makes hollow pins that are the absolute minimum length, including a head that barely protrudes above the surface of the bridge.

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by Alan Carruth

Rudy4 wrote:
"My own personal opinion is the weight of six bridge pins doesn't vary enough between wood or synthetics to matter."

Peter Schickele said that: "Truth is just truth; you can't have opinions about truth". The reality is that bone pins to weigh more than wood ones, in general, and that small differences in the weight at the bridge can make perceptible changes in the sound.


At various times I've weighed more or less 'standard' pattern bridge pin sets, that came is as follows:
plastic - 3 grams
ebony - 5 grams
bone - 8.5 grams
brass - 26 grams
'Power' - 31 grams (with all the washers)
I'm told that 'Liquid Metal' pins weigh ~16 grams/set

I have had experiences where altering the mass at the bridge by as little as two grams made the difference between a sound that was 'too bright' and 'just right', and one can measure objective output changes that correlate with that.

One could continue, but somebody just came to the door....

I guess that proves my opinion to be wrong.

[Brucebubs]

Am I reading these figures wrong or is the decimal point missing in Bruce's pictures?

Bruce bone = 63g ... Alan bone = 8.5g

Bruce ebony = 37g ... Alan ebony = 5g