Counter bearing treatment

[Richard Brekne]

Grin.... As far as the Capo Bar is concerned... this is one of those proverbial
can of worms. I am one of those who likes the logic behind arguments supporting
a soft iron thin and sharp Capo Bar. Most of what I have read aggrees that this
lowers inharmonicity by makeing the termination point behave more like a hinge
and less like a clamp. It also seems aggreed upon that this allows for bleeding
of energy through the termination point. Whether this latter is desireable or
not is another question alltogether and no doubt depends largely on other design
/ construction considerations, such as scale tension, plate internal damping
characteristics and a host of things still vague in my own learning mind.
Thirdly much (but by no means all...grin..) of what I have picked up points to
this having a suprisingly positive effect on the matter of string buzzing. Tho
this is perhaps the point I find most dissagreement on.

This kind of termination point is by no means the only successfull termination,
and I have to admit that recent months have got me looking much closer at
alternatives that inhibit string energy leakage. There are some definate
advantages here as well. Always tradeoffs... sigh...

But as to pressure bars.. counter bearings ... etc.. I hadnt thought of these in
this regard until putting this exact question to Del about my Grotrian problem.
I had hoped to get time to measure off a few things he asked for today,, but I
got the whole day there tommorrow so tommorrow it will have to be. Still some
basic rules of thumbs regarding hardness, profile, deflection angle, and
distances in this regard would be nice.

On the side... why do scaling programs not take into consideration the string
lenght from the tuning pin to the forward termination, but do take into account
the lenght behind the bridge ??

Richard Brekne
I.C.P.T.G.  N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway

Brian Trout wrote:

> Hi Richard and all counter bearing thread followers.
>
> Another question that came to mind while perusing the thread was the -shape-
> of the termination.  I'm thinking specifically of the capo bar, but it
> certainly wouldn't be limited to the capo bar.
>
> Is there an ideal shape / size of termination?  I've seen a lot of
> variations from close to a 1/2" diameter sized round over to almost a sharp
> point.  I suspect neither are correct, but what is correct?  Does an
> appropriate termination shape change throughout the scale, or get sharper or
> less sharp as you go up the scale?
>
> According to Willis Snyder, it doesn't need to be hardened steel or sharp,
> and suggested that (I thought he said) 3/16" drill bit stock would work well
> as a new capo surface.
>
> Interesting thread.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Brian Trout
> Quarryville, PA
> btrout@desupernet.net