powerpopper Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 All of which is way off-topic from Tusq saddles, lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LesLawrence Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 All of which is way off-topic from Tusq saddles' date=' lol...[/quote'] Perhaps, but I will not leave unchallenged sweeping assertions that bone saddles are more interesting, and appeal more to the "experienced" and "sophisticated" ear. Bob is qualified to speak for himself and no one else. If this is science then let him reference the appropriate studies (hypothesis, experiment and result). Cheers, Les Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powerpopper Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Perhaps' date=' but I will not leave unchallenged sweeping assertions that bone saddles are more interesting, and appeal more to the "experienced" and "sophisticated" ear. Bob is qualified to speak for himself and no one else. If this is science then let him reference the appropriate studies (hypothesis, experiment and result). Cheers, Les[/quote'] I think that's fair. I own a lot of guitars and I've played a lot of guitars. For me *personally*, I'm more interested in how they play and am happy if how they sound is somewhere in the range of "very good," assuming I'm paying more than $1500. All of which is to say there are tons of people who know much more about the intricacies of guitar sound than me. If that gives them more "experienced" and "sophisticated" ear, so be it. I guess I'm not as big a guitar geek as I thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 If this is science then let him reference the appropriate studies (hypothesis' date=' experiment and result).[/quote'] Les, I told you where to find the references. Check 'em out if you want to, or don't if you don't. Either way is fine with me. However, I do want to note that I never said that bone saddles `appeal more to the "experienced" and "sophisticated" ear'. This claim is absurd. It does not follow from the fact that Bach's music is, in a purely objective sense, more sophisticated than Beethoven's that anyone -- regardless of how sophisticated they are -- prefers Bach to Beethoven. In point of fact, I explicitly denied that the science justifies a prediction of anyone's preference for bone over Tusq, or vice versa. Perhaps if you read what I wrote a little more carefully, you wouldn't be quite so outraged by it. -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarstrummer Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Perhaps' date=' but I will not leave unchallenged sweeping assertions that bone saddles are more interesting, and appeal more to the "experienced" and "sophisticated" ear. Bob is qualified to speak for himself and no one else. If this is science then let him reference the appropriate studies (hypothesis, experiment and result). Cheers, Les[/quote'] I've seen the studies that rar referenced. Their findings are very interesting and it would be worth a look, if you haven't done so. edit: I just tried to find the link for the comparison tests and for some reason, the link isn't working right now. Here's the link where they were located. Maybe the link will work later. http://www.graphtech.com/kbase.html?ArticleID=4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Les, I think you are misreading rar's post. We all have tusq on some guitar or other, we all agree it's a good material for some applications, not second class, etc. etc. Nobody is putting it down. It's good to stock up on spare saddles and try different materials on each guitar to maximize your listening pleasure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 (Though I'm mighty curious to hear how you would define "semantic" as applicable to music...) Jayla' date=' Oops! I didn't mean to ignore this, but I somehow missed it until now. I very strongly suspect that you do not really want to see the definition of "semantic" as applied to music. This is standard terminology, but it suggests that the "meaning" of the music is somehow involved. Turns out that's not the case. The adjective serves to distinguish between measures of entropy based on relative frequencies and those based on the logical or subjective probabilities used for induction. If that made sense and you're still curious, check out Carnap's book [i']Two Essays on Entropy[/i], in which semantic entropy gets defined and applied to "gas molecules in a container"-type systems -- you can't get much less meaning-laden than gas molecules in a container! But I bet you're not curious anymore. :) -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LesLawrence Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 I am well aware of of the Tusq literature relative to frequency response. Nowhere does it mention that Tusq is less interesting than bone. The topic as I understood it was saddle material. Clearly the perception of beauty is in the ear of the beholder. If I subsequently got lost in the ramblings about classical music and semantic entropy then please accept my apology. My training is in science and not classical music while my understanding of semantic entropy stems from coding theory and not hot air. Cheers, Les Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brians356 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 In an attempt to cause this thread to crash and burn, burn, burn: RAR, take a gasoline tank and drain the gas out of it, then flush it out with soap and water, then blast it with hot steam while draining the condensate until the last gasoline molecule is evicted from the tank. How long will that take? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 My training is in science ... my understanding of semantic entropy stems from coding theory and not hot air. Les' date=' I'm tempted to point out that, if you knew about applications of recent neuro[u']science[/u] to musical perception, nothing I said would be news to you, and that Shannon-style coding theory has nothing to do with semantic entropy (except in the special case where probabilities are simply known frequencies -- a case that never occurs outside the classroom). But I won't, because that would be completely off-topic! Regards, -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 How long will that take? A long time' date=' but, if I were to keep waiting, I'd eventually get there (with probability 1, though not with certainty). Does this mean the discussion is supposed to be over now? Surely you know the only reliable way to kill a thread is [i']reductio ad Hitlerium[/i]. According to Godwin's Law, it might take a long time, but, if we keep talking, we'll eventually get there (with probability 1, though not with certainty). Regards, -- Bob R P.S. I hereby resolve to stop responding to off-topic posts. In this thread, at any rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsghome Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 WOW, did I open a Pandora's box? And I was going to ask next about which strings with which saddle:-$ I am glad I joined this forum and hope to learn more about my old SJ CW treasure. Thanks for sharing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWilson Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 .. rar - I have been putting that kind of reasoning foward on this forum for some time now..... .....and some smart-alec usually comes along and says "the covers of your book are too far apart". But I for one agree wholeheartedly Nik-I can't believe you're still punishing me for saying that. I was kidding' date=' I'm a kidder (as KSD once said). I actually find your posts quite interesting and your humor entertaining. Forgive me, sir!![/color'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayla Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I very strongly suspect that you do not really want to see the definition of "semantic" as applied to music. This is standard terminology' date=' but it suggests that the "meaning" of the music is somehow involved.[/quote'] That is indeed what I thought. The adjective serves to distinguish between measures of entropy based on relative frequencies and those based on the logical or subjective probabilities used for induction. Ah, okay... If that made sense and you're still curious, check out Carnap's book Two Essays on Entropy, in which semantic entropy gets defined and applied to "gas molecules in a container"-type systems -- you can't get much less meaning-laden than gas molecules in a container! But I bet you're not curious anymore. :) You're right! But thanks for the explanation all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLiveSoundGuy Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 WOW' date=' did I open a Pandora's box?d'oh! And I was going to ask next about which strings with which saddleShhh Angel I am glad I joined this forum and hope to learn more about my old SJ CW treasure. Thanks for sharing. [/quote'] I think you answered your own question here: Found this Tusq on Ebay' date=' which claims to fit older or classic Gibsons with adjustable bridges. Is this what is being used within the forum? http://cgi.ebay.com/PQ-9016-00-TUSQ-ACOUSTIC-SADDLE-ADJ-FITS-GIBSON-NEW_W0QQitemZ370136557726QQcmdZViewItemQQptZGuitar_Accessories?hash=item370136557726&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50 As for strings, I think the standard forum answer is D'Addario EJ-17's Best of luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brians356 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Re: Gas molecule problem, this actually came up in college Differential Equations class (won't reveal which decade that was) and the answer is "forever", i.e. you can never get to zero molecules remaining since the function is asymptotic and approaches (but never reaches) zero. It becomes less math and more philosophy or religion to try to answer it, not unlike Tusq vs bone saddles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsghome Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 Installed Tusq saddle and D'Addario EJ17s on my ole '64 SJ CW. Thanks to all here for the recommendations. It never sounded or played so good!:) Now if I can ever approach the quality of the guitar to do it justice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLiveSoundGuy Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Man's two best friends. It don't get no better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsghome Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 Man's two best friends. It don't get no better. :P Rexx and I agree and thank you for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.