.1250625"
Give or take a hair...
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Saddle thickness http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=9198 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Andy Zimmerman [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Many have suggested wider saddles to fascilitate intonation. Somogyi and Doolin use 3/16th or so....what do you use |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I goofed and hit the wrong button 3/16" |
|
| Author: | paul harrell [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I used 3/16 on my first guitars. I don't think is is neccessary for intonation, I used it because of an article I read by Somogyi-he thinks it improves the sound. I have been using 1/8 recently, especially on Dreds because Bluegrass players tend to like the traditional look(I know 3/32 is the standard for Dreds but 1/8 doesn't seem to catch their eye like 3/16.) They would say "nice looking guitar, but whats with the weird looking saddle" I don't think I have enough experience to say if the wider saddle helped the sound, but if Ervin thinks so, it is certainly worth a try. Paul |
|
| Author: | Alain Desforges [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yep, I tried really wide saddles on my first 2 (7/32)... A bit too wide to look at IMHO... I think I'll try 5/32 now... |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
as a standard for builds i usually use 1/8". when it comes to repairs or intonation correction i use whatever i need. in replacing the mechanical saddles so common on gibsons and their clones of a couple of decades ago i will put in 1/4" solid bone or corrian on the cheapies(client's choice of what they want to pay for) or solid bone on the "better" models if the client won't spring for the cost of a matching insert and rerouting, or a new bridge altogether. up to a certain point a thicker saddle does seem to drive the top better, i know that clients are usually thrilled to hear their instrument which had the mechanical saddle when i relace it with the huge solid, but those are usually relatively insensitive tops. the change in an instrument with a higher grade top is not as pronounced. |
|
| Author: | Colin S [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I couldn't vote for any of the above as my saddles are 3.5mm. Colin |
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use the Tusq saddles which only go as wide as 1/8" as far as I know . I would like to try a 3/16" so I could ramp the E and B strings as Somogyi does . That extra contact makes sense to me . The Tusq saddles are lighter than bone . Better sound IMHO. Craig Lawrence |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Lets see... That would be close to 9/64" |
|
| Author: | Colin S [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=MichaelP] Lets see... That would be close to 9/64"[/QUOTE] Closer to 141/1024"! Think I prefer metric! Colin |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
.1250625" Give or take a hair...
|
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=azimmer1] Many have suggested wider saddles to fascilitate intonation. Somogyi and Doolin use 3/16th or so....what do you use[/QUOTE] I am shifting to a .250" saddle. I am not sure about Mike, but Ervin's reasons are not exclusively for intonation. He wrote an article about why he does this. You should check it out. |
|
| Author: | j.Brown [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mechanical? |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
gibson and the clones used a saddle for many years that consisted of a metal bar about 1/4" inch wide with a shallow slot which held the saddle. height was adjusted by a screw at either end. it was an abomination!! |
|
| Author: | j.Brown [ Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That sounds like an incredibly bad idea. |
|
| Author: | Dave Anderson [ Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like a 1/8" bone saddle. Yep those old Gibson saddles/bridges were a bad design,IMHO that is. I do like those old Gibson Flat-tops but.........those bridges 
|
|
| Author: | Wayne Clark [ Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have a japanese guitar with one of those adjustable saddles. I have to agree, it's not a really good idea. To top it off, the saddle material is plastic! |
|
| Author: | Scott van Linge [ Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I once bought a J-50 Gibson, 1965, with that adjustable metal bridge. The deal included the store replacing that bridge, which was cracked through the saddle slot, with a solid rosewood bridge and bone saddle. The three putty filled holes in the top where someone had put in volume and tone knobs and a switch made the price right for a guinea pig in 1988, during my early years of bracework. I then re-voiced the guitar, and although I got it balanced with more sustain, the volume just wasn't what I felt and hoped it should be. I eventually discovered that the repairperson had failed to remove the old adjustment screws' support bolts! They were special 1/4" bolts with a thin, concave washer, serving as the bolt head, that fit into a shallow recess in the top. The bolts had threaded holes for the adjustment screws, and a 1/4" nut (what else?) below the bridgeplate. Subsequent r n r of the bridge and bolt removal brought that guitar alive! Another observaion on bridge/bridgeplate mass. When I re-voiced one for a friend, he didn't want the bridge removed. I used a 1/4" drill (again, what else?) straight down through the 1/4" saddle slot, removing all but the thin washers between the bridge and top. Seemed like a good compromise, and the threaded holes kept the drill bit from wandering. I'm not sure what keeps me from wandering anymore... Scott PS: Anyone have a link to Ervin's article? |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
i've often wondered which was worst, gibson's support bolts or the clones which often had the slot clear through the bridge and the adjusting screws bearing directly on the top, which of course dug nice matching holes thereinto. one wonders what was in the "mind" of the designers. |
|
| Author: | CarltonM [ Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=crazymanmichael] one wonders what was in the "mind" of the designers.[/QUOTE] Lunch. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|