Kevan Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 While tooling around online (I do that sometimes), I stumbled across this great article by Rich Lasner, himself a great guitar builder. It's got some interesting insight from some heavy-hitters in the luthier world. I think you folks might dig on it, or at least file some of the info away for later projects. http://archive.guitarplayer.com/archive/gear/solidbdy.shtml Enjoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xebryusguitars Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Heh all things to consider while making a guitar. THanks for that site kevan, very good source of ANY level of luthier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javacody Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 (edited) Yeah, I remember this article. This goes against what some of the experienced builders around here believe, especially the following: The metals used in bridge components contribute to the guitar's sonic personality. A die-cast zinc bridge, made by pouring molten metal into a mold, sounds distinctly different from a solid-steel unit milled from a single piece of metal. "It definitely produces an audible difference," says Sadowsky. "As a rule, solid bridges sound better." Brass, now considered a "tone sink" that robs the string of energy, was once the material of choice. I agree with this statement, 100%. I've only put together guitars from parts and have my first homemade in process, but from playing guitars for 16 years, it certainly rings true. Edited November 28, 2004 by javacody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 This goes against what some of the experienced builders around here believe, i don't think i have ever heard an experienced builder say otherwise.maybe you are reffering to some of us who say that you shouldn't worry too much about things this minute,because wood choice and tight tolerances are more important than what type of floating bridge you use,and that "different" tonality is not "bad" tonality,rather that it is a personal choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soapbarstrat Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 Written in 1992, back when GP could still get away with writing crap, throwing articles together like a 4th grade book report. Their take on brass vs steel is like someone saying Alder is a "tone sink" but mahogany isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 mmm...yeah the brass part seems a little silly.i was referring to the solid bridge vs cast...which does seem to produce a different sound. "better" though is in the ear of the listener.someone once told me walnut was a tone sink,even though i have used it more than once with great results.very creamy. some people seem to think there is one "ultimate" tone out there that everyone is trying to achieve.i think every possible tone you can wrangle out of any piece of wood is going to be useful for something,and will sound great in certain applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 A die-cast zinc bridge, made by pouring molten metal into a mold, sounds distinctly different from a solid-steel unit milled from a single piece of metal. "It definitely produces an audible difference," says Sadowsky. "As a rule, solid bridges sound better. Well....the dude is mixing up his variables here. Is he comparing zinc vs steel? Or die-cast vs milled? Both can be a single piece of metal....and the steel was once poured into a mold too, its just that it was later cut & milled to shape. Sure you could make a bridge out of a single piece of metal, but then you sacrifice in string height adjustment (needed because necks move over time) and intonation adjustment (needed for set-up and whenever you change string gauges). So given that nearly all bridges will have adjustable saddles and will not be a single piece of metal, I think that the engineering and the quality of the machining contribute as much as the type of metal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggy Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 my idea is: just trow some random materials together and then check how it sounds, that makes things much more interesting than just take the stuff that is considered "good" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javacody Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 I took the part about brass being a tone sink to read that steel allowed the tone of the body wood to come through with less coloration. You can't really call brass "bad". Just different. I think it does color the sound more than steel. I would say that your bridge material would have a huge impact on tone. Your strings are directly coupled to it. I really think there are several "schools" in guitar making. There is the stuck in the 50's everything vintage mindset. There is the stuck in the 70's, hippie sandwich, everything covered in brass mindset. LOL Then there is the maple bodied, high-output bucker, floyd school. Did I miss any? I'm not sure where I fit, because I prefer the 50's vintage mindset, but as a teenager I really like the floyd stuff. I guess I believe that the US was in its manufacturing hay-day in the 50's. We had the best of everthing, and it wasn't too expensive. I think the guitars made then were probably made out of a better grade of materials. However, I think guitars made nowadays are made to much higher quality standards (as far as fit and finish) and much tighter tolerances. I'm trying to find the best of both worlds. Also, I disagree about the quality of writing in GP in '92. Anyway, I stopped reading guitar magazines for the most part years ago. They are so forumulaic. 50% old news (Satriani, Vai, EVH, SRV, Hendrix, etc. etc. Ad Nauseum) and 50% the flavors of the month. To me, the best parts in guitar magazines are the lessons and articles written by the pros. Do I really need a centerfold of the lead singer of Nickelback? Yuck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soapbarstrat Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I read articles made since that one, that indicated that brass allows more natural tone to go through it into the body, but steel would "bounce back" the string vibration more, causing more sustain, and then actually altering the tone quite a bit as it goes through the bridge to the body. Then I've also recently read that some brass has lead in it, to make it easier to machine. I will say I have to think of lead as a "tone sink". That article is pure early 90's thinking. A real modern heavy metal sound was in style, with grunge also coming out to be different than that, but those builders were catering to the metal crowd. Gary Brawer making that comment about bigger frets sounding better, or something like that, reminds me of when I bought my first Dunlop 6000 fret-wire from him. Then I also needed a pickguard screw, so he gave me one for free and said " have a good screw". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer7440 Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I think a big variable in bridge material would have to be, how hard is the material. If you take a piece of zinc diecast and hit the corner of it with a file, the file will cut into the material very easily, indicating a soft material. If you try the same test on a piece of steel, the steel will resist the file more than the diecast, indicating a harder material. Try this on a piece of hardened tool steel and the file won't even touch it, this is a very hard material. I would think that the softer a bridge material was, the more likely it would be to absorb vibration. Another way to look at this concept is this, If you hit a lead pipe ( assuming you could find one) with a hammer it makes a thud kind of noise and the pipe caves in. Lead is soft. If you hit a steel pipe with the same hammer, the hammer will ricochet (sp?) off leaving no mark on the pipe, and the pipe will ring and vibrate like a bell. All of this is not to say that one material is better than the other, its just my explanation for the tonal variance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren wilson Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I think the mindset behind making guitar hardware out of brass was even more simplistic. They make bells out of brass, right? Bells have a good 'ringing' sound and good sustain, right? Let's make guitar hardware out of brass! It will have those same qualities, won't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevan Posted November 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 They make bells out of brass, right? Bells have a good 'ringing' sound and good sustain, right? Let's make guitar hardware out of brass! It will have those same qualities, won't it? Only if you keep hitting the bridge like you do a bell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 I'm working on some new bridge designs made of extruded Aluminium (aluminum if you must!) with stainless steel at the friction points. There seems to be another factor to consider - stiffness. If designed slightly differently you can get quirte a bit of stiffness and strenghth with aluminium without the weight. Aluminium is clearly a soft material but has interesting acoustic properties. I wouldn't think it would be a "tone sink" but rather a light and responsive material. It's easier to work too! What do you guys think psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javacody Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 Well, vintage Gibson's used Aluminum Tailpieces, and all the Historics have them as well. My friend Steve Rowen (from Pigtail Music) swears by them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.