Better bridge vs. better mando?

[abalter]

I'm getting ready to buy a new lower-mid range mando (been posting questions here), such as a Kentucky KM-254 or a Loar LM-400. Kind of leaning towards the Loar.

The question is to compare one of these mandolins with a slightly less expensive one (such as a KM-161, 161) with a Cumberland bridge upgrade?

I've read some great tales about how big an improvement they made both in volume and tone. Are they really all that? Would they make a big difference on a KM-160? Would the KM-254 with a Cumberland bridge sound better than the LM-400?

Thanks in advance!

[JEStanek]

A good bridge that is well fit to the top will maximise the mandolin's potential. If the top is not carved well, then your benefits, while still present may be less than by getting a better constructed mandolin. Another way to put it, you get more benefit from a better bridge on a better built mandolin.

Jamie

[Brent Hutto]

It's like asking whether a Hyundai Sonata with every available option added on is a better car than a basic-model Accord. I personally prefer to spend limited money on good "bones" in any product and in the case of the mandolins you mentioned I'd get the better mandolin even if its bridge is supposedly sub-par.

In the case of the LM-400 there's nothing wrong with the bridge, assuming it has been carefully fitted, although the Cumberland ones are nicer still. It might be different if it were some non-ebony "mystery wood" and that was built too loosely to hold its position. But the bridges on "The Loar" mandolins are quite adequate.

Plus you can always add a $100 bridge upgrade to a better instrument. You can go back and turn your cheaper mandolin with an upmarket bridge into a better mandolin with an upmarket bridge six months down the road. Also, add-ons and putative upgrades may not return any additional money when you resell the instrument. Or maybe I should have said "if"...

[Dave Weiss]

While this site is a wealth of information, some of this information may be misinterpreted by us novices. A new bridge may make your mandolin sound a little better. I put a Cumberland bridge on a KM172 and quite frankly couldn't hear a bit of difference, but I was now the proud owner of a KM172 with a Cumberland bridge (kinda like the Emporers new clothes). At best the changes you can make, bridges, armrests and even strings will only make subtle differences in the way your mandolin sounds. Get a mandolin that sounds right in the first place 'cuz there's little you can do to change it.

Dave

[Rick Cadger]

I, on the other hand, changed the stock rosewood bridge on my KM-172 for an ebony one and it made a noticeable difference. That said, I suspect that was largely due to the fact that I took the time to fit the replacement tight to the top. The factory one was not fitted too well.

If it were me making the decision I'm pretty sure that I'd go for the LM-400.

[Brent Hutto]

Better yet, get an LM-400 and make sure someone fits the stikin' bridge to the top. Now we're talking.

It's like on the guitar forums when someone swears their new buffalo horn bridge pins improved the sound of the guitar immensely. Of course while they were changing the bridge pins they also took the 8-month-old 80/20 strings off and put on some brand-new phosphor bronze ones and had the guy level up their frets to get rid of that buzz it had in first position. Oh and they had a new nut made because the slots were binding and the action was too high. But man those new bridge pins make a world of difference!

[Fretbear]

Would they make a big difference on a KM-160? Would the KM-254 with a Cumberland bridge sound better than the LM-400?
Good questions; too bad that without having them in hand, there are no answers to them.
The only thing that could be said is that if a particular mandolin has a properly fitted CA bridge (or equivalent) and you still don't like how it sounds, then you need to keep looking at other mandolins, or practice some more.

[Steve Ostrander]

While I am a big fan of Kentucky, without hearing either, I too would opt for the Loar.

Not only do you have to buy the CA bridge, you have to pay someone who knows what they are doing to fit it to the top. I would rather invest that money in a better instrument. You can always upgrade the bridge later.

[abalter]

Sounds like (1) more people guiding me to the Loar, and (2) making sure whatever mando is really well set-up is the most important thing.

Well done folks!

[Schlegel]

If you get the better mandolin, a new bridge later is cheap. And it's less hassle than changing mandolins.

[Rick Cadger]

^ Truth.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Jamie got it spot on. A good,well fitted bridge is always beneficial.However,the underlying quality of the instrument plays it's part.You can't make a really poor instrument sound 'good'. You'll make it sound 'as good as it can sound'. The two Mandolins that you name,the Loar or the Kentucky might benefit quite a bit,but which ever you buy,make sure that you check the bridge fitment 'as it comes'. If the bridge doesn't seem particularly well fitted to the top,you might re-fit it & check the change in how the instrument sounds then. If there's an improvement,then i'd say that a CA bridge would possibly be of further benefit still,
Ivan

[Bertram Henze]

The bridge is the one crucial part that transfers sound from the strings to the top, so the best mandolin is nothing with a bad bridge.

But to change that bridge with the objective of better tone or higher volume requires knowledge of exactly why a given replacement is supposed to be better than the original and if that applies for the mandolin in question. The tricky part is how the bridge couples with the mandolin top:

- the lower surface of the bridge must fit exactly with the surface of the top; it must not be possible to slip paper underneath it anywhere, but
- bridges differ in shape and amount of their footprint, i.e. where they touch the top. Vibrations of the top will not be distributed evenly across it, but there are areas with more vibration and quiet areas without. A bridge will have a better throughput if it couples with the active areas - if only we'd know where those areas are (and what's more, their position depends on frequency).

My OM had a bridge covering a solid strip halfway across the top originally. I then read about Red Henry's experiments with bridges that stand on two single feet, like a violin's. I placed two single short shims under my bridge and was amazed by the improvement in volume. Later, I had a luthier make me another bridge with two single feet and the good effect remained.

To make a long story unbearably boring: without thorough measurement of mandolin top vibration it is impossible to predict if a new bridge will improve sound. All that's left to do is experimenting, either with simple temporary constructions like in my example or with a real new bridge.

[Big Joe]

The first thing is to get the best mandolin you can. Then it must be perfectly set up. If a great bridge is put on it does make a substantial difference, but not just by sticking it on. The quality of the lower cost bridges is pretty minimal. The cut and shape are not very effective and they can easily rob the instrument of its opportunity for maximal output. When the bridge is shaped and fit for the best output of that particular instrument it makes a world of difference. There is a lot of work in getting a bridge to peform its best for a particular instrument.

We like to use the CA bridge because we know how it is built, and how it performs when fit properly to an instrument. It is made from high quality materials and it starts with a reasonable shape so it needs less work to get just right than many of the others. Steve has worked very hard with us over the years to produce as close to a perfect bridge as is possible. His bridges are used on many of the most sought after mandolins made today. Many of those luthiers may not advertise they use the CA product, but many of them do.

The factory bridge on the pac rim models are one place they can save money. They look like a real bridge to the untrained eye, and they would seem to be relatively well fit, but if you know what to look for you will immediately see the hardware is very cheap and the wood is barely acceptable. These bridges can be retrofitted to be more functional, but it takes a LOT more work to get them right than to start with a good bridge of higher quality to begin with. You can easily pay more for the labor to fix a poor bridge than just putting on a good one to begin with. Every dollar spent in production results in several dollars in the final retail price. The one place they can save is on the hardware. On the Loar models the woods are great, they are nicely built, and they are finished very well... especially for any instrument in that price point. The tuners are not expensive, but function well. The place they can save is the remainder of the hardware. Eliminate a pickguard and save money. Use cheap bridges and tailpieces and save money. That allows them to hit the price point they are looking for. Do the best setup you can in a matter of minutes, but they don't have the money to spend on doing a perfect setup and still hit the price point they are trying to achieve.

With a good basic instrument, and The Loar mandolins are that, then applying a really good setup and a really good bridge fixed to make that particular mandolin its best, can make that instrument perform MUCH better than it did before. It is less expensive for the end user to buy that mandolin, and then have the work properly done for that instrument than to buy the instrument already done. Most factories are not capable of doing that quality of work on the instrument if they wanted and it would raise the final price to a much higher level than the way it is currently done. I certainly don't want my instruments set up in a generic factory set up. My instruments play incredibly well and sound incredible. This is because I take the time and have the knowledge and experience to get the best from them.

Again, the first money goes to get the best instrument you can. However, save enough to get the instrument to peform at is best. The two together can get you a much better instrument than just one of the above elements itself. I have seen a LOT of The Loar mandolins through our shop. In EVERY case where we replaced the bridge with a CA bridge and set the instrument up ourselves, we have seen incredible improvements. This is not only our observation, but also the observation of our customers. It is a LOT more than just sticking new parts on the instrument, but having the best materials to start with is certainly a help.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Big Joe - "This is because I take the time and have the knowledge and experience to get the best from them.". There's no substitute for that Joe & i agree with you totally on the quality of the CA bridges. I've only ever fitted one bridge to a Mandolin, & that was a CA bridge that i fitted to a Lebeda Mandolin that i once owned. I took my time,got it spot on, & it improved the sound to a very marked degree,
Ivan