| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Ivory, bone, or synthetic? http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=3522 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | csullivan [ Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
When I started building, ivory was not a banned material and was easy to get, so I always used ivory over bone. We all know how beautiful it is and how well it ages. It was worth the extra money. That's not a choice any more, and rightly so. I thought I'd start a thread here to get opinions on the alternates we all use and hear the reasons you elect to use what you use. Bone it seems is the only natural material readily available today, unless of course you want to take out a loan for fossilized ivory. The density of bone seems to vary a great deal according to some of the threads I've read here. So, do you prefer bone and why? I've used Corian several times. It's consistent, I can get an almost unlimited supply in several shades of white for nothing from a local countertop builder. His scraps will make dozens of nuts and saddles. Surprisingly, it's not as hard as I thought it would be. Some acoustic pickup manufacturers actually recommend it for saddles on top of piezo type pickups. Do any of you use it and what do you like/dislike about it? Acoustically, what's your assessment? There are products made specifically for this purpose -- "Tusq" and "Slip- Stone" are 2 that come to mind. I haven't used them. What's your assessment? How do all these materials rank functionally, acoustically, economically, and from a workability standpoint? Do you have an alternate you use or would like to try that's not mentioned here? This is a question that's been bugging me for awhile. Your thoughts will be greatly appreciated. Craig |
|
| Author: | JJ Donohue [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 12:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good questions, Craig...I've been wondering the same thing. I've been curious about Tusq in particular. I use Tusq bridge pins and feel they are at least as hard as bone...and I believe the density is more consistent. I'll be trying Tusq nuts one of these days as well. |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 12:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I used to use Corian exclusively for nuts and saddles. Then I replaced a customer's nut and saddle with bone while it was in the shop for some repair work. There was a marked difference in tone, which I honestly didn't expect or believe would happen. I now use only bone. I would like to know if anyone has ever tried any ceramic products, since they can be very hard, but non-metallic in nature. |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
More to the story than hardness and density. I am not a molecular engineer so I will not make specific fact statements, but I have used Tusq, corian and bone. There is something about bone that transmits better. In reference to the cost of FWI, a nut and saddle combo will cost in material in the $60-$80 range. Way more than bone for what I feel is about a 10% gain in tonal clarity (my unscientific impression). This is so subjective though and besides, how much trouble would we go through in construction to get a 10% better sounding guitar? Humm??? And just what is better sound anyway? My point is FWI seems to transmit Mid- High notes with a bit more energy, and on a 3k instrument $100 for the best possible transmitters does not seem unreasonable I use them when requested and charge a premium for them. But my std is un bleached bone. I have a friend in custom knife building. He provides me with pieces that are quit nicely molted |
|
| Author: | tippie53 [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I am a boner I lol the stuff as it is in good supply and affordable. Iused the other material and use bone as first choice. I will use corian and tusq if the guitar is too bright and I also play with pins. They can help in adjusting the balance of the bass and treble. john hall blues creek guitars |
|
| Author: | Michael McBroom [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ceramic materials are generally very hard and would probably have to be shaped using industrial diamond coated grinding tools. Personally, I wouldn't want to mess with it. Metal would probably conduct sound energy in a similar fashion, and metal would be easier to work. I have used Corian almost exclusively on my classical builds. In the A-B testing I've done, I think it compares favorably with bone -- with classicals, at least. I've built one steel string so far, and used Corian for the nut and saddle with it. It sounds good too, but I don't have anything avaiable at this time to compare it with. Craig is right -- Corian is a relatively soft synthetic stone material. Think marble. But that's also another reason why I like it. I can cut it on my bandsaw, and it shapes easily with files and sandpaper. Regarding ivory, there is no ban on mammoth ivory since the species is already extinct -- I'm not talking about the fossilized stuff. I'm talking about the stuff that is routinely excavated or scavanged from the Siberian tundra and similar locales. Mammoth ivory is relatively plentiful and not all that expensive. There is a knifemakers supply local to me that makes knife handles out of it, and often has scrap available. I've bought scrap pieces from them before that would have been large enough to get saddles and nuts from, although I've used it mostly for tie block inlays and headstock inlays. Much of the mammoth ivory I've seen -- the scraps at least -- will have flaws running through it, which can compromize its structural integrity for use with saddles or nuts, but some of the larger pieces would definitely be useable. This same place -- Texas Knifemakers Supply -- carries all sorts of exotic stuff. Various types of synthetic stone, all sorts of stabilized woods, horn, antler, etc. One of the products they sell that I'm interested in trying out is camel bone. It's cheap enough -- about $20 for a set of grips that would yield maybe a dozen each of nuts and saddles. Dunno how camel would compare to cow bone, though. Best, Michael |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Michael McBroom] Dunno how camel would compare to cow bone, though. [/QUOTE] Michael, Tricky to know whether to go for Bacterian or Dromedary. Multiple humped stuff would let you do those scalloped nuts and saddles that Tim McKnight does. And provided you give them a good drink first, they'll last for months! |
|
| Author: | Michael McBroom [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hehe. Yeah, kinda like having built-in Damp-its, eh? Best, Michael |
|
| Author: | arvey [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Never used Camel but those that do swear by the stuff |
|
| Author: | Brad Goodman [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
There is no legal problem with "pre-ban" ivory as far as I know.You just can't ship it out of the US. It can come from old estate ivory or old broken sculptures,piano keys etc. |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
regarding the recommendation by undersaddle pickup manufacturers for sythetic saddles. they want balanced energy transmission to the pickup so that there are no weak strings. bone, being natural material, is tends to be variable in its consistency, as does irory. the synthetics are usually more uniform and thus give more balanced pickup response. that corian is softer is not such a prolem on classicals as the tensions are lower and the string diameters larger and the strings softer, so that wearing is not as pronounced. it will wear faster on steel strings. taylor, for instance, uses tusc for its synthetic for its better wear resistance. martin used to use micarta, though i think they are using tusc now. unbleached bone is my standard on builds and repairs. ivory is a significant extra. its colour is very similar to ivory and the stuff i have been getting from euphonon has been of excellent consistancy. on lower cost or constrained budget repairs i use corian. whilst it is not as good as bone it is much better than the cheap plastic junk that comes in most low end instruments. if i can't get even sound with bone on pickup instalations i go to tusc. |
|
| Author: | csullivan [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
All great answers. It looks like bone is still the first choice with Tusq running second. You all sound like you know what to expect when you use either of the two. The mammoth ivory seems like there could be a consistency issue. I have about 4 sets (nut and saddle) of ivory tucked away for those very very special projects some day. Crazymanmichael, I'm not familiar with Euphonon. Do you have a link or phone number? I saw in another post from you that they have a very high quality bone. I'd like to make contact. Thanks everyone Craig |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Craig, Just drive north to Orford, NH.... Walter Lipton is the owner, and he has some killer great woods as well. But shhh....don't tell anyone. 1-888-517-4678 I think this is it. Not sure. |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
don is right, on all counts. and don't forget his strings, fret files, and... but walter is a bit old fashioned, which means great, personal service, great prices, expert advice, but no web site or cards. |
|
| Author: | Graham Steward [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Has anyone used Buffalo horn? I bought some off of ebay a while back because it was black and thought it looks cool. I'm not sure if it will be a good material to use. Thanks |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
i've not used it i have seen reports elsewhere that it is too soft. |
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 12:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just drop a bone saddle on your bench top and listen. Now drop a Tusq one . An enormous difference. The Tusq is way brighter,,, almost a brittle sound. You'd think it would transmit a lot better |
|
| Author: | Dennis Leahy [ Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Left field, maybe even the left quadrant of Alpha Centauri: Jade. Nephrite Jade. OK, it would be quite a bit more difficult to file than even fossilized ivory. But it has legendary toughness, and when struck it sounds like ... well, er, like striking a hard stone. Jade can be olive green to bright green, and white (though the pure white stuff is very expensive.) Eventually, I will try some, and then I guess I'll finally know if it is an interesting idea or just plain nuts. Dennis 
|
|
| Author: | Michael McBroom [ Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dennis, My wife and I are jade collectors. Fascinating thing about jade is it first had value as a material for knives, axes, and weapons because of its hardness. Later, the weapons aspects of jade became more ritualized as it became more ornamental in nature, and from there it evolved into pure ornament and jewelry. But the reason for jade's original value was its hardness. Typically 6-6.5 on the Moh's hardness scale, nephrite is characterized as being a very tough mineral due to its fibrous texture and interlocking grain. It will require rather specialized lapidary equipment to grind jade due to its hardness. Also, with a specific gravity of 1.6 or so, it might be borderline heavy, but probably not too bad. But you're right abour one thing -- it rings like fine crystal, and I'm sure its acoustic transmission properties are excellent. Good jade is not cheap, though. You could probably achieve very similar results with agate or quartz. Best, Michael |
|
| Author: | Dennis Leahy [ Sat Oct 15, 2005 8:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Michael, I have seen some very thin-walled bowls lathe turned from jade, and when I remarked to the maker how amazing it seemed, he showed me his belt buckle. Unlike a typical lapidary belt buckle made from metal, with a stone cabochon, his entire (thinly carved) belt buckle was jade. He said he had worn it for years, and told me that jade is extremely tough. Now I know that it is the interlocked crystalline structure that makes jade so tough. I have gemstone faceting equipment, so I could get the saddle ground down to the proper size. (Carborundum sanding belts would work also.) I think the most difficult thing will be grinding the saddle for intonation compensation. That might require a small diamond-charged file. At the size of a saddle, I think agate and quartz would be much more prone to breaking than jade. Plus they are both harder than jade, adding to the difficulty in filing for intonation. Dennis |
|
| Author: | arvey [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I ussually use bone but have experiemented with Tusk, Peal and red sea snail. I have found that the Tusk gives a slightly brighter sound. The Pearl and Sea snail nuts look great but I found the Pearl brightened things up a bit and the Snail shell was a little dampened. On my SJ I really like what the Tusk does for it but on the rest I stick with bone. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|