Inconsistencies in bone saddles.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victory Pete
  • Start date Start date
Wait a minute...



Are you sayin Bullshit? :confused:



:D




(pete...I'm really tryin to give you the benefit of the doubt here man...:rolleyes:)
 
Not interested!

I have plenty of balls, I just have no need for that useless nonsense. I dont miss High School antics. I am really too busy to be on this computer wasting time. I am becoming a slave to this forum. The real world is more important.
ViP:cool:
 
Victory Pete said:
I have plenty of balls, I just have no need for that useless nonsense. I dont miss High School antics. I am really too busy to be on this computer wasting time. I am becoming a slave to this forum. The real world is more important.
ViP:cool:
Click to expand...

We heard you the first time..;):rolleyes:
 
Victory Pete said:
The problem was the bone saddle. It had different densities in it, it was visible in front of a light with a magnifying glass. the suspicious area was more translucent and therefore less dense. I have since cut a new one and now it works great.
ViP
Click to expand...

Muttley said:
Bullshit.....
Click to expand...

I think VP is correct here, especially since replacing the saddle corrected the problem. Bone is grown by ignorant animals under uncontrolled conditions, and variations in density (heterogeneity) can occur.

v6c01a.jpg
 
crazydoc said:
I think VP is correct here, especially since replacing the saddle corrected the problem. Bone is grown by ignorant animals under uncontrolled conditions, and variations in density (heterogeneity) can occur.

v6c01a.jpg
Click to expand...

He is far from correct

Re-read what he said and then explain how piezo elements work and how inconsistent density is going to effect the output of both a single string and then others adjacent to it.

Then explain how the timber on which it is resting doesn't play a far greater role in your conclusions seeing as how it has inherently far more inconsistency in it's physical and mechanical properties than than the bone that is adjacent to it. and also touching the piezo element.

Then explain and demonstrate how the speed of sound varies in bone and is related to it's amplitude at the frequencies at various densities and show how that impacts on the way in which a piezo element generates a signal.

You can use practical scientific examples of your research to back it up as it would probably reflect mine. Once you have done that you can conclude that his diagnosis of the fault was bullshit and if he actually fixed it was the result of a fortuitous and simple coincidence.,.
 
muttley600 said:
He is far from correct

Re-read what he said and then explain how piezo elements work and how inconsistent density is going to effect the output of both a single string and then others adjacent to it.

Then explain how the timber on which it is resting doesn't play a far greater role in your conclusions seeing as how it has inherently far more inconsistency in it's physical and mechanical properties than than the bone that is adjacent to it. and also touching the piezo element.

Then explain and demonstrate how the speed of sound varies in bone and is related to it's amplitude at the frequencies at various densities and show how that impacts on the way in which a piezo element generates a signal.

You can use practical scientific examples of your research to back it up as it would probably reflect mine. Once you have done that you can conclude that his diagnosis of the fault was bullshit and if he actually fixed it was the result of a fortuitous and simple coincidence.,.
Click to expand...

It is funny though, when I swapped it end for end the weak spot was now under the A and D strings. Let me recap: Originally it was the B and G strings that were weak. I refiled the saddle, perfectly flat, no change. The I turned the saddle around, end to end. Guess what? Now the A and the D strings were weak. Conclusion: Weak spot in saddle. Outcome: Happy customer with a refitted saddle. Have a nice day!
ViP:cool:
 
Victory Pete said:
It is funny though, when I swapped it end for end the weak spot was now under the A and D strings. Let me recap: Originally it was the B and G strings that were weak. I refiled the saddle, perfectly flat, no change. The I turned the saddle around, end to end. Guess what? Now the A and the D strings were weak. Conclusion: Weak spot in saddle. Outcome: Happy customer with a refitted saddle. Have a nice day!
ViP:cool:
Click to expand...

Congratulations. You have just re-written physics.:rolleyes:

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about. Give it up.
 
muttley600 said:
He is far from correct

Re-read what he said and then explain how piezo elements work and how inconsistent density is going to effect the output of both a single string and then others adjacent to it.

Then explain how the timber on which it is resting doesn't play a far greater role in your conclusions seeing as how it has inherently far more inconsistency in it's physical and mechanical properties than than the bone that is adjacent to it. and also touching the piezo element.

Then explain and demonstrate how the speed of sound varies in bone and is related to it's amplitude at the frequencies at various densities and show how that impacts on the way in which a piezo element generates a signal.

You can use practical scientific examples of your research to back it up as it would probably reflect mine. Once you have done that you can conclude that his diagnosis of the fault was bullshit and if he actually fixed it was the result of a fortuitous and simple coincidence.,.
Click to expand...
Glad to hear that the saddle density (which directly couples the string's energy to the bridge/soundboard) doesn't have a significant effect on sound quality. I'll be able to start using cardboard or sponge for my saddles and nuts.

Here's an experiment. Make a saddle consisting of two pieces - one bone and one plastic, each under three of the strings. Pluck each string and record. Then switch the two saddle pieces to the opposite strings and repeat. Compare spectral analyses.

If there are no differences, then I will believe that saddle density has no effect on the sound. Until then, this is the internet and I can believe anything I want. :D
 
crazydoc said:
Glad to hear that the saddle density (which directly couples the string's energy to the bridge/soundboard) doesn't have a significant effect on sound quality. I'll be able to start using cardboard or sponge for my saddles and nuts.

Here's an experiment. Make a saddle consisting of two pieces - one bone and one plastic, each under three of the strings. Pluck each string and record. Then switch the two saddle pieces to the opposite strings and repeat. Compare spectral analyses.

If there are no differences, then I will believe that saddle density has no effect on the sound. Until then, this is the internet and I can believe anything I want. :D
Click to expand...

You can believe anything you want that will not make you correct. But if you insist that the premise made by VP is correct I shall not let you promote it to others. It's false and totally incorrect.

Once again, re read what VP claims, find out how piezo elements work and then explain how it will result in a lower output for a single string. When you have done that I will pm you with an explanation of the reason this fault is common and how to sort it out the same as I have three others who have read this thread. It doesn't have anything to do with any inconsistent density found in bone saddles either.:rolleyes:
 
crazydoc said:
Glad to hear that the saddle density (which directly couples the string's energy to the bridge/soundboard) doesn't have a significant effect on sound quality. ......................
Click to expand...

Where did you hear this by the way.:confused:
 
muttley600 said:
Where did you hear this by the way.:confused:
Click to expand...



muttley600 said:
... explain ... how inconsistent density is going to effect the output of both a single string and then others adjacent to it.
Click to expand...
I interpret your statement as saying that saddle density doesn't affect the output of a string (that is, the energy transmitted from the string to the underlying structures.)
 
crazydoc said:
I interpret your statement as saying that saddle density doesn't affect the output of a string (that is, the energy transmitted from the string to the underlying structures.)
Click to expand...

If you'd read it correctly along with the rest of the thread you would take it to mean that natural variations in the bone density of the saddle do not effect the output of the piezo transducer.

Nobody has even suggested that different materials do not effect the timbre of an instrument.

The fact that a bone saddle is rigid with near identical elastic properties is all that is important when it is set on a piezo transducer. Variations in material density within the bone make absolutely no difference unless you have ridiculous extremes in that density. Of the hundreds of transducer saddles I have worked on over the years I have yet to come across one that will not give an even response across the strings if fitted correctly with a prefect fit along the bottom of the saddle slot and perfectly upright with the correct break angle or string ramp. You can of course believe what you like.
 
muttley600 said:
If you'd read it correctly along with the rest of the thread you would take it to mean that natural variations in the bone density of the saddle do not effect the output of the piezo transducer.

Nobody has even suggested that different materials do not effect the timbre of an instrument.

The fact that a bone saddle is rigid with near identical elastic properties is all that is important when it is set on a piezo transducer. Variations in material density within the bone make absolutely no difference unless you have ridiculous extremes in that density. Of the hundreds of transducer saddles I have worked on over the years I have yet to come across one that will not give an even response across the strings if fitted correctly with a prefect fit along the bottom of the saddle slot and perfectly upright with the correct break angle or string ramp. You can of course believe what you like.
Click to expand...

I am working on another bone saddle for a guitar with no piezo element. I was curious to try the bad saddle. It is not as obvoius as with the piezo, but an audible difference is apparent. Upon examining the bad saddle with another new one, the difference is quite obvious, The new one is not anywhere near as translucent as the bad one.
VP
 
Victory Pete said:
I am working on another bone saddle for a guitar with no piezo element. I was curious to try the bad saddle. It is not as obvoius as with the piezo, but an audible difference is apparent. Upon examining the bad saddle with another new one, the difference is quite obvious, The new one is not anywhere near as translucent as the bad one.
VP
Click to expand...

VP I was was discussing this with crazydoc. There is hope for him and he has in the past demonstrated a very open mind and the ability to rationalise a debate.

You on the other hand are a hack and bring nothing to this forum, in fact most of the time you detract from it. I shall continue to respond to your postsin the way I have concluded is the only appropriate when they offend logic and science as well as 450 years of guitar technology.

Bullshit....:rolleyes:
 
mutley I am beginning wonder if you even know the definition of the word density and why us Americans associate it with the elements of sustainability in a guitar because I have used the term and every time I have associated this word with its relevance to pretty much what is discussed here you jump on board and tell me how wrong I am about what I said and I have no Idea what i am talking about which is an insult to my inelegance because dense / hard materials does have a direct effect on sustain whether you agree or not does not change that fact.

That Is All
Carry On.
 
muttley600 said:
Nobody has even suggested that different materials do not effect the timbre of an instrument.
Click to expand...


I do.

Well, I contend that none of the commonly used materials make enough of a difference for you to actually perceive it in a real world environment when your ability to hear small changes in sound is all of about three minutes, which is far less time than it takes to change a saddle and ensure that all other factors are exactly the same.

None of which has anything to do with the thread at hand, which I intend to continue reading with a benign smirk while thinking what a waste of time it is to argue with anyone as stupid as VP.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
Roguetitan said:
mutley I am beginning wonder if you even know the definition of the word density and why us Americans associate it with the elements of sustainability in a guitar because I have used the term and every time I have associated this word with its relevance to pretty much what is discussed here you jump on board and tell me how wrong I am about what I said and I have no Idea what i am talking about which is an insult to my inelegance because dense / hard materials does have a direct effect on sustain whether you agree or not does not change that fact.

That Is All
Carry On.
Click to expand...
As I have pointed out to you in the past, I teach this shit at graduate and post graduate level. If you'd like to dig up the old threads where I pointed out you were wrong I'd be happy to explain it again.

As long as people keep posting bullshit without regard to the way physics or material science and musical acoustics works I will keep pointing out that it is bullshit. As I was always fond of saying to you, you ain't disagreeing with me you are disagreeing with accepted and demonstrable science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top