Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Pinless bridge
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=3685		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  John How [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:19 am ]
Post subject: 
Question for those with experience in going pinless.
Since there are no pins there should be no real need for a bridge plate. do any of you use a brace of some sort under the bridge when you go pinless to help counter string torque?
Author:  Pwoolson [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:54 am ]
Post subject: 
John, I think that if you make sure you cross the legs of the x with the bridge, that sould counter the force enough. Though I'm of the school of thought that the bridge plate does NOTHING but keep the balls from ripping up the top. So mine are as thin as possible.
I've done two pinnless bridges. One as a repair to fix compensation issues and one that was planned. The fix has a bridge plate and the planned doesn't. I haven't noticed adverse effects on either.
Author:  John How [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:34 am ]
Post subject: 
I agree that the plate doesn't do much but support the pins but it must add a little stiffness I would think. I'll not put a plate in this one though and see. It'll be a keeper anyway.
Author:  russ [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:45 am ]
Post subject: 
John,

I use a pinless bridge, but with a bridge plate also. It's not quite as heavy as normal, but my pinless bridge is made using the Klein bridge as a point of departure. There are music wire rods that the ball ends of the string slide over, and these pass through the bridge, top and bridge plate. It's a pretty solid assembly.

Russ
Author:  John How [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:54 am ]
Post subject: 
Russ, are the wires anchored somehow or just glued in?
Actually I am thnking about using a string thru style. string inserted from behind the bridge but above the top.
Just something I want to try out on a special guitar.
Author:  Michael McBroom [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:04 am ]
Post subject: 
John,

I've built only one steel string so far, but I liked the idea of a pinless bridge, so that's what I went with:



I installed a bridge plate on mine, just more out of following tradition more than anything else. I build classicals, and most classicals use a bridge pad, typically made from a soundboard offcut, which acts to reinforce the top from the bridge's attempt to torque the soundboard toward the nut. But since classicals typically do not use an X-bracing design, I can see why a plate might not be necessary at all. It seems to me that an X-brace would provide you with all the reinforcement you would need to counteract the string pull without the addition of the plate.

However -- one thing I've noticed regarding my classical builds is that more solid reinforcement along the bridge saddle line seems to increase a guitar's sustain. So, it might be worthwhile to keep a plate of some sort in the event that sustain might be affected. Apples and oranges, I realize, but still something to possibly consider.

Best,

Michael
Author:  Chas Freeborn [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:07 pm ]
Post subject: 
I would definitely check out how Mike Doolin does it.
http://www.doolinguitars.com/pinless.html
I believe the pins pass through the bridge and into the bridge plate,
replicating the type of "pull" a conventional bridge design does.
-C
Author:  Frank Ford [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:04 am ]
Post subject: 
Trust me, the bridge plate can have a big effect on the bridge's ability to
stay stuck to the top of the guitar. By stiffening the area, it reduces the
tendency of the top to "peel" away under the bridge.

One feature of the pinless bridge I find particularly annoying is the tendency
for a broken string to "shoot" the string ball back out of the bridge, seriously
scarring the top. Another is that when the bridge becomes loosened from
the top it can pull all the way off, sometimes taking a big chunk of the top
with it in front of the bridge. That's another nasty piece of business that the
pin bridge design avoids.
Author:  Don Williams [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:03 am ]
Post subject: 
I don't entirely get the whole pinless bridge thing.

Now I realize that some of these pinless bridges look really cool, and I think maybe it's easier to change strings with a pinless bridge.
But maybe I'm stuck in the mud here, because I just like the look of the pinned bridges better. Perhaps we're all so accustomed to it that the pinless bridges have a certain "wow" factor that the traditional pinned bridges don't have. At least in our minds. I like pins.
Author:  John How [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:16 am ]
Post subject: 
I'm jst trying to loose weight were I can. Not that a bridge plate is very heavy. But now I can get ride of those big lead bridge pins I've been using .
Author:  Wade Sylvester [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:33 am ]
Post subject: 
I like the Doolin design.
Don,
There is something about "seeing" the anchor point of the string at the bridge that seems reassuring somehow.
With pins, it took me a while to learn how to get the strings to seat properly against the inner plate on my first few acoustics. When the ball end is not in the right spot, it can cause some odd sounds.
But, I like pins too.

Wade
Author:  Dave White [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:38 am ]
Post subject: 
Don,

I came at guitar building having owned and been impressed by the Lowdens that I own and have only made guitars with pinless bridges. I'm the flip side to you - I don't get (or want to do) the multiple "piercings" of the top, forcing the strings down and then wedging them in with some bits of wood or other substances

My head tells me that not having to perform the anchoring role of the strings through the top, the bridge will drive the top in a different way (more freely?) but I've asked the great source of wisdom Alan C about this and he's not so sure. It certainly gives more freedom for bracing designs, but I think you still need a bridge plate (as Frank Ford says, to help keep the bridge on) and also I would tend to agree with Michael that it helps with sustain. The Mike Doolin bridge is a very clever design, but I regard it as a hybrid rather than pure pinless bridge as it has pins (albeit brass ones) drilled through the top into the bridgeplate.

I make my bridgeplates with the grain in the same direction as the top - after reading something that Frank Ford said.

Pinless bridges have to be more carefully glued and can pop, but those of mine that have came off clean as a whistle (like taking off an elastoplast). Breaking strings can do damage, but equally they can do it between the bridge and soundhole. Nearly all of my breakages (fortunately) have been at the tuner end and the ball-ends have not caused damage. Changing strings is actually trickier as you have to avoid damaging the top behind the bridge as you take the old strings off and put the new ones in. I have taken to making small wooden plates that match the contour behind the bridge for my guitars that can be used when changing strings.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:04 am ]
Post subject: 
Just a anticlerical thought here. All things being equal, for the pin-less bridge to increase sustain over the pined bridge it would seam to me that the pin-less bridge arrangement would some how have to produce more energy either at the saddle or through the bridge its self to have that affect. Most pin-less arrangements I have seen have a shallower break angle than pined. And in my thinking slightly dampen the available energy at the saddle
I could be wrong here.
Author:  Don Williams [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Michael,

It would take greater minds than mine to know for sure!
Author:  Dave White [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=MichaelP] Just a anticlerical thought here. All things being equal, for the pin-less bridge to increase sustain over the pined bridge it would seam to me that the pin-less bridge arrangement would some how have to produce more energy either at the saddle or through the bridge its self to have that affect. Most pin-less arrangements I have seen have a shallower break angle than pined. And in my thinking slightly dampen the available energy at the saddle
I could be wrong here.
[/QUOTE]

Micheal,

My reasoning (and it could be equally flawed!!) is that the strings being anchored through the bridgeplate will take some of the energy from the bridgeplate (most of the movement part being at the saddle, the anchor being - well an anchor) so pinless could actually move more freely. Also in terms of break angle, I have seen the great Alan C post many times that it is the height of the strings above the top (which is closely correlated, usually to break angle) that is the driver - you only need enough break angle to keep the strings in contact with the saddle.
Author:  RussellR [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 7:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dave

I come at this one from a slightly different angle, my theory (which could also be flawed) is I view the bridge plate and bridge as one unit, so for my design of guitars I want the bridge and bridge plate to drive the top, I have experimented alot with various sizes of bridge plate, and to me it make a real difference.

Thats not to say that I think the pinless approach is wrong, take Lowden for instance they build top and brace structures that are already very active, so put a large bridge plate and pinned bridge on this and it is rather like having a small car with a big engine, it becomes uncontrolable.

For me this is one of those areas where you can't isolate a part of the top and test, the top must be considered as a whole.

Which is not too good I guess from a science point of view as it is difficult to test in a scientific manner.

Mind you having seen pictures of some of your beautiful top designs, I am sure you have this all in balance.
Author:  John Kinnaird [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't like the idea of the force of the strings held only by a glue joint. If the piano wire supports penetrate into a bridge plate that helps some with a mechanical bond but not as much as the strings themselves pulling directly against the bridge plate. With a pin bridge, as I am sure most of you know, even if the glue joint fails completely the strings will stay put.
I vote for the mechanical connection of pins.

Just my 2 cents contratian view.

John
Author:  Dave White [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=John Kinnaird] I don't like the idea of the force of the strings held only by a glue joint.
John[/QUOTE]

Makes it a sort of "creative tension"
Author:  Dave White [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Russell,

I agree 100% - the whole of the design is what makes things work, not just individual pick and mix parts. As they used to say - "If it ain't baroque, don't fix it"
Author:  Paul Schulte [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:59 am ]
Post subject: 
The thing about pinless bridges to my eye is that more of the string tension is on the bridge itself, trying to peel the bridge off the top. I think with a pinned brige
you are vectoring more force perpendicular to the top tending to keep the bridge in place. Lower string tension on Classicals I think can handle the peeling force better than a steel string. Then again I never tried it on a SS.
Author:  Jimmy Caldwell [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:22 am ]
Post subject: 
Michael,

re: break angle at the saddle. Here are a couple of pictures (not the best quality) that shows how break angle is addressed on my version of the pinless bridge. The strings are passed under the head of a button head cap screw that can be adjusted up or down allowing adjustment of the break angle. By tightening the cap screws the break angle is increased by pulling the pivot point closer to the bridge.

Author:  Don Williams [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jimmy, that's pretty cool! Can you show us a close-up of the side of those pins? And, are those anchors piano wire like Mike Doolin uses?
Very sharp looking...
Author:  John How [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Well you guys made me so nervous that I glued on a bridge patch and will use pins on this one and save the pinless for after more research.
Author:  John Kinnaird [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jimmy
   That is a very creative bridge. In fact the entire guitar looks very original and nice.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:06 am ]
Post subject: 
I like two things on this set-up

1) The step brake angle induced by the buttons
2) The deep foot print of the bridge (more glued surface area.) I have repaired several pinless bridges that have pulled lose that were more like the Ovation pinless. A note here Ovation bolts their bridges to solve this issue.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/