Cougar Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Yes I did. 2 low E Strings at the same height with different break angles. And what's your report? Also, they're at different locations - one E string is in the A string slot. Their vibes are being injected into different points on the soundboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 . There are still too many differences between the two strings to think you've isolated the break angle. For one thing, you are comparing two different designs - one with a the pin hole right next to the saddle versus one with the pin hole significantly further from the saddle. To illustrate how important this distance/placement might be, check out Babicz Guitars - http://www.jeffbabicz.com/models-gallery . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 10, 2016 Author Share Posted November 10, 2016 And what's your report? Also, they're at different locations - one E string is in the A string slot. Their vibes are being injected into different points on the soundboard. I have already commented on my report. The difference between the E and A location certainly must be neglible, my findings remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 10, 2016 Author Share Posted November 10, 2016 . There are still too many differences between the two strings to think you've isolated the break angle. For one thing, you are comparing two different designs - one with a the pin hole right next to the saddle versus one with the pin hole significantly further from the saddle. To illustrate how important this distance/placement might be, check out Babicz Guitars - http://www.jeffbabicz.com/models-gallery . That is an extreme example of differing pin location. My findings remain. Please feel free to conduct your own tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 I have already commented on my report. The difference between the E and A location certainly must be neglible, my findings remain. About as negligible as pick attack Db meters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 10, 2016 Author Share Posted November 10, 2016 About as negligible as pick attack Db meters Nope, it is very real as I have proved and others have observed with their own guitars. I don't understand why you are naysaying this. Do you have other findings? Have you multiple guitars that you have objectively compared? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvi Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 looks to me like the extreme break angle pictured is a bit extreme ,possibly hard on a saddle?, j Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 10, 2016 Author Share Posted November 10, 2016 looks to me like the extreme break angle pictured is a bit extreme ,possibly hard on a saddle?, j I don't think it is hard on the saddle, but if that was an actual situation it could split the bridge, also a high saddle and break angle can cause forward twist of the guitars top. I have a shim under that saddle for the test, it does not necessarily represent a typical situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvi Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 agreed on bridge, and glad it was just a test ! j Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 Wouldn't a shim affect the sound ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cougar Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 When I had the 2 E strings on I could compare them directly. Again volume and tone the same. I don't understand why you are naysaying this. Well, I think it's because your conclusion is counter to all prior understanding of a guitar's break angle, along with theoretical physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 11, 2016 Author Share Posted November 11, 2016 Wouldn't a shim affect the sound ? If the hardwood shim affects the sound it did so uniformly with both high and low break angle. I did the experiment with no shim and the results were the same. My findings remain. Nice try though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 11, 2016 Author Share Posted November 11, 2016 Well, I think it's because your conclusion is counter to all prior understanding of a guitar's break angle, along with theoretical physics. Can you state exactly what this prior understanding is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhanners623 Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 I'm curious, Pete.... Why all this undue interest in string break angle? It is what it is. Most guitar players are not going to go to any great lengths to change the angle that is built into the guitar through the neck angle geometry. Except for raising or lowering the saddle a smidge, there's nothing you can do. This really doesn't seem like an issue to spend a lot of time on -- or get all defensive about when they question your contention, methods or conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 11, 2016 Author Share Posted November 11, 2016 I'm curious, Pete.... Why all this undue interest in string break angle? It is what it is. Most guitar players are not going to go to any great lengths to change the angle that is built into the guitar through the neck angle geometry. Except for raising or lowering the saddle a smidge, there's nothing you can do. This really doesn't seem like an issue to spend a lot of time on -- or get all defensive about when they question your contention, methods or conclusions. It is an important factor to consider when buying a guitar. I have no intention of ever changing them, how could you really? I get defensive when I get posts that challenge my findings without any credible evidence of their own. It is a fact this effect does exist and many guitar players know it. What surprised me and probably others is that the break angle alone does not increase volume, height from string to guitar top does. But break angle does change this picking attack effect and seems to increase the brightness a little bit. I don't call any of this "undue interest", quite the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhanners623 Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 It is an important factor to consider when buying a guitar. I have no intention of ever changing them, how could you really? I get defensive when I get posts that challenge my findings without any credible evidence of their own. It is a fact this effect does exist and many guitar players know it. What surprised me and probably others is that the break angle alone does not increase volume, height from string to guitar top does. But break angle does change this picking attack effect and seems to increase the brightness a little bit. I don't call any of this "undue interest", quite the contrary. Oh, I'd say any thread you've kept going for four pages, often through defensive and snarky posts, classifies as "undue interest".... If everyone wanted a guitar to sound like what you think a guitar should sound like, then I'd say maybe you've got a point. But everyone is different. I may pick up your guitar, strum it and conclude it still thinks it's a tree. Or you could do the same with my guitars. Until you figure out a way to readily (and dramatically) alter break angle, it's not going to be an issue for most folks. They'll either like a particular guitar's sound or they won't. There are A LOT of considerations we worry about before we get around to fretting (no pun intended) about break angle. A guitar either sounds good or it doesn't, and "good" is subjective. As much as I hate the phrase "It is what it is," it's the phrase that fits when you're talking about string break angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 12, 2016 Author Share Posted November 12, 2016 Oh, I'd say any thread you've kept going for four pages, often through defensive and snarky posts, classifies as "undue interest".... If everyone wanted a guitar to sound like what you think a guitar should sound like, then I'd say maybe you've got a point. But everyone is different. I may pick up your guitar, strum it and conclude it still thinks it's a tree. Or you could do the same with my guitars. Until you figure out a way to readily (and dramatically) alter break angle, it's not going to be an issue for most folks. They'll either like a particular guitar's sound or they won't. There are A LOT of considerations we worry about before we get around to fretting (no pun intended) about break angle. A guitar either sounds good or it doesn't, and "good" is subjective. As much as I hate the phrase "It is what it is," it's the phrase that fits when you're talking about string break angle. There is plenty of interest in the topic, just Google it. I never once mentioned changing break angle. I don't know why you and certain others are trying to rain on my parade. The facts remain and myself and others will benefit from them. One less mystery removed from the "All guitars sound different" puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhanners623 Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 There is plenty of interest in the topic, just Google it. I never once mentioned changing break angle. I don't know why you and certain others are trying to rain on my parade. The facts remain and myself and others will benefit from them. One less mystery removed from the "All guitars sound different" puzzle. If you can't change it, why worry about it? Next up: We discuss the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buc McMaster Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 One less mystery removed from the "All guitars sound different" puzzle. This is your quest? Somehow Sisyphus comes to mind........... Okay, Pete, try to keep up here. You insist, by your experiments, that raising saddle height (strings above the top) alone is responsible for increasing volume and that break angle has nothing to do with it.......but your methods, you must admit, are far short of scientific and your conclusions cannot be presented as "fact" for this reason. It may well be true that increasing saddle height increases volume, but by default you cannot increase saddle height without simultaneously increasing break angle. Since both happen together you cannot definitively conclude that it is saddle height alone causing the volume increase. The only way to confirm your findings and isolate saddle height from break angle would be to lift the entire bridge higher off the top as a unit, preserving the break angle as it is but increasing string height over the top. This would isolate saddle height from break angle and, if there was a scientifically demonstrable volume increase, then your theory becomes fact. But that's not what you have done. It may well be true that higher break angles change the feel of string attack, firm vs. loose, but this has nothing to do with your assertion that saddle height alone is responsible for volume increase. Pete we're raining on your parade, as you put it, because your experiment is not adequately controlled to give accurate results and therefore cannot be accepted as "fact". Nothing personal, Pete, but there must be much better experimental control for theories to become facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 This is your quest? Somehow Sisyphus comes to mind........... Sisyphus - sort of sounds like it should be a Rock and Roll band. And, here's another log to throw on the fire: http://www.banjohangout.org/archive/134859 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 12, 2016 Author Share Posted November 12, 2016 If you can't change it, why worry about it? Next up: We discuss the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin.... Wow, your continued posts are just so fascinating and intriguing. Worry? who's worried. Facts don't typically worry me, ignorance, hearsay and myths do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory Pete Posted November 12, 2016 Author Share Posted November 12, 2016 This is your quest? Somehow Sisyphus comes to mind........... Okay, Pete, try to keep up here. You insist, by your experiments, that raising saddle height (strings above the top) alone is responsible for increasing volume and that break angle has nothing to do with it.......but your methods, you must admit, are far short of scientific and your conclusions cannot be presented as "fact" for this reason. It may well be true that increasing saddle height increases volume, but by default you cannot increase saddle height without simultaneously increasing break angle. Since both happen together you cannot definitively conclude that it is saddle height alone causing the volume increase. The only way to confirm your findings and isolate saddle height from break angle would be to lift the entire bridge higher off the top as a unit, preserving the break angle as it is but increasing string height over the top. This would isolate saddle height from break angle and, if there was a scientifically demonstrable volume increase, then your theory becomes fact. But that's not what you have done. It may well be true that higher break angles change the feel of string attack, firm vs. loose, but this has nothing to do with your assertion that saddle height alone is responsible for volume increase. Pete we're raining on your parade, as you put it, because your experiment is not adequately controlled to give accurate results and therefore cannot be accepted as "fact". Nothing personal, Pete, but there must be much better experimental control for theories to become facts. No rain here, just facts and non assumptions. In my test I have shown that a steeper breaker angle for the same string height does not increase volume. It is posted elsewhere that string height above the guitar top is what changes volume, I participated in those threads and without getting any clear answers nor evidence decided to do this experiment, I have been banned from my own thread there until tomorrow. How would increasing the string height without changing the break angle prove that break angle may change the volume? I believe my test clearly "demonstrates" that it does not. http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/133477-saddle-height-and-break-over-angle/page__view__findpost__p__1810693 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 Sorry Pete Bucs right , your experiment is not watertight By increasing one thing you are effecting another item in the chain I vote non conclusive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhanners623 Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 Sorry Pete Bucs right , your experiment is not watertight By increasing one thing you are effecting another item in the chain I vote non conclusive Throw in individual differences between guitars (tonewoods, bracing, bridge pin material, size of the bridge plate, saddle material, string type, etc.) and it is even more inconclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buc McMaster Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 How would increasing the string height without changing the break angle prove that break angle may change the volume? And now I am reminded of a particular Jethro Tull song.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.