At 10:32 am -0700 4/6/07, David Love wrote: >I canÕt imagine it would have any effect on sound. A cap less prone >to expansion and contraction and which resists string indentation >would be the primary goal for selection of material. I think that is definitely a secondary consideration. If it were not, why would makers not have continued the capping in the denser wood (normally boxwood) the whole length of the bridge? The relative density of European boxwood is from 0.95 to 1.1, that of maple 0.63, of beech 0.72. Boxwood is denser even than most of the rosewoods and has the advantage of being free of visible pores and blending in colour pretty well with the rest of the bridge. The use of boxwood rather than the hardest of woods, such as ebony and lignum vitae (say 1.2 g/cc) will make less difference than using maple rather than beech. The audible gain from using the dense capping diminishes as one goes down the scale, at which point makers mitre it off and continue with the solid bridge. I think I recall correctly when I say that Fazioli and Steinway Hamburg cap the treble with boxwood, as do, or did, countless other makers. I am pretty sure that simple experiments would show a marked difference in timbre between the bridge capped with boxwood (or ebony!) and the plain bridge. JD
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC