Official Luthiers Forum!

Owned and operated by Lance Kragenbrink
It is currently Mon May 19, 2025 3:47 pm


All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:41 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 761
First name: Blain
City: Leander
State: Texas
Country: United States
Focus: Build
What is the thinnest that you would recommend to make a bridge?

I have a piece of Ebony that is about .30 thick and was wondering if y'all would recommend this thickness for a bridge.

Also what is the thinnest that you would make the sides of the bridge? (The "wings" so to speak)


_________________
Thanks,
Blain

http://www.ullrichguitar.com

"89.67% of all statistics are made up on the spot."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:47 pm 
Offline
Old Growth Brazilian Rosewood
Old Growth Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 5915
Location: United States

Mine are .300" in the center and are domed (no wings). They essentially are less than 1/32" at the ends.


_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:51 pm 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:13 am
Posts: 3270
Location: United States
My blanks start out at 3/8", but probably end up at around .3, also. My wings are about 1/16".

Ron

_________________
OLD MAN formerly (and formally) known as:

Ron Wisdom

Somewhere in the middle of Arkansas......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:51 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 761
First name: Blain
City: Leander
State: Texas
Country: United States
Focus: Build
Thanks Brock. So hopefully I can use this one then. Truth is I sanded a little thinner than I meant to. I do have a spare which is about .5" thick that I could use as well, but thought I would see if I could sacrifice it.

Do you really mean 1/32" (.03125) That seems really thin.

Thanks again!

_________________
Thanks,
Blain

http://www.ullrichguitar.com

"89.67% of all statistics are made up on the spot."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:53 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 761
First name: Blain
City: Leander
State: Texas
Country: United States
Focus: Build
Thanks Ron. Sounds like I'm good to go then.

_________________
Thanks,
Blain

http://www.ullrichguitar.com

"89.67% of all statistics are made up on the spot."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:14 pm 
Offline
Old Growth Brazilian Rosewood
Old Growth Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 5915
Location: United States
[QUOTE=blain1976] Thanks Brock. So hopefully I can use this one then. Truth is I sanded a little thinner than I meant to. I do have a spare which is about .5" thick that I could use as well, but thought I would see if I could sacrifice it.

Do you really mean 1/32" (.03125) That seems really thin.

Thanks again![/QUOTE]

Yeah, 1/32... but they are domed. So imagine an arc that terminates at the face of the soundboard. There are no wings.


_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:29 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 761
First name: Blain
City: Leander
State: Texas
Country: United States
Focus: Build
Thanks Brock for clarifying that. I understand what you're talking about now.

_________________
Thanks,
Blain

http://www.ullrichguitar.com

"89.67% of all statistics are made up on the spot."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:56 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 3:50 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: Napa, CA
Hesh...nice outrigger, anti-slip grips on that throne!

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:41 am 
Offline
Cocobolo
Cocobolo
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:18 am
Posts: 265
Location: United States
First name: Frank
Last Name: Ford
City: Palo Alto
State: CA
Zip/Postal Code: 94301
Country: USA
Focus: Repair
Status: Professional
For Martin work, I aim for a bridge height of 3/8", and a minimum of
5/16" (.313). Much thinner than that, and you can have some structural
difficulties if you use a tall saddle or install an under-saddle pickup.




_________________
Cheers,

Frank Ford

FRETS.COM
HomeShopTech
FRETS.NET


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:23 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 3:50 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: Napa, CA
Frank...I'm interested in your opinion...would a 5* back-angled saddle help to resist the structural difficulties you describe? Theoretically, more saddle force would be directed downward and less laterally. Waddya think?

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 4:17 am 
Offline
Cocobolo
Cocobolo

Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:13 pm
Posts: 195
Location: United States
I think Santa Cruz is using a 10 degree back-angled saddle now if I'm not mistaken...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:28 am 
Offline
Mahogany
Mahogany

Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:26 am
Posts: 49
Location: United States
what is this back angled saddle? You mean the saddle actually sit a little tilted towards the lower bout end?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:48 pm 
Offline
Mahogany
Mahogany

Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:41 am
Posts: 61
Location: Chi. N/W Burbs Illinois
Tell me if I'm wrong and why but I would think that 1/2 the break angle of the strings from the saddle to the bridge pin holes would be and ideal back angle for the saddle.

Kirby



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:38 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:32 am
Posts: 2687
Location: Ithaca, New York, United States
A back-angled saddle doesn't change the overall torque on the bridge, but it does direct more of the force on the saddle towards the bottom of the saddle slot. I realize that may sound self-contradictory, but it's not. Ask Todd Stock. He can explain it better than I can.

More on topic, though... This may be stating the obvious, but the bridge height (thickness) and the neck angle are interdependent. If this bridge is going on a guitar whose neck angle is already set, then the appropriate bridge thickness is determined by the neck angle (assuming the neck angle is such that a reasonable bridge/saddle height is possible). When building a new guitar or resetting a neck, it's the other way around: proper bridge and saddle height determine neck angle, this being, of course, the more ideal way to go about it. Personally, I wouldn't compromise the sound of the guitar by using a bridge of less than ideal height just to save a piece of wood.

_________________
Todd Rose
Ithaca, NY

https://www.dreamingrosesecobnb.com/todds-art-music

https://www.facebook.com/ToddRoseGuitars/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
phpBB customization services by 2by2host.com