Anybody else got a bridge like this?

I had one something like that on a Yamaha FG300, a copy of a Hummingbird.

I had one something like that on a Yamaha FG300, a copy of a Hummingbird.

Thanks. :)

A quick Google threw up a few references to that Yamaha model. Some referred to its 'adjustable' or 'tune-o-matic' bridge. I found a smallish photo and it looked to be a more complicated arrangement than the one on the Terada - possibly allowing adjustment of the intonation as well? Much more like an electric guitar bridge. Looked interesting, but maybe the cost outweighed the benefit?

I had a Harmony acoustic students guitar, made in the '70s that had a bridge like that. Haven't seen one on any recent guitars though.

an old epi 12 string i bought as a project has one of those

Weight was one consideration, transfer of energy from the saddle to the top another. If you think about what happens when it lifts the saddle up, you can see that it is no longer in solid contact with the surface beneath.

Not that I can hear the difference...

I think I could adjust the intonation too.

Thanks for all the replies :)

Good to know that other variations have been used.

Weight was one consideration, transfer of energy from the saddle to the top another. If you think about what happens when it lifts the saddle up, you can see that it is no longer in solid contact with the surface beneath.

Not that I can hear the difference...

Good point about the energy transfer. It leaves a small air gap underneath. It would make some sort of difference although, as you say, I can't really hear anything that seems different. It's a very good sounding guitar, despite having been horribly abused by being forgotten and left in a hot roof space for over a decade....

Cheers,

Chris

Great pic Neztok. :)

That looks like it might well be the original that the makers of my guitar pinched the idea from.

Interesting to see what seems to be a very large difference in the angle of the saddle between the two guitars.

My 33-year-old Alvarez has the same adjustable bridge. It also has a laminated top, so I don't think the added mass or lack of contact intimacy would significantly alter the timbre.

The added mass would normally lower the acoustic volume of the attack (detract from the punchiness) and increase the sustain a bit. The result is a less lively sounding guitar. Compromised contact would probably change the timbre, but in less predictable ways, as that effect would be something like applying EQ filtering -- too many variables to know exactly what that characteristic would be.

I think just about every guitar from the seventies had a variation of this bridge. some were good and some not so good. The only manufacturer that didn't do it on a regular basis was Martin.

I've replaced a LOT of Gibsons that had these, putting a traditional bridge on some of them really improved the tone. The problem with some of these setups were that they used a soft plastic in the saddle. Other than that, they worked O.K.

The transfer of vibration from the string to the top is really important and a lot of it goes through the saddle, the better the connection between the two the more energy is transfered to the top and the better the sound. You would be surprised how much louder the guitar gets with just a change of material in the saddle.

With the adjustable bridge, the vibrations have to go through the two adjustment screws, not a lot of contact. In an electric this is not a big deal but, IMHO, on an acoustic it's more important.

Of course, if it sounds good and it's not broken, leave it alone! I've played a lot of Gibsons that had this and they sounded great!

The advantage of them is apparent when the weather changes, one setting for summer and one for winter when the air is drier, this is why I have two saddles for my acoustics, when I notice a change in the action in the spring and fall, I just change saddles. I also play with almost a too low action on all my guitars and I notice changes pretty easily.

Wow. Thanks for two more great replies. :)

Interesting to find out that this was popular at a specific time (the seventies). Adds a bit of historical interest to the old girl.
With the adjustable bridge, the vibrations have to go through the two adjustment screws, not a lot of contact. In an electric this is not a big deal but, IMHO, on an acoustic it's more important.

Of course, if it sounds good and it's not broken, leave it alone! I've played a lot of Gibsons that had this and they sounded great

I guess that's the bottom line - how good it sounds. I've been very lucky with this particular instrument, as it was badly neglected for years. I bought it new in the early 70s, but (due to various other distractions) never got around to trying to learn to play. So it just got dragged round the world and stuck in cupboards and attics with no thought for heat or humidity. :shock: For well over a decade it sat in the roof space of my house under a tin roof, in a space that reaches hideously high temperatures in the Australian summer. It also gets fairly damp in there in the winter and - to add insult to injury - it was the exit point for humidified air that passed through our old evaporative air conditioning system when that was in use.

It was in a case. But cases mostly protect from knocks, and provide only limited and temporary relief from heat and humidity. When I finally dragged it out and opened the case, I was expecting to see a complete wreck. But it played just fine. :D It was a 'middle of the range' sort of instrument in its day, but it has a solid top which hasn't cracked and a good straight neck. I have several guitars now, but that's the only one which gets played every day. Mainly because it sits on a stand right next to the computer, but also because I just have a lot of affection for it. It has a good sound, a nice action, and plenty of that hard to define 'character'.

The contact made by the little 'cradle' that holds the saddle is of course very limited underneath, where the screws lift it up, but it's reasonably deep, so it still makes good contact on both sides. This seems to be enough. Friends who've played it have favourably compared the sound to their own good quality instruments.

But now, of course, I'm going to be tempted to try making other cradles up (out of woods or metals) but sitting snugly in the slot with no screws. And see if I can pick the difference..... :D 8)

Thanks to all for your replies. I've learned a heap. :)

Cheers,

Chris

My 33-year-old Alvarez has the same adjustable bridge. It also has a laminated top, so I don't think the added mass or lack of contact intimacy would significantly alter the timbre.

The added mass would normally lower the acoustic volume of the attack (detract from the punchiness) and increase the sustain a bit. The result is a less lively sounding guitar. Compromised contact would probably change the timbre, but in less predictable ways, as that effect would be something like applying EQ filtering -- too many variables to know exactly what that characteristic would be.

I had an Alverez like that I bought in 1979 ... Close enough to 33 years? My first acoustic. I gave it away. :shock: I gave it to my best friend. 8) He cherishes it.

[img]<img class="go2wpf-bbcode" src=" ">

That's the Hohner folk guitar I scored not long ago.

My 33-year-old Alvarez has the same adjustable bridge. It also has a laminated top, so I don't think the added mass or lack of contact intimacy would significantly alter the timbre.

The added mass would normally lower the acoustic volume of the attack (detract from the punchiness) and increase the sustain a bit. The result is a less lively sounding guitar. Compromised contact would probably change the timbre, but in less predictable ways, as that effect would be something like applying EQ filtering -- too many variables to know exactly what that characteristic would be.

I had an Alverez like that I bought in 1979 ... Close enough to 33 years? My first acoustic. I gave it away. :shock: I gave it to my best friend. 8) He cherishes it.

Mine was the first acoustic I owned after having a couple electrics. Tank-built, so I've never had to take care of it (humidity, temp, etc), but of course not a very open or nuanced guitar. I put a Fishman Rare Earth active humbucker in it years ago, so now it's an all purpose AE beater, which according to Vintage Guitar is worth about $100 US + whatever I could get for the Fishman. It makes a very usable slide guitar. Another thing about it I realized recently: It's basically a slightly fancied-up appearance Martin knock-off. As I learned a lot of my acoustic playing on it, I'm slightly biased to the Martin D28 in-hand feel. Too bad I've yet to find a D28 that sounds really nice to me -- though there has been an occasional HD28 that did it.