Buc McMaster Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 My little CJ165 came with a TUSQ saddle, in spite of what Fuller's told me when I made the swap. After wanging on the poor little thing for a week or so I removed this saddle and installed a FWI saddle leftover from a previous Gibson and immediately noticed a darker, smoother tone......much better! This past weekend I removed the UST pickup system from the guitar - I just wanted it out of there. Don't play out anymore; unnecessary hardware......g'bye. This made the FWI saddle to low......w-a-y too low.....so I dug out the original TUSQ saddle. Gawd what an awful tone from this thing! Thin and glassy sounding.....terrible. Why oh why does Gibson use this as original equipment?!? Anyway, I have placed an order with Mr Colosi for a new saddle in EI this time, still a natural material. Bob says EI has fewer overtones than his other materials, a feature I desire in my guitar. We shall see........... Bottom line, TUSQ kinda sucks as a saddle material for my taste in tone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 About 10 million thanks for that post. I have an '07 Rosewood with UST and TUSQ. I've thought about taking both out and replacing with bone. I'll stick my neck out say I'm not impressed with the tone or volume of this guitar. It just doesn't do the name justice. Maybe the combination of TUSQ saddle and UST is killing it. I need to order some bone blanks, maybe I'll order an extra one for the CJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 string mystix Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 I guess my Cj-165 is uncommon as I am very happy with the tone,volume and overall sound. When I had the guitar set-up, I asked my luthier about replacing the bridge pins which are also Tusq...and eventually the saddle and nut... and he said if it sounds good you may not want to change anything just yet---play it for a little while and see. Well, it has been a few months and I am still in love everytime I play it--which is daily. I guess curiosity might eventually get the better of me but for now I think she sounds beautiful -as is... Either I am in the minority and feel that the bone/ivory vs. tusq debate is overrated OR I am in for a really NICE surprise if and when I upgrade to nicer saddle/bridge pins/nut combo.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 Well, Buc has done an A-B comparison and I'm on the verge of doing one, so you'll have something to work from. I'm still skeptical about the whole bridge pin debate, but I am a firm believer that if the saddle is mushy, the sound will suffer. I don't go chasing rainbows; if a guitar sounds good I don't try to 'improve' it just for the sake of improving, but I have some guitars (non-Gibson) that have icky soft saddles and the tone is iffy... on those, I will pursue better saddles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 I wish Therm was still on the forum, I'm sure he could have explained it scientifically in one or two pages in a way we all could understand....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryp58 Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 All I can say about it is from my own experience. I, too, replaced the saddles in both my Gibsons with Mr. Colosi's bone saddles. IMMEDIATE results! My True Vintage SJ had a bone saddle but I replaced it with a compensated bone saddle. It really let the guitar ring when playing up around the 10th-14th frets. Just sayin'!:- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkharmony Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 ....so I dug out the original TUSQ saddle. Gawd what an awful tone from this thing! Thin and glassy sounding.....terrible. Why oh why does Gibson use this as original equipment?!? I've no idea. They are horrible, though. I don't expect a FWI nut and saddle, and I can even live with plastic pins standard, but it's pretty sad they won't pay the couple bucks to put a bone saddle on their guitars - all of which retail for over $2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buc McMaster Posted July 7, 2010 Author Share Posted July 7, 2010 Gawd what an awful tone from this thing! I suppose I should qualify that statement with "relatively speaking". The guitar sounded good new with the TUSQ saddle, but after hearing it with FWI the difference became apparent. And quite a difference it is. FWI mellowed the tone out very nicely, very smooth sounding. I did the old drop test: on a glass topped desk, the TUSQ sounds very brittle and tinkly (?) while the FWI sounds more like dropping a #2 pencil on the surface. True, perhaps not a very scientific test but the difference in tonal properties is obvious. Make mine natural! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drathbun Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 I think making a Tusq saddle and plastic pins standard equipment on a good guitar makes sense. They also make a bone nut standard. The easiest things to replace are the saddle and the pins. I would rather buy a new Gibson with plastic pins, a Tusq saddle, and bone nut than have a Tusq or Micarta nut with fancy pins and a bone saddle. It seems to me they've cheap'd out in the right place. Cutting a new nut is a much more involved process requiring the services of a technician. However, most people can replace bridge pins and buy a bone nut customized for their guitar from Bob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryp58 Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 It seems to me they've cheap'd out in the right place. Cutting a new nut is a much more involved process requiring the services of a technician. However' date=' most people can replace bridge pins and buy a bone nut customized for their guitar from Bob. [/quote'] +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maninblack Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 Don't they use tusq on acoustic/electrics only? I thought it was supposed to be more balanced and reliable plugged in than natural materials. I'm down to one A/E guitar. I've pulled out the heavy UST and tusq on all the others and replaced them with bone. For acoustic purposes it is clearly superior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 Just a snapshot in time, but when I got my CJ in 2007 the standard was for bone on the acoustic only models and TUSQ on the ones with USTs. Least that's how I recall it. I think I heard someone say something like "we found that combination to work best" which can be taken with however many grains of salt you wish. I questioned (to myself) if the ones wth a pickup would be more likely to need a compensated saddle due to being electrified and the intonation needed to be tweaked a little more. Pure speculation on my part, no basis in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderful remark Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 I prefer tusq for my j45. it barks better with tusq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 ... I am a firm believer that if the saddle is mushy' date=' the sound will suffer. ....[/quote'] Tusq is hardly mushy: unlike the cheap-o plastics of the past, Tusq transmits sound energy better than bone. My theory is that many of us think bone saddles (and those made of other natural materials) sound better because they tend to damp certain frequencies but not others, resulting in a lower entropy signal. -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilliangirl Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 There was a website awhile back that did a blind comparison between Tusq and bone. It asked you to listen to the tone of a guitar clip, then the other clip, then decide which you liked best. The Tusq sounded richer to most. Yes, the site was by a Tusq distributor, but it was interesting, even tho' it was biased! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KL Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 A bone saddle can sometimes be a problem if you have an undersaddle pickup. Being a natural material it varies in density from place to place and can have air pockets inside it. This can mean there is uneven transmission of sound to an undersaddle pickup. Having said that I have a D28 with a bone saddle and an undersaddle pickup and it sounds really good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadgrateful Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 I have some Tusq bridge pins and I'm damned if I can tell the difference between them and plastic ones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 I'm happy with mine, but I like the sound of the Fishman, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 string mystix Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Well, I just realized why mine sounds so good with the Tusq.... mine happens to be a Sunburst... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 A bone saddle can sometimes be a problem if you have an undersaddle pickup. Being a natural material it varies in density from place to place and can have air pockets inside it. This can mean there is uneven transmission of sound to an undersaddle pickup. ... Is this based on your own experience? I ask because a couple of people who have installed a lot of USTs have told me that this is an urban myth: as long as you use good quality bone (as opposed to making a new saddle from the leftovers of last night's T-bone, I guess), this never actually happens. -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodehopper Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 I unfortunately can't say what did it, but my CJ-165 sounds great. ....... I recently pulled the UST Pick up out of my CJ. I had already swapped out the original saddle to bone or FWI (I can't remember now...if I had to guess I think it is FWI) and was re-set up with a small rosewood shim. The reason I can't say for sure how much this helped the sound is because during that time frame I got my Tone Rite and was giving the CJ a couple sessions with the Tone Rite at about the same time. All I know is the thing is a totally different guitar after these two changes. I am just thrilled and really love mine now. It is the guitar it always wanted to be when it grew up!! :-) If you are an owner and aren't satisfied....give your CJ a chance ....there is a diamond in there waiting to shine!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGreatOne Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 Some say it is the density of the composite material, and the ability to mold it to fit the top radius, that makes Tusq popular as standard equipment or aftermarket replacement saddle and nut material. Others say that it is the low cost associated with purchasing a pre-manufactured material of a standard quality. I don't know if the Tusq composite is or is not a great material, although I've tried a number of guitars that use it. What I do know is that bone is not very expensive, either, and every acoustic guitar I have is using bone now, because it works! Bone (I get my saddles as blanks from Stew-mac and shape 'em myself) makes a very noticeable difference in sound quality and, believe it or not, volume, when compared to plastic or wood saddles. I use bone bridge pins, as well. What do these contribute? Not sure, but I feel better when I have 'em in there. They look great cosmetically, and I don't feel a bunch of plastic in my fingers when I change strings. Plastic pins bend and lose shape, and need replacement after a while. I've been using bone pins for years and I've never had to replace one. As to overtones, some say they hate them, while others truly enjoy them. You WILL get overtones with a bone bridge on an acoustic. Depending on the guitar, and possibly its setup for intonation, the overtones will be on key or off key. Off key overtones are unpleasant... On key overtones are like having a beautiful chorus behind you. I've found overtones are most prevalent when you play high up the neck, twelfth fret or higher. Saddles are inexpensive, and unless you have a saddle that has been tightly glued into the bridge, it is relatively easy to swap them in/out. If you can waste $10 to $50, you can get a number of saddle materials and swap them out to see which you like best. I recommend checking out Stew-mac.com as they have blank and pre-shaped/cut saddles in several materials. You could do the same with nuts, but be prepared to do a little custom work, and be sure you have the tools to get a good fit. One caution on nuts: Don't believe that you can get a wider string spacing, say, changing from 1 11/16" to 1 23/32" or 1 3/4" simply by swapping the nut. The NECK and fretboard have to be wide enough to accomodate the nut, and if you sand the edges of a wider nut to fit the space allocated, you'll likely have the two E strings sitting at the very edge of the fretboard, not a good thing! It is possible to reduce string spacing by going to a smaller nut, but it will be cosmetically unnattractive, and the neck/fretboard width will not be reduced, possibly leaving too wide a space between the edges of the fretboard and the two E strings. THINK before swapping nuts to change string spacing! A final note: Before bothering to swap out saddles or nuts on a new guitar, and even before sanding the bottom of a saddle to get lower action, try adjusting the truss rod to pull the neck back. This wil lower the strings considerably and may provide the improved action you seek without need for sanding the saddle bottom. If you're very cautious, and have the right files, you can lower the string slots in the nut to bring the stings down at that location. However, it's usually better to remove the nut, lightly sand the bottom, and then put it back. One of my guitars is a 1965/66 Gretsch Chet Atkins Nashville 6120, and that guitar has what I consider a very remarkable feature; it has a false fret immediately after the nut, which allows the nut to be a string guide and spacer ONLY, while the false fret allows the strings to sit very low on the fretboard. This is a great, old idea, and should be used by more manufacturers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dove Histronic Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 This past weekend I removed the UST pickup system from the guitar - I just wanted it out of there. Don't play out anymore; unnecessary hardware......g'bye. Didn't it feel great to take that crap out ? I rip mine away like a full moon werewolf in glorious lycanthropic splendor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 I rip mine away like a full moon werewolf in glorious lycanthropic splendor... And did you perform this task with a copraphagic zygomatical contraction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.