Article about bridge agraffes - function, types

[RicB]

Hi again Calin, others

I just had a thought about how you might find out whether an increase in 
termination stiffness alone could account for any significant change in 
sustain and efficiency in general. You could lay a couple centerpins 
under the strings on the bridge cap tight up against the bridge pins.  
They would have to be sunk into the wood so as to not really change 
downbearing more then a hair... but you'd have your increase in 
stiffness with a minimal of mass increase. 

Just a thought.

RicB



     > I think you may be missing the point. You gave a weight of
     > 18.2 gr each for Steingraeber agraffes, of which the
     > accompanying photo shows 16 in the top treble section. The
     > agraffes weigh in at 291 gr all by themselves in that section
     > alone, which is around twice the mass load I'd typically
     > install in a conventional bridge in that section. The Stuart,
     > etc, aren't that heavy, but still add up to a significant
     > mass, which is the reason for the increased sustain, not the
     > termination quality. Having listened to sustain times before
     > and after the addition of mass to treble bridges with no
     > changes to the pinning, I can assure you that mass can rather
     > dramatically extend sustain times.

    Interesting. I can't tell how much of the improved sustain is
    because of the
    added mass and how much because of the improved termination quality
    of the
    agraffe.