From: Martyn Hodgson <[email protected]>
   To: Martin Shepherd <[email protected]>
   Sent: Friday, 1 August 2014, 10:40
   Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Lute Bridge vs Guitar Bridge Functioning
   Dear Martin,
   Thanks for this.  I mentioned string slide in the context of modern
   guitar bridges with a straight top to the saddle (ie no notches).
   The notches on the nut of a lute (and modern guitar) avoid the problem
   of such slide (provided they're not made too wide of course). As you'll
   know, citterns (like some modern guitars) do generally have a 'zero'
   fret just before the nut but since the maximum amplitude of the pluck
   is at closer to the bridge end the displacement (slide) at the nut is
   minimal.
   regards
   Martyn
     __________________________________________________________________

   From: Martin Shepherd <[email protected]>
   To: Martyn Hodgson <[email protected]>
   Sent: Friday, 1 August 2014, 8:11
   Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Lute Bridge vs Guitar Bridge Functioning
   Dear Martyn,
   Thanks for this clear explanation.  It seems there must be a tradeoff
   between bridge height and mass, in the sense that a higher bridge would
   presumably increase the volume of sound but the greater mass would
   decrease it.
   I've often wondered about the issue of bridge flexibility, entertaining
   suspicions that a bridge which is too stiff may have a damping effect,
   but this is only intuitive.
   I'm interested that you raise the issue of string slide - it occurs to
   me that this can't happen at the nut on a lute because of the extreme
   angle of the pegbox, but could happen on baroque guitar/vihuela nuts
   and
   theorbo lower nuts?
   Best wishes,
   Martin
   On 01/08/2014 08:29, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
   >    In fact both lute and guitar bridges function in the same way. In
   >    short, a horizontal force (imposed by the string) is momentarily
   >    increased when the string is displaced (plucked); this in turn
   >    increases the turning moment of the bridge (ie force x height of
   string
   >    above belly at take-off point) which in turn causes the belly to
   >    vibrate with mostly a wave action (tho' some vertical pumping
   action
   >    too) and thus amplifying the sound by varying the air pressure
   within
   >    the soundbox. Whether the vibrating string leads from a loop
   (lute) or
   >    from over a saddle (later guitars) is immaterial - it is the
   height of
   >    the string at take-off which is relevant. Vibration patterns have,
   in
   >    fact, been studied: eg the Galpin Society Journal (Hellwig I
   recall)
   >    which contains relevant papers.
   >    Differences in timbre between instruments may well be due to many
   other
   >    factors rather than the way the physics of the bridge works,
   including:
   >    mass of bridge (size and density), surface area of base of bridge,
   >    stiffness of bridge, barring, internal shape of soundbox and its
   >    volume, etc.
   >    An illustrative example: many years ago I made a 5 course guitar
   after
   >    Sellas and fitted an ebony bridge (thinking the original had one).
   The
   >    sound was quiet and muffled (tho' with considerable sustain). I
   had a
   >    rethink and after further investigation decided to remove it and
   fit a
   >    fruitwood (actually pear) black stained bridge to precisely the
   same
   >    design: the resulting sound was considerably freer and increased
   the
   >    output ie volume. In fact the much greater mass of the ebony
   bridge was
   >    acting as a considerable dampener requiring more of the
   vibrational
   >    energy of the string to set it in motion than that of the
   fruitwood
   >    bridge which had a mass less than half that of the ebony. On the
   other
   >    hand, the ebony bridge's greater mass meant that it had more
   inertia
   >    and thus continued to oscillate for longer than the fruitwood
   bridge -
   >    thus giving the greater (if much quieter) sustain.
   >    MH
   >    PS Incidentally, drilling the string holes low down on a modern
   guitar
   >    bridge does not increase the string tension/force and hence the
   turning
   >    moment of the string at the bridge (and it could not be otherwise,
   >    since for a given string the pitch is simply a function of
   transverse
   >    force/string tension) but does increase the resultant vector
   >    downbearing on the saddle which avoids excessive frictional string
   >    slide (and hence loss of energy ie output) across the saddle. The
   >    discrete loop take-off point used on lutes and early guitars
   avoids
   >    this problem.
   >
   __________________________________________________________________
   >
   >

   --


To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Reply via email to