Does the size (foot print) of the bridge and saddle have an effect on the volume of the sound board? I like to make my saddle and bridge match the rest of the theme or box. Is there a difference in making them narrow and thin or wide. Thanks to all for this great forum.
You need to be a member of Cigar Box Nation to add comments!
That is a very interesting question! Never thought of that. One of my loudest CBG's has a Bolt with 2 nuts on it. Only the flats of the nuts are against the lid. I think that, in this case, the volume has more to do with the box, but I'm not sure!
I'm sure there's plenty of very scientific information on the internet about this, but here's my experience.
On a build where acoustic volume is important (i.e. vibration of the soundboard) the 'footprint' of the saddle/bridge should be as small as possible, so the energy of the strings is passed more effectively through a smaller area onto the soundboard. I would imagine this is also important with piezo pickups as the output will be tied to the level of vibration in the soundboard. This is what mine look like:
As you can see the material is no only quite thin, but I've used a drill to make arches so the footprint is even smaller. I use a combination of hard wood and bone to make sure as much of the string's energy is transferred through the bridge as possible, which then vibrates the soundboard. This is standard practice with banjo bridges etc. Using softer woods, or larger saddles will result in more of the energy being lost on the way.
If you are using a magnetic pickup, the saddle/bridge is not as important, as the pickup works off string vibration. If you have a look at hardtail type bridges, they have a much larger area in contact with the guitar body. They won't be as loud acoustically but they don't need to be. They also might contribute to the rigidity of the soundboard which would give better sustain.
Replies
I love this guys page about mandolin bridges.
He has experimented with all types of woods and shapes.
http://www.murphymethod.com/index.cfm?event=pages.content&conte...
And here are some I made out of some wood a luthier friend gave me.:
Padauk, Honduran wood, Oak
Here`s a selection of some of my custom bridges both acoustic and rod piezo bridges
theres a mountain of material here
http://www.murphymethod.com/index.cfm?event=pages.content&conte...
Thanks for that link. Quite impressive info and photos!
That is a very interesting question! Never thought of that. One of my loudest CBG's has a Bolt with 2 nuts on it. Only the flats of the nuts are against the lid. I think that, in this case, the volume has more to do with the box, but I'm not sure!
I'm sure there's plenty of very scientific information on the internet about this, but here's my experience.
On a build where acoustic volume is important (i.e. vibration of the soundboard) the 'footprint' of the saddle/bridge should be as small as possible, so the energy of the strings is passed more effectively through a smaller area onto the soundboard. I would imagine this is also important with piezo pickups as the output will be tied to the level of vibration in the soundboard. This is what mine look like:
As you can see the material is no only quite thin, but I've used a drill to make arches so the footprint is even smaller. I use a combination of hard wood and bone to make sure as much of the string's energy is transferred through the bridge as possible, which then vibrates the soundboard. This is standard practice with banjo bridges etc. Using softer woods, or larger saddles will result in more of the energy being lost on the way.
If you are using a magnetic pickup, the saddle/bridge is not as important, as the pickup works off string vibration. If you have a look at hardtail type bridges, they have a much larger area in contact with the guitar body. They won't be as loud acoustically but they don't need to be. They also might contribute to the rigidity of the soundboard which would give better sustain.
Hope this helps!