The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 52
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    What I thought was worse about bone, and this happened both times I tried it as a nut material on an electric, was it sucked the body of the tone out. It wasn't that it had a muted top which could be an advantage, it had no nice bassy resonance which I need for an electric and I would assume most people want for a jazz guitar. I was thoroughly underwhelmed. I could possibly see it working for an acoustic where you don't need that fundamental bass in the tone. But the material which I thought sounded insane for acoustic was micarta. Yes, I think ceramic should theoretically be a good material - probably a lot like corian which is my favorite material for a nut on a jazz electric. It has the nice rich fundamental bass to it with a slightly muted top but still detailed. Yes, tusq is advertised as being a replacement for bone but to my ears sounds much better if you want a tone with more harmonics to it.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    That corresponds to what I thought, though I'd expect a wooden bridge to absorb even more vibrations.
    An electric guitar is fundamentally different from an acoustic in that you don't want to transfer sound to the acoustic amplifier that is the body of a "normal" guitar. Quite the opposite of what I am after. If it weren't I'd get the heaviest TOM-style bridge and be done.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Yep, wood is more muted. What sound are you after?

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    The richest and most versatile *acoustic* tone, with as much dynamic as possible. I wouldn't hesitate to play (20th/21st C) classical repertoire on my archtop; while I do not appreciate how so many classical players make their guitars sound I do recognise that as an allround acoustic instrument the classical guitar is probably way ahead of most acoustic "steelies" in the same price class. And as repeated above, on those guitars bone is the preferred easily available choice for saddles. Tusq is easily available too but I never heard a higher harmonic content with their saddles so its disadvantages don't outweigh the theoretical benefit for me.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    If you want versatile and rich, I would honestly recommend a tom. Metal saddles have the most richness because they enhance the bass fundamental, but they also have a full range of brillance. Having a material other than metal in both the nut and the bridge softens and dulls out the tone. I know it's tempting to try a material which is reportedly boutique, but I think bone really clinks the sound. If it were me, I would go with the best available option for the bridge which is a tom, then adjust with the nut. You also get the benefit of being able to adjust the intonation.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by RJVB
    In fact, how long ago did you do the swap? I assume you can handle the swapping yourself ... if so, could you be persuaded to do a comparison recording (esp. of the acoustic tone)? I assume a '48 DA to be all solid woods and an excellent acoustic player (too)...

    I've looked for those on YT but without success...
    I did the swap when I first got the 48 DA. The Ivory saddle has never been back on. I don't like to de-tune an old guitar with a non-adjustable truss rod, so no comparison recording shall be made. Sorry.

    I assure you, with the ivory it was much brighter. The rosewood was slightly warmer than the ebony BTW.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    There is an important consideration: do you want a tradition-focused sound based on the instrument/genre or are you trying to find something else. If the former, then Stringswinger has given you the correct answer. If, however, you are experimenting, an investment of $27.95 for the Foley is very small to see if you like the difference. I have been playing with sound my whole life on guitars and have gone through several periods of "change." However, your sound reflects your personality and level of musicianship since one's ear changes dramatically as your skills increase and you mature musically. So, if you can gather a group of 10 professional musicians playing an L5 . . . you will get 10 different sounds. This is no different than the voice of a poet or the personal imprint of a visual artist.
    Marinero

    P.S. One last remark: in order to find your sound, you must have it firmly implanted in your head before your search. Otherwise, what's the point?
    M
    Last edited by Marinero; 02-21-2022 at 10:47 AM. Reason: addition

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    Well, the bridge with the bone insert arrived. It's not a Foley, it's this one:
    https://www.ebay.com/itm/15457213824...53.m2749.l2649

    Even though it says (twice) in the description that the post spacing is 73mm, it's actually 78mm, and the overall length of the base is ~6.1". Even the length of the bone insert is more than 73mm. It won't even come close to fitting any base I have, so my only option is to use the (almost flat bottomed) base that came with it. I did a quick re-radius of the saddle, because it was 15"+, and all my fretboards are 12". It was easy enough to install temporarily, pending the major sanding operation it needs. I put it on a parallel braced archtop that needed a little brightening, and even with the non-fitting base it sounds much brighter than the ebony saddle that was on it. It has more definition and snap, I think. I was prepared to just toss it if it sounded too bad, but for the price I wasn't too concerned. The saddle is compensated to some degree, as much as is possible considering the thinness. I think I'm going to spend the time and effort to fit the base to the top, and see how much I like it. The dimensions of the bridge are very different from those given in the description, but otherwise it seems to be fairly well made. I have no hands-on experience with the AllParts equivalent, which looks identical from the photos.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    I think I saw this one on Reverb and got the following measurements from the seller

    Bone-insert saddles & AllParts/Foley bone-top adjustable bridge-xsiipp70nncwfpoaklhw-jpg

    which may be even larger: I rejected this as a bridge for a 17" or 18" guitar.

    So what's your initial impression about the increased brightness; does it make the trebles too bright, too nasal? I presume you didn't lose any bass?

    NB: "brightening" the sound by better restitution of the higher harmonics may actually increase the bass response if the frequency spectrum allows us to hear the root better - the same principle that allows well-built small (Italian) harpsichords to sound so deep. And the principle between power chords

    EDIT: the Foley bridge turns out to be out of stock on the EU AllParts site, at least the ebony model which I'd want.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    The Foley bridge seems to be available on the US ebay site. Mostly rosewood, but there are a couple of ebony bridges with bone inserts. Shipping to France appears to be ~$12.

    I don't really hear much difference in bass from brief initial impressions, but keep in mind that the base is not properly fitted, and in fact is far from fitting, so the final sound is uncertain. So far the trebles are not 'nasal' to my ear. I did have to raise the action slightly to get rid of a very high-pitched ping, presumably from some slight string slap because of the very low action I prefer. It's now somewhere above 1.3mm at the 12th fret. My Blue Chip 50 pick (.050") goes between the fret and the string easily without touching the string. I haven't measured more precisely because the exact measurement is not that important to me.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Any news, did you get to fit the bridge properly?

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Yes, it took a lot of sanding, because the bottom of the base was almost flat, but I finally got an acceptable fit. It hasn't been my first priority. It's brighter than the ebony saddle that came with the guitar. The sound is more defined, if you know what I mean, not as 'thuddy'. That guitar is parallel braced, and needed a little brightening, and this bridge did that. I think I'll keep it installed, and add the original to my collection of unused bridges, of which I have a fair number. I find that I prefer a somewhat brighter tone these days, perhaps because as I age my high-frequency hearing is diminishing, or maybe my tastes just change. I haven't noticed any high-frequency hearing loss with age, but it's reported to be common.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Stupidly I forgot to ask you to make a couple of comparison recordings... but good to hear. The part (in ebony) should become available again soon here in continental EU, so I'll order one.

    More brightness but no loss of lows (warmth), I presume (hope)?

    Quote Originally Posted by sgosnell
    I haven't noticed any high-frequency hearing loss with age, but it's reported to be common.
    It's inevitable, but under normal circumstances you end up with about the same upper limit as FM radio, i.e. well above the musical pitches we're used to. I'm sure Graphtech would be all over it with their propaganda if elderly players with age-related hearing loss could benefit from even better high frequency transfer than bone allows

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    I don't notice any loss of lows, but it's hard to be sure purely from memory. I don't really have a viable recording method. The only microphone I have is in my phone (and inside my desktop computer) and that's not very high quality. And I have no plans to buy one. Nor computer interfaces/di boxes, etc. I've just never been interested.

    I also bought a Graphtec bridge, just to try, and I like it on the archtop I put it on, which was overly bright for my taste with an ebony bridge and saddle. I prefer the Graphtec on that one. Every guitar is different, especially archtops, and some sound better with one bridge and others better with another. I can't predict which. It's all a mystery to me, and only trying different bridges (and especially bases, which IMO make as much if not more difference than saddles) provides the information. I've found that the same bridge sounds great on one guitar, and terrible on another. If I could know in advance which would sound best on any particular guitar, I would be money ahead.

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sgosnell
    I don't notice any loss of lows, but it's hard to be sure purely from memory. I don't really have a viable recording method. The only microphone I have is in my phone (and inside my desktop computer) and that's not very high quality.
    If that's an iPhone you could probably do a lot worse (with just the phone on your stand, horizontally upside-down with the mic openings on top).

    But I suppose your memory of the sound with the ebony bridge can't be that old so not even imagining a loss of low-end is already a good-enough indication for me

    I'm less enchanted that the bridge base is almost flat, but I've seen a few vids on how to do a rough tracing of the required radius on the base.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    The microphones on our phones might be better than the ones most jazz classics were recorded with. LOL

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    I have never owned an iAnything, and plan to never own any.

    The best way, IMO, to fit a bridge base is to use thin double-sided tape to stick sandpaper to the top of the guitar over the area where the bridge goes and just patiently sand away by moving the base across the sandpaper until the fit is perfect. This can take some time and effort. I wouldn't even try to cut the base any other way. I suppose one could trace the pattern on the side of the base and use a machine to sand away much of the waste, but that can (probably would) introduce variations in the flatness of the base, which are to be avoided. I just spend the time to carefully hand-sand until it's done. YMMV.

    Also note that I didn't buy the Foley you originally linked to, just a cheap copy from ebay. I can't speak to the more expensive model.

  19. #43

    User Info Menu


  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Talking about compensation with somebody on the AGF I got an interesting idea. The typical archtop saddle is a lot thicker than the (bone) saddle on a flattop, meaning it can be cut to provide a lot more compensation (which according to him is better).

    The bone insert in the AllParts/Foley bridge throws that benefit away by being (it looks) about as thick as a flattop saddle.

    But what if we replace the profile top part of a wood saddle with bone profiled the same way? Will that bone top be a lot heavier than the wood it replaces?

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by RJVB
    Talking about compensation with somebody on the AGF I got an interesting idea. The typical archtop saddle is a lot thicker than the (bone) saddle on a flattop, meaning it can be cut to provide a lot more compensation (which according to him is better).

    The bone insert in the AllParts/Foley bridge throws that benefit away by being (it looks) about as thick as a flattop saddle.

    But what if we replace the profile top part of a wood saddle with bone profiled the same way? Will that bone top be a lot heavier than the wood it replaces?
    Bone vary a lot in density, but I think its fair to assume that it will by lighter than f ex ebony

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    From these it would seem that bone can be up to 2x heavier than ebony

    Density of Bone in 285 units and reference information
    Mass, Weight, Density or Specific Gravity of Wood

    And tbh that doesn't surprise me.

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Weight and hardness don't necessarily track. Titanium is very hard, but much lighter than lead, which is rather soft. I would expect any bone to be harder than wood, but not necessarily heavier. Both bone and wood vary rather wildly. I would be hesitant to make many predictions. The bone saddle on the archtop bridge is somewhat wider than most flattop saddles I've seen, and is compensated. The top of an ebony saddle isn't much, if any, thicker, although the total thickness is usually much thicker. The goal is usually to have a very narrow part of the saddle in contact with the string, about as thin as possible. Having a quarter or half an inch of the top underneath the strings is undesirable.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    My hunch that bone suitable for making saddles is probably heavier than ebony doesn't come from a hardness comparison. Rather, from an animal vs. plant provenance, and from the function it evolved to fulfill. I take it bone for saddles is obtained from leg bones or possibly the cranium. Those are structures that have evolved to take huge loads but aren't big enough that they could collapse under their own weight. Ebony comes from a tree trunk. Evidently the lower parts of trunk need to be able to withstand much higher loads, but more static ones (trees don't galop around, nor do they butt heads). They also need to support keeping the tree upright and not collapse under its own weight, even under windy conditions - and I can only assume that the wood higher up in the trunk is the same as the wood down below, except a bit younger and of course there's less of it. As I said, a hunch, and not as thoroughly educated as I'd like, but I think there's more evolutionary pressure on (trunk) wood to remain light.

    Also, look at bones that did evolve under pressure to keep the weight down, those of flying animals. They're still strong enough for their task, but very fragile.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    Bummer, apparently the ebony version has been discontinued (and was already out of stock everywhere when I decided I wanted one). Strange, strange... and annoying!

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by RJVB
    From these it would seem that bone can be up to 2x heavier than ebony

    Density of Bone in 285 units and reference information
    Mass, Weight, Density or Specific Gravity of Wood

    And tbh that doesn't surprise me.
    Well, the number for bone seems to track back to icru compact bone, which is concerned with human bone. I hope you dont plan to use human bone on your guitar.

    I didnt find a lot of numbers for cow bone which I guess is what more likely to be used, but I found something from cambridge saying between 1.27 and 1.71.

    So slightly heavier than ebony