J-45 anyone. . .

[father_of_pearl]

I was also doubtful because of what I read about the ADJ saddle killing tone…

But let’s be honest, if you like the Gibson’s 60s sound ( and I know I’m not the only one here) then no doubt you like the ceramic saddle’s tone.

And yep, to me, E-minor7’s 1963 SJ and her ceramic saddle is the best sounding of his herd, just listen to his recordings, the tone is just classic.

 

I honestly think that I would like to see a 'true vintage' or whatever they decide to call it , with a replica saddle the way they used to be .

I actually like the thoughts of one.

 

Gibson made a Limited Edition 1960’s Hummingbird with the ADJ saddle last year :

 

 

Don’t know what the saddle is made of ( Tusq, Bone ?) but I doubt it’s ceramic.

Anyway, that one looks like a True Vintage with some cosmetic variations.

 

Unless Gibson decides to launch a « 1960 Hummingbird Legend » with the exact same bracing , bridge and ceramic saddle to come close to the original sound, you gotta play the real non-modified 54 year old Bird to get something like Keiths tone. But good luck finding one of these rare birds.

[E-minor7]

Don't know what the saddle is made of ( Tusq, Bone ?) but I doubt it's ceramic.

Anyway, that one looks like a True Vintage with some cosmetic variations.

 

 

Admit the one in clip has some of the crisp edge we are talking about. Wonder about the material.

 

From my tests neither tusq or bone will emulate the exact nuance of ceramic - in fact not at all.

[duluthdan]

Is it possible to find a ceramics saddle to fit an SJ with a rectangular thru saddle bridge? Might yield an interesting tone.

[j45nick]

Is it possible to find a ceramics saddle to fit an SJ with a rectangular thru saddle bridge? Might yield an interesting tone.

 

 

I've never seen one. It might be too fragile, as ceramic is usually very inelastic, unlike bone. It would be interesting to see how it compared to a relatively hard ivory or fossilized ivory.

[AJ or Burst]

Dear Gibson Forum Members:

 

I cannot let this topic alone. I own a 1969 Gibson SJ that I retro-fitted with a tusq saddle following a grim "repair" where the "technician" chose to replace the stock ceramic saddle with a nylon un-radiused saddle. I had a problem with the vagueness of the tone of the guitar before the repairman got his hands on this guitar.Here is the truth. wether you choose to believe it or not is on you.o

Do you really expect the saddle to radiate the optimal tone to the spruce top when it is raised off the top so that there is no contact with the topwood? That the only vibration to the top is through the bolts in the saddle adjustment mechanism ? Pure and by the laws of physics...no way.

Fixed saddles will bring out 100 % of the tone of the guitar. Adjustable saddles were invented to be a convenience and are a compromise. Acoustic guitars are different that electric guitars. Adjustable saddles are unique to Gibson guitars and the copies that chose to mimic this design. They are an inferior design, and any good sounding Gibson adjustable saddle acoustic guitar will sound better with the proper fixed saddle arrangement. If you choose to think other wise you are only fooling yourself.

A Gibson Lover

[blindboygrunt]

Dear Gibson Forum Members:

 

I cannot let this topic alone. I own a 1969 Gibson SJ that I retro-fitted with a tusq saddle following a grim "repair" where the "technician" chose to replace the stock ceramic saddle with a nylon un-radiused saddle. I had a problem with the vagueness of the tone of the guitar before the repairman got his hands on this guitar.Here is the truth. wether you choose to believe it or not is on you.o

Do you really expect the saddle to radiate the optimal tone to the spruce top when it is raised off the top so that there is no contact with the topwood? That the only vibration to the top is through the bolts in the saddle adjustment mechanism ? Pure and by the laws of physics...no way.

Fixed saddles will bring out 100 % of the tone of the guitar. Adjustable saddles were invented to be a convenience and are a compromise. Acoustic guitars are different that electric guitars. Adjustable saddles are unique to Gibson guitars and the copies that chose to mimic this design. They are an inferior design, and any good sounding Gibson adjustable saddle acoustic guitar will sound better with the proper fixed saddle arrangement. If you choose to think other wise you are only fooling yourself.

A Gibson Lover

 

Has it never occurred to your little mind that some players might like a 'muted' tone ?

[j45nick]

Fixed saddles will bring out 100 % of the tone of the guitar. Adjustable saddles were invented to be a convenience and are a compromise. Acoustic guitars are different that electric guitars. Adjustable saddles are unique to Gibson guitars and the copies that chose to mimic this design. They are an inferior design, and any good sounding Gibson adjustable saddle acoustic guitar will sound better with the proper fixed saddle arrangement. If you choose to think other wise you are only fooling yourself.

A Gibson Lover

 

 

When it comes to "sounding better", I submit that is entirely in the ear of the beholder. My preference is for a fixed, traditional saddle/bridge arrangement on a flat top. But that doesn't mean that someone else can't prefer the way a particular guitar sounds with an adjustable saddle, even though, as you say, the adjustable saddle was developed as a convenience, and might be a compromise when it comes to the pure physics of the transfer of vibration.

 

And, by the way, if we are obsessed with top vibration, we should all stop draping our picking arms over the lower bout of our guitars when we play.

 

Em7 is a professional musician, and a great student of the nuances of tone. If he prefers his 'birds with a ceramic adjustable saddle, it's not for me to tell him his guitar would sound "better" with a fixed bridge/saddle.

 

By the way, the bridges on most acoustic archtops--including my 1947 Gibson L-7--have adjustable saddles that are not that dissimilar in principle to the adjustable bridge/saddle we are talking about on Gibson acoustic flat-tops.

[E-minor7]

I cannot let this topic alone.

 

You shouldn't.

 

Admit I never tried or A/B'ed the same guitar with first adjustable then fixed saddle, but I definitely experimented with inserts (rose - bone - ivory - tusq - rose/bone)

Here my experience is that ceramic is louder than wood with ordinary sized bone saddle or at least as loud. And 'better' sounding than bone and tusq.

You represent a consensus which I'd like to challenge.

Not saying you are wrong, but the different materials and concepts simply creates different nuances of voice.

My main-point is that the adjustable saddle isn't necessarily the catastrophe it's been claimed to be.

As said, I don't know what the 2 excellent sounding early 60's ceramic J-45's I've played would sound like with fixed saddle, but I sure wouldn't change them if they were mine.

And it's not because I go for some alternative (subdued) flavor in fact the opposite.

A vintage guitar that have 'grown together' with its adj. saddle can sound so genuine Gibson it would be a shame to change a hair.

Some even state the same could be said about the plastic bridge !

 

 

 

 

Nick Not saying I prefer ceramic in my vintage hog squares.

I have porcelain in the 1963 SJ, but old-vase-ivory in another, wooden insert w. bone in a third and fixed on a forth.

I consider switching to rose for certain recordings.

That's one of the reasons there's a little collection here.