#1
|
|||
|
|||
Optimizing the adjustable bone/"tusq" in the saddle - two thoughts
Now if you remove the bone/tusq material in between the strings, so only the parts that the strings rest on are allowed to fully reach up to the strings. Which would leave the adjustable piece of bone/tusq scalloped to some degree.
Is that a great idea? Do you practice it? Have you tried it out? Should I file for a patent? If you look on the guitars of the old days, they were oftenly equipped with saddles that had rounded edges, at least the quality instruments. But today most instruments come with saddles that are directly from machinery with sharp edges. Supposedly it doesn't make a very big difference. But it surely looks less attractive. It also "adds some weight" to the instrument. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The bridge (not the saddle), on the Gibson Advanced Jumbo tapers down from the bass end to the treble end. I'd be interested to know what the thinking is behind that.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
If the adjustable piece of the saddle is of bone, as it oftenly is, it will be a big part of the weight of the adjustable piece of bone + bridge, all in all. So removing weight of the piece of bone will affect the total weight, in some degree. Thatīs it, cheers!
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Kevin Krell, Executive Director, International Traditional Music Society, Inc. A non-profit 501c3 charity/educational public benefit corporation Wooden Flute Obsession CDs https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...d.php?t=572579 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, exactly, thatīs it! Though Iīd expect the acoustic effect to be bigger at the saddle.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
No way I can tell what effect, as there has never been a different nut or saddle on this guitar. How it comes from the maker.
__________________
Kevin Krell, Executive Director, International Traditional Music Society, Inc. A non-profit 501c3 charity/educational public benefit corporation Wooden Flute Obsession CDs https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...d.php?t=572579 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I would say that the reduced mass by scalloping those very small areas would be negligible against the weight of the bridge itself. A 1x6" ebony bridge weighs about 28g, a bone saddle 4g, a TUSQ saddle of same dimension 2g. Add 5g for TUSQ pins and 6g for bone, for a total of ~37-38g for bridge/saddle/pins and the amount of mass saved by scalloping the saddle would be basically irrelevant...
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The density of bone: "The density of compact bone is surprisingly constant through out life at about 1900 kg/m3"
https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002...russkaya.shtml The density of rosewood: the density of rosewood or palisander is 881 kg/m3 or 0.881 g/cm3. http://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_the...ty_of_rosewood So bone is approximately twice "as heavy" as rosewood. If you have a saddle where the piece of bone is comparably large, it might be of value to notice that. Keeping in mind the ratio between densitys of bone and wood. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Are you sure lightening the mass of your particular bridge is a good thing? It isn't, necessarily, from all I know.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
(Weight of the saddle in comparison to the bridge, bridge pins, size of bone piece in comparison to the saddle, the bracing etc. and dimension of strings.) Some people even add weight to the top to dampen certain unwished effects. As for instance wolf notes. |