Official Luthiers Forum!

I was asked by a customer about fossilized ivory bridge pins. He wanted to know if they would make his guitar sound better. Having never used bridge pins of ivory, I had no answer for him.

Recently he picked up a set of ebony wood pins for his Martin dreadnaught, a D18. I told him that the pins would need to be fitted to his guitar. Of course he lacks the proper tool, so he didn't get a reliable idea of how these pins would sound since they were binding the strings and the ball ends were not seating against the bridge plate.

So he trudges on in pursuit of the best pin for his guitar. I simply have no strong opinions about plastic, bone, ivory or any others. Pins are pins in my mind. I do suspect that the brass pins, being heavier, would have maybe the greatest effect and change on tone. What's your PIN EXPERIENCE?

_________________
http://www.dickeyguitars.com

Bruce...I've always been of the school of thought that if it "pings" when dropped onto a hard surface, it should produce a better resonant tone than if it thuds. Using that theory, I have always used TUSQ bridge pins. They seem to ping even better than bone and even some FWI pins I bought some time ago.

Disclosure... While I have used these exclusively, I have not done any guitar sound comparison tests between the TUSQ vs. bone or ebony, etc...something I should probably do some day.

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

I like the looks that FWI pins. compaired to ebony or Rosewood pins they are brighter is the best discription I can come up with. And way loader than plastic pins. Is it worth the extra $120 not in my books. Bone or Ivory do just about as good of a job in my book.

I've only used bone so far, but I have several sets of various wooden pins. I believe it was Kevin, in a thread several months ago, that said he didn't think pin material made any appreciable difference in the sound. If it wasn't Kevin, I apologize.

Ron

_________________
OLD MAN formerly (and formally) known as:

Ron Wisdom

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

I think that there is probably a slight audible difference between pins. But, Frank Ford has a tale about the fossil ivory pins. They replaced one pin on a Martin with fossil ivory. Everyone could hear that that string sounded better. Then they moved the ivory pin around among the strings with all the pins taped over. No one could tell which string had the ivory pin.

Frank's conclusion was no audible difference and another example of how we hear with our eyes. I pointed out another possible conclusion: the tape spoiled the benefits of the ivory pin. I was joking.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

This is a real minefield. On the one hand, there are guys like Hesh, who's opinion I respect, who have done subjective experiments and gotten some consistent results. On the other hand, it's REALLY hard to think of any property of bridge pins except mass that ought to have any effect at all. Remembering Feynman's Dictum ("You are the easiest person for you to fool") one has to wonder.

From a physical standpoint, the saddle is the part of the bridge where the string vibration is supposed to stop. Sure, the whole bridge and top move, and that does have effects on the vibrations of the string, but that's not going to be effected as far as I can tell by the pin material, except, as stated, for the mass. If the string is vibrating in any way between the saddle and the pins, you've got trouble.

The 'zing' tone that Hesh notes is a longitudinal vibration of the string. You can think of it as being like the vibration of air in a long, thin pipe. It's coupled in with the transverse vibration that does most of the work, and does contribute a little to the sound. Again, it's _supposed_ to stop at the saddle top. The main thing that might effect whether it does or not, I think, would be the angle of the strings over the saddle, and if there's enough break for the transverse vibration there should be for the longitudinal as well. At any rate, again, it's hard to see how pin material would effect that.

Except, as I keep saying, for the mass of them. Sometimes a couple of grams more or less on the bridge can make a difference, and the differences in weight between the different pin materials can add up to that, and more if you count in brass. I'd think a lighter bridge would tend to allow the highs to 'leak' out of the string faster than a heavy one. This runs counter to Hesh's results, which showed the heavier bone pins as having the 'brighter' tone.

Obviously, more work needs to be done.   

I would say that if there is an audible change from switching pins, it can be heard with brass. Loss of attack and loudness. The only reason I can imagine for them is to increase sustain for playing amplified. But then why not get an electric guitar?

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

I wonder if having the pins the same or close to the density of the bridge material is what we are after?  This, it seems to me, would let the pins and bridge act (vibrate/dampen/etc.) in unison. 

Someone with an oscilliscope (digital version) could easily do a test for frequency response using the same instrument with different pin material.  You could also quantify sustain and harmonic differences.

_________________
Steve Walden
Aspiring Builder,
Bartlesville, OK

In another guitar forum something similar to this thread was brought up by a guitar player, not a luthier. He was flabberghasted by the "zing" sound his new guitar had (I believe was a Martin) and that the guitar had been fitted with TUSQ bridge pins and saddle. My advise to him was to replace the pins with wood pins (preferably EIR) and if that didnt solve the problem to change the saddle to bone or corian.

I dont remember if it was this forum or another one where a luthier was complaining about that "zing" sound and his solution was to change the TUSQ pins out. This is waht I based my reply to this guy on.

 

Then again, I have no scientific data to back me up... 

_________________
Reguards,

Ken H

Another way to compare, haven't done it, don't remember where I saw it is to put two of the same strings on a guitar, like two .012s, with say, a tusq pin on one and a plastic one on the other, so you get a "true" (?) A/B. You'd might need to consider different string lengths due to compensation, maybe even make a special nut for this test.

_________________
now known around here as Pat Foster
_________________
http://www.patfosterguitars.com

Yet another view.

If you have a heavy, gutless, overbuilt guitar, not a whole lot will change its tone, whatever tone it may have. So, changing pins on smeting like that won't do anything.

If you have a nice and lightly built guitar, yet it is stiff, again, it won;t respond to each and every little change.

If you have a nice and lightly built guitar with very responsive characteristics, these little changes are audible. Not huge, but for sure, they can be real.

And taking Al's lead on mass, if we hav a 38 gram bridge, a change of 2 grams in pin mass is a 5.26% change. If we have a lightweight, say 14 gram, bridge, that same 2g mass change at the pins is a 14.28% change!

Now, take the same mass, and divide it by 6, and we see that Frank's test with the ONE pin on a heavy Martin bridge was meaningless, because it was so small of a percentage to BE meaningless....

    I am in the school where my engineering background comes into play. I have used different pins on the same guitar and set of strings.
    My first observation was the harder pin made the biggest difference. The one thing about this was that I just swapped pins willie nillie.
   I did hear a difference but that wasn't the pin. I didn't really seat them. Once I realized that my observation was tainted I took a close look.
   I used a slotted bridge with Martin SP's in medium gage. I use FWI Bone Ebony and Plastic. The bone did seem to brighten the guitar up a bit and then I realized that weight may be more of a contributor.
   With slotted bridge pins and slotted bridge I couldn't tell one pin from the other. What surprised me most was when I put in the pins and new which pin was on the guitar I allways picked the FWI as the best sounding. When it was BLIND I couldn't tell FWI from plastic. I guess we like to think if it cost more it must be best.
    I am sure someone with a better ear may hear a difference but even on the old Osilliscope the wave length , amplitude and duration was so close as not to see any difference .
   The saddle well that did make a large difference.
john hall
blues creek gutiars

     I think that the important qualities of a bridge pin are related to material
only so far as the material can resist damage from the pressure of the string
and ball end which it is pinning.
     That the pin is unslotted is much more important than the material of the
pin so long as it is hard enough to resist being deformed.
     The fit of the string into the slotted hole is important as is that the length
of the string in the slot should be firmly and evenly (not tightly) pressed into
its slot by the pin. This is more important than the material.
     Unslotted pins seem to be a bad idea brought on by mass
manufacturing. Stewmac's unslotted ebony or ivoroid pins I believe sound
every bit as good as any unslotted pin.

Slotted bridge pins were a mistake that happened beginning in the 30's
with molded plastics. It was convenient for manufacturers, and the
problems likely didn't become obvious until around the 60's, since most
slotted pins take 20-30 years to destroy a bridge plate. By that point
slotted pins had become so standard that there was really no turning
back. Guitars from the 20's and 30's that still have their original pins are
usually just fine - no significant bridge plate wear.

It's a fact that slotted bridge pins destroy bridge plates, and even tops
and bridges over time. Sometimes it takes a long time, but it happens to
the vast majority of guitars built with them. One of the worst things I see
from people who have heard of slotting the bridge but don't understand
why, is still using slotted pins with a slotted bridge - that's a double
whammy.

I don't know why I'm complaining though. I get tons of business repairing
all the damage they do.

I won't make much argument concerning bridge pins and tone. Though if
one argues that lighter is better, I would love to see some extremely
lightweight cheap plastic/composite against beautiful (but heavier)
fossilized mammoth tusk or ivory in a non-blind listening test. I
would bet 9 out of 10 would vote for the ivory as sounding better. There
may be some difference, but not enough to concern me. I use bone,
ebony, ivoroid, whatever matches the instrument and it's trim best.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Thanks guys for the interesting comments.

(Just got off the phone with this acquaintance/customer.)

He purchased a GA24 Mammoth Ivory Pin from Elderly. Yep, you heard right, a single pin for $21 plus shipping.

As we visited, I pulled up the site, because I knew that the FWI pins were nearly $200 a set. He thought he'd ordered a set of pins for $21. Chuckle chuckle..... ooops!

So that makes his ten thousand year old mammoth ivory pins $126 a set.   

Take a look at this pin on the Elderly website:



Enjoyed the comments by the way.

_________________
http://www.dickeyguitars.com

I wonder why they would put up a photo showing a gob of excess glue?

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

[QUOTE=Howard Klepper] I wonder why they would put up a photo showing a gob of excess glue?[/QUOTE]

Howard,

That's probably a fossilised Mammoth tear. Or it could be a drop of amber with a mosquito inside - now a dinosaur on the bridge would certainly increase sustain

_________________
Dave White
De Faoite Stringed Instruments
". . . the one thing a machine just can't do is give you character and personalities and sometimes that comes with flaws, but it always comes with humanity" Monty Don talking about hand weaving, "Mastercrafts", Weaving, BBC March 2010

It's fossilized Mammoth Hide Glue! 

_________________
Waddy

Photobucket Build Album Library

Sound Clips of most of my guitars

Waddy wrote:
"It's fossilized Mammoth Hide Glue!"

ROTFL

I can see that as the next 'in' thing. Sure you use spruce of an uncommon species from East Central Europe grown on a north slope in flinty soil, and cut during the late winter under the dark of the moon so that the logs can be floated down the river to be ponded in the lagoon in Venice for ten years before resawing. Yes, you got your rare tropical hardwood B&S from the wreck of a Spanish galleon that went down in a hurricane off the Barbados in 1537, and the tons of gold and silver in the salt water along with the wood for all those years have added important metalic ions that increase the sustain and yeild 'magic' trebles. Naturally you organized your own expidition to Africa, to a long-hidden valley deep in the heart of the continent, where, braving tse-tse flies, malaria, and bubonic plague, you felled one of the last really big ebony trees for the fingerboard and bridge. Of course you use only the finest fossile ivory for the bridge pins, and camel bone, from a beast you killed yourself on the way through Timbuctoo, for the nut and saddle. But, DID YOU USE FOSSILE MAMMOTH HIDE GLUE? Well, then how can you call that a quality guitar....?

It just sounds better than, "I built this guitar with Fish Glue."

_________________
Waddy

Photobucket Build Album Library

Sound Clips of most of my guitars

[QUOTE=Hesh1956] I have done some subjective testing of bridge pins in my efforts to tweak the final tone of a number of my guitars. Mind you by subjective what I mean is that I swapped out pins and listened for the differences. And as some will consider me to be nuts, me included...., I could hear some rather dramatic differences when swapping out bridge pins. And the differences that I heard held true on three different guitars as well.

[/QUOTE]

Based on reports from luthiers about what makes a difference to the sound of an instrument, I have concluded that not only are they just as susceptible to suggestion as the general public, but quite possibly more so. There is a reason why any reliable data about these things is gathered not just blind, but double blind. Probably the only person who can really judge this stuff objectively is me.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

(shakes his head, as he tosses another set of used plastic pins in the scrap box) (scratches lower backside as he heads back over to dustpan the last eighty gallons of sander dust out of the collector) (muses to himself wouldn't a vacation be wonderful)

_________________
http://www.dickeyguitars.com