Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to at_leo_87)
believe it or not, but i am too dumb to get a sharp picture of the hole. My phone cant focus on objects that are close!!! Im gonna try a last time tomorrow, and then upload.
Posts: 3055
Joined: Aug. 30 2008
From: Boston, MA, U.S.A
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to at_leo_87)
i like the 12 hole conversion. is it easier to change strings? i guess. but after years of doing it the traditional way, i got used to it so it doesn't really make a difference for me in that regard. i think the traditional way looks cool but the 12 hole style is nice too. i got used to it real fast.
break angle definitely increased, no doubt about that. has the tone improved because of this? well, im not too sure because i changed a bunch of other things on my guitar at the same time so i dont know what is doing what. my guitar sounds waaaay better than before, i'll tell you that much.
i have one point of concern though. it seems like the high e is slightly more likely to slip than before. i had to triple loop it at the end. all the other strings seems nice and secure. im using d'addarios now. i didnt have this problem before with la bellas. i think the d'ads are more slippery.
Posts: 283
Joined: Jul. 10 2007
From: Leigh, Lancashire, UK
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to at_leo_87)
quote:
break angle definitely increased, no doubt about that. has the tone improved because of this? well, im not too sure because i changed a bunch of other things on my guitar at the same time so i dont know what is doing what. my guitar sounds waaaay better than before, i'll tell you that much.
I tried an interesting little experiment earlier.
I needed to re-string an classical guitar and, inspired by this thread, I wanted to see if it was worthwhile converting to a 12 hole bridge.
First I had Louis_B play the instrument, then photographed the bridge to illustrate the original string break angle
Then, using my very basic woodworking skills, I fabricated a tie-off block, knotted the original strings and re-tensioned.
The result was photographed and you can see the string break angle has increased markedly.
When played there was a noticable increase in volume, especially the trebles.
I was really surprised at the difference - I suspect luthiers won't be
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
Posts: 3055
Joined: Aug. 30 2008
From: Boston, MA, U.S.A
jeesh, gotta change the title. 12 ho... (in reply to Graham_B)
quote:
When played there was a noticable increase in volume, especially the trebles.
I was really surprised at the difference - I suspect luthiers won't be
ah-ha. so it's not in my head!
i imagine a 12 hole conversion would be difficult especially if you dont have the right tools. that's why i let a repair guy do it for me. i forgot to ask him how he did it.
anyways, if you dont feel like doing a twelve hole conversion or if you're scared you're going to mess up try making something like this.
it's based off of your idea but with three holes for each string, so you can tie it like a 12 hole bridge and forget about knots. i've had knots slip before. ouch.
woops, i numbered it wrong. string goes from bridge to hole 1, then to hole 3, around back to hole 2 then under itself between 1 and 3. wrapped twice for the g and b string, three time for the high e. and hole number 2 can be on the left side for the bass strings for a symmetrical look.
and make it thinner, like bridge saddle thin. and maybe carve out a little gap in the back so the strings will have a place to sit in and the tie off block can sit flush up against the bridge.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to Graham_B)
Hi Graham,
I'm a bit suprised at the significant increase in the the volume. I can see that the break angle over the bone has indeed increased, but the angle that the string attaches to the soundboard/bridge has effectively decreased by the same amount, I can't really see how the torque loading of the soundboard has changed so much.
Maybe the stringing without the loop erradicates some absorbtion of the vibrations so more energy is transfered?
_____________________________
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music - Angela Monet
Posts: 283
Joined: Jul. 10 2007
From: Leigh, Lancashire, UK
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to at_leo_87)
quote:
I'm a bit suprised at the significant increase in the the volume. I can see that the break angle over the bone has indeed increased, but the angle that the string attaches to the soundboard/bridge has effectively decreased by the same amount, I can't really see how the torque loading of the soundboard has changed so much.
Maybe the stringing without the loop erradicates some absorbtion of the vibrations so more energy is transfered?
I'm equally surprised at the volume effect on this particular guitar - I suspect the effect varies from guitar to guitar depending on the original break angle.
You might be correct regarding energy transfer. Maybe one of our luthier colleagues might confirm?
I'll certainly try a more refined version of the tie block - maybe using Anthony's 18 hole idea.
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to Graham_B)
Maybe there is something to what you are saying. Maybe it is what you want to hear.
Lets say for the sake of argument the break angle was improved from 25 to 30 degrees. Well the difference on the force on the saddle increase 20%. But then the tie block is also very involved in tranmitting sound to the soundboard. And that is pulling up right adjacent. Did it all wash out to equal not much of a change????
If break angle was the be and end all we would locate the tie block underneath the soundboard in a pocket. We would all be raising our action as high as possible while still be playable.
Really it is a complicated system. The saddle is necessary to get the length of string correct for tuning and intonation - and transmits sound to the soundboard. The bridge transfers sound to the soundboard and holds the string. They work together.
So what do we have, another anectodal tale of noticeable improvement? Well prove it please.
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to at_leo_87)
hehe yes. There can be alot of talking on the internet, pro and contra. Just do it yourself, get involved in it, or dont say anything ;). This is not even a field where science is done, so acting as if there was evidence speaking against, or in favor of an effect, is speculation. We are all no scientists on guitar acoustics (although luthiers would come closest to this), but we can share our experiences in what we think makes the guitar a better instrument.
RE: OK, florian, i f*cking did it, a... (in reply to at_leo_87)
Just wanted to say thanks for this thread!
I stumbled upon while on the train and decided I finally needed to gather my courage and install a golpeador on my Alhambra 3F. (I bought it on a whim in a shop in Sevilla and, for some reason, it didn't have one installed!)
Anyway, it turned out much better than I anticipated and Im very happy to have learned something in the process! Thanks again!
Printable Version
i'd like to see how he reinforced it so i can steal his idea. 
Well prove it please.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread