Maple mandolin bridges

[Red Henry]

Maple mandolin bridges are still catching on. Dozens of people have made their own and I’ve sold almost 700 bridges myself, and the response from customers has been excellent. Over the last 7 or 8 years I’ve gone through a few different models of the bridges, and I’m considering making another change.

For the last five years or so, my standard bridge has been an 11-hole model, which seemed to give the best overall response– combination of tone and volume– on the majority of mandolins. I decided on this design, in maple, after trying 30 or so designs in about 25 different woods. And as with all these bridges, on most mandolins they yield characteristic bell-like treble, excellent sustain, and solid midrange and lows. (See the first pic.)

But lately I’ve been thinking about some winged bridges I made at first. They often gave the richest and bassiest tone, deeply desired by many bluegrass mandolin pickers because some mandolins could use a bit more low end. Winged bridges also give more sweetness and sustain than other designs. Their volume, however, though usually greater than with a conventional bridge, was a few percent less than with 11-hole bridges.

Now I’ve found that a slightly-modified version of the winged bridges will give both (1) the rich tone many bluegrass players want and (2) almost as much volume as an 11-hole bridge. I have made several of these bridges, and really like the sound. This would be a mandolin bridge specifically for Bluegrass (see the second pic).

–so if there is some demand for it, I may produce this modified winged design for use specifically on bluegrass mandolins. How about it, bluegrass players? Is enhancing your mandolin’s low end as important for you as it is for others? I may put these new winged bridges into production. Let me know.

Red
www.murphymethod.com/maplebridge.html
Experiments in bridge designs and woods, by myself and many others:
www.murphymethod.com/redbridge.html

[dunwell]

Howdy Red,

Interesting modification. This is very similar to the design that I ended up using (see my discussion at http://dunwellguitar.com/, Click Luthier Pages, click Mandolin Solid Bridge Project). I see that you have moved the central holes that are linked so that they are moved down in-line with the ones slotted to the edge. It also looks like all your central holes are smaller now. I do like the nice woody bass side with these. I also made several with shedula and they were very good and had great volume and good note separation similar to the maple but sweeter and more mellow on the bass side without losing the upper register. One of the problems I've had with this design is that once it is under the string pressure the feet tend to compress the outside slot a good bit and let the ends of the feet "wing-up" away from the top. Simply changing string gauge can completely mess up the bridge fit. What width are you making these along the line of the feet and holes? Perhaps I'm just making them to thin.

Laters,
Alan D.

[Red Henry]

...One of the problems I've had with this design is that once it is under the string pressure the feet tend to compress the outside slot a good bit and let the ends of the feet "wing-up" away from the top... What width are you making these along the line of the feet and holes? .

My mandolin bridges are usually 5/16" to 3/8" thick at the base, because bridges thicker than that seem to lose sound. (Mandola, mandocello, and guitar bridges work fine when considerably thicker than that at the base.)

Another factor is the foot-length, or rather, the length of the bottom cut-out between the feet. While with a 6-hole or 11-hole bridge I like to make the feet quite short-- it seems that feet 1" to 1 1/8" long give the most response-- on a winged bridge I might make the feet 1 3/8" long or more, so that the area under each wing-root doesn't act as a 'hinge" and let the foot-ends lift.

Enhancing the instrument's arch while fitting the bridge (usually with a 2"-wide piece of card-stock under the sandpaper) also helps the foot-fit by concentrating the downward-pressure toward the tips of the bridge when under string tension.

Red

[dunwell]

Thanks Red, looks like we are on the same track for thickness. I think mine are a bit too long in the foot then, which is not at all like being long in the tooth. I'll have to measure to be sure. Also I was earlier on making the hole for slotted ends a bit too large, I find that if I make it smaller than 1/4", I can't remember the #drill off hand, that the sound was much more clarified and the ends didn't lift as much. I'm working on an arch top bouzouki and plan to use this type of bridge there as well, I'll try your new design when I get to that point. Thanks again for sharing your knowledge on these!

Alan D.

[8ch(pl)]

I fit mine under string tension by putting a layer of epoxy resin mix on the bottom side of the bridge. Wax paper between the top and the bridge keeps the epoxy off the top. I bring the strings up to pitch.

Red, are you saying that the radius should be increased. I have thought that even the thickness of the sandpaper makes an inaccurate fit. I have used sandpaper on the top to get it close, then gone for the epoxy to fit it dead on.

[8ch(pl)]

Sorry to post again, the last bridge that I fitted on my Samick A was only about 1/4 in thick. I went that route to try for a bit more volume.

[Lefty Luthier]

I fit mine under string tension by putting a layer of epoxy resin mix on the bottom side of the bridge. Wax paper between the top and the bridge keeps the epoxy off the top. I bring the strings up to pitch.

Red, are you saying that the radius should be increased. I have thought that even the thickness of the sandpaper makes an inaccurate fit. I have used sandpaper on the top to get it close, then gone for the epoxy to fit it dead on.

Instead of wax paper, try aluminum foil and leave it attached. It couples with the finish far better than bare epoxy and won't scratch.