I need to learn about Archtop Bridges

[Matt Cushman]

i was under the impression that Joe D was talking more about the transfer of volume/sound the bridge transfers to the guitar body...via the saddle/base interface...intonation (and the need for correct saddle positioning is a seperate (tho important) issue..but that depends just as heavily on type of strings being used & other set-up factors...ie. almost impossible to get right without having the guitar in hand

luck

cheers

ps- incredible piece of workmanship from matt c notwithstanding, of course!!...

a trip to montana may be in order Joe D!! hah

Thanks Neatomic!

I agree with you about the importance of the bridge body interface. I am a believer in having a light but strong bridge for best transfer of energy.. I also think a good replacement bridge may be needed. I just wanted to point out that a saddle can be made to best suit a particular guitar and string set for best intonation.

[sgosnell]

Sometimes, with the saddle too high, and too much threaded post between the base and saddle, adding one or more thumbwheels helps, probably one set is enough. You can adjust the wheels so that one is against the base, the other against the saddle, and use the top wheels to adjust the saddle. This gives a solid rest for both pieces. It's a cheap and easy fix, if it works, and if it doesn't, you're not out a lot of money. You can get bridge wheels all over, probably from the local Guitar Center, certainly from StewMac, LMI, and Allparts. This is assuming that there is enough space for the extra wheels, and if there isn't, that probably isn't the problem.

[omphalopsychos]

This is a fascinating thread. I have a question about neck angle and bridge height for archtops. I would expect a steeper neck angle to generate more volume. The result of a steeper neck angle would be a higher saddle and therefore more pressure on the top. Does this make sense? I'm trying to infer this from the differences in construction that I've seen in some classic archtops. For example, the 16" L-5,7,10,12 etc have a relatively shallow neck angle and a very thin bridge baseplate. As a result, the strings rest on the bridge with less pressure perpendicular to the top. I imagine that this is partially the reason why these guitars have such sustain compared to other archtops, since the strings transfer less energy into the top and are able to oscillate more freely. In contrast, I've seen later archtops from Gibson and Epiphone (1930s Broadway for example) with steep neck angles and very tall baseplates. The result is less sustain but more volume. Is it possible this is just in my head?

[skiboyny]

I think generally speaking the harder the bridge top the more sustain. Tunomatic being metal would sustain the most, ebony,
than rosewood. They all would change the tonal properties of the guitar. I have had a few Johnny Smiths, none with the brass inserts in the bridge top, they all had great sustain. I always attributed the sustain to the fingerboard resting solid on the top with no gap. Possible the bridge top cut down doesn't have the mass and you notice the sustain loss. Easy fix. Be warned though even different types of ebony will yield a different tonal quality.

[ptchristopher3]

[...]Be warned though even different types of ebony will yield a different tonal quality.

To which types of ebony do you refer, and what are the differences in tonal quality?

[neatomic]

every detail is a component of the larger sound

the bridge must react with the archtop wood for best resonance...in the case of solid spruce...which is a soft wood..i like a full contact rosewood base..or even some species of dark walnut...ebony is too hard...two opposing forces...

(tho it might work for a laminate!)

but for the saddle, i do like ebony...it'll hold the string slots intact better...and transfers energy from the tailpiece better..(kind of like a tuneamatic does)...with luck it'll give the fundamental a good start and allow the arch body to amplify it as it was designed to do

the idea is to get the best setup that allows the box to sing


cheers

[ptchristopher3]

Here is a saddle I recently made that is custom cut for better intonation.

Wow Matt, that is some intense G-string compensation (well non-compensation I suppose). Is it an unusual string set, or just another one of the many eternal compensation mysteries?

Did you cut that by hand? And if so, did you make pics of the pieces of your fingers left on the shop floor?

Nicely done.

Chris

[neatomic]

agreed..it's an amazing piece of whittling!! hah

beautiful work..as matt c does.

cheers

[Max405]

Bro’s
Cant be on tonight..
its my wife’s birthday. Don’t want to wake up tomorrow morning with one less body part..
See you tomorrow.
Joe D

[Woody Sound]

[WillMbCdn5]

I just had my 2013 MIK D'angelico EXL-1 in for a luthier tuneup mostly to get an intermittent electronic short resolved. While the stock pickup has been replaced which dramatically improved the tone it hasn't had an experienced luthier tuneup/setup . Despite the fact I thought it was sounding great he insisted it could sound and play better after he played it for a bit and noted my preference for round wounds. He lowered the string height at the nut and dressed the nut slots, slightly opened up the string notches at the saddle/bridge because he felt there was some binding and reset the relief as well as a fret dress and level. Yike!! what a transformation. A guitar with what I thought sounded like a great tone has been transformed into one with a sublime rich voice that intones beautifully across the neck height and length and has a noticably more balanced and articulate clarity .

Don't underestimate the input and advice of a talented luthier doing a tuneup/setup in bringing out the best in an instrument.

Will

[Max405]

Real quick..
this is what it looks like now..

Gotta go. See ya.

[neatomic]

interesting...thems some long legs!! haha..less post height would be optimum...by abt 1/2..but really depends what kinda action you have goin on..and what that darn "neck angle" is...

that setup should be able to be improved on!...might need coupla more pics tho..right up the neck

cheers

ps- the problem when the saddle sits high on the posts, is that the string pressure tends to bend/push the saddle towards the neck ie messes with your intonation..and not just once..but consistently

[vinnyv1k]

That base looks too long to me.

[sgosnell]

I think an extra set of wheels might help that bridge. It would stabilize the posts in the base and minimize bending/leaning. But if you have the money, time, and inclination, a new bridge is certainly possible.

And Joe, some body parts are more important than others, Some men would prefer to part with a finger than with other parts. But a guitar player might be inclined to prefer to lose other parts. I don't know your preferences, but I'm not a professional guitar player, so fingers have less importance to me than other parts do.

[Dennis D]

interesting...thems some long legs!! haha..less post height would be optimum...by abt 1/2..but really depends what kinda action you have goin on..and what that darn "neck angle" is...

that setup should be able to be improved on!...might need coupla more pics tho..right up the neck

cheers

ps- the problem when the saddle sits high on the posts, is that the string pressure tends to bend/push the saddle towards the neck

..and all the components have to be or already are ' in play '.......a bridge set that high is compensating for something else that needs attention.......I'd be very surprised the guitar's original design has the saddle set that high........ ( wonder whether the neck's a candidate for heat procedure, and / or some truss rod work ??)

.....good luck Joe !.....

[sgosnell]

Joe said it was all fine until his luthier took a lot of wood from the bridge base and saddle to 'improve' it. The base should be much thicker, and the saddle taller, which would put them closer together. I doubt the neck is an issue.

[Max405]

Joe said it was all fine until his luthier took a lot of wood from the bridge base and saddle to 'improve' it. The base should be much thicker, and the saddle taller, which would put them closer together. I doubt the neck is an issue.

Thanks buddy. Yes, my luthier had to remove a lot of wood to make this one fit. That thinned out the sound a little.
The guitar is perfect. The sound could be better.
Vinny already told me what to do. Get another bridge made.
Matt, I would love to take you up on getting another one made for my baby.
You guys are the best.
I snuck away. My wife is having a nice birthday. I appreciate all the advice.

JD

[Brian B]

Have you seen the bridge?

Where's that confounded bridge....

(My project from last night, in addition so building a new harness)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cunamara]

PS, I Emailed Bill Gagnon this morning to see if he is still making bridges. His website says he is no longer taking orders. I hope that is not the case.

Contact Matt Cushman on the forum here. All you need is a bridge top that is tall enough, not the base, as your experiment showed. Matt has made several bridge tops (and a guitar) for me and does excellent work. One discovery I made is that the bridge to- mass has a huge impact on sound. Matt sent me otherwise identical ebony and rosewood tops; the former was 11 grams and the latter was 7 grams. The heavier bridge top has a darker sound with a strong fundamental- a more traditional jazz sound; the lighter top has a lot of overtones, almost like a flattop guitar. I think the mass had much more effect than the wood species.

[Cunamara]

Here is a saddle I recently made that is custom cut for better intonation.

Hey, that rascal looks like the new one you are making for me and my weird string set.

I sent Matt a Tune-o-Matic I had used to sort out the intonation. Yes, the G string saddle is that far forward.

[skiboyny]

To which types of ebony do you refer, and what are the differences in tonal quality?

There are many species of ebony. I can't give you examples of tonal differences only that they each could sound tonally different. The bridge top is an important tone shaper for the archtop. There is a hardness scale for ebony also where the piece used falls into that scale.

[Matt Cushman]

Hey, that rascal looks like the new one you are making for me and my weird string set.

I sent Matt a Tune-o-Matic I had used to sort out the intonation. Yes, the G string saddle is that far forward.

Yes that is your saddle. I hope you don't mind that I posted a photo. You should have it soon, I mailed it usps. Here is a photo of your Tune-o-Matic placed behind the work piece as I was cutting it on my mill that I referred to in an earlier post.

[Max405]

That base looks too long to me.

Yeah me too. I think its a Heritage thing. Not sure why.

Don't underestimate the input and advice of a talented luthier doing a tuneup/setup in bringing out the best in an instrument.

Will

Trust me Will. I learned that lesson, big time. On this guitar in particular. Thanks.

I think an extra set of wheels might help that bridge. It would stabilize the posts in the base and minimize bending/leaning. But if you have the money, time, and inclination, a new bridge is certainly possible.

And Joe, some body parts are more important than others, Some men would prefer to part with a finger than with other parts. But a guitar player might be inclined to prefer to lose other parts. I don't know your preferences, but I'm not a professional guitar player, so fingers have less importance to me than other parts do.

Sgosnell,
Thanks for taking the time to try and help. Big time.
I thought about the extra set of wheels.
And yeah, all my fingers and other small protrusions are very important to me. I was a good boy so I will hang on to everything!
Thanks again buddy.

..and all the components have to be or already are ' in play '.......a bridge set that high is compensating for something else that needs attention.......I'd be very surprised the guitar's original design has the saddle set that high........ ( wonder whether the neck's a candidate for heat procedure, and / or some truss rod work ??)

.....good luck Joe !.....

Dennis, I would have thought the same thing. But I already knew the bridge was severely reduced in height by my luthier trying to fit the base to the top and re- radius the top to the fretboard.
The Guitar is nearly perfect, it really is. It just doesn't match up to my Gibson in terms of tone. And I am not willing to accept the old, "Well that's a Gibson and this is a Heritage" excuse. I am trying to find the reasons for the disparity and I think I am onto something here. Thanks bud.

Joe said it was all fine until his luthier took a lot of wood from the bridge base and saddle to 'improve' it. The base should be much thicker, and the saddle taller, which would put them closer together. I doubt the neck is an issue.

Thanks Sgosnell.

[Dennis D]

FWIW, that base looks to be close to the base Gibson used on their ( my ) '34 L-5 R/I...also not 'footed'...and it was fixed too......