Get your popcorn ready - sound checking different bridges

[Tavy]

Four different bridges on a Blue Ocean F4, in order:

1) Brekke with Coombe style saddle.
2) Regular stock Gibson-adjustable style.
3) Red Henry style solid maple with 11 holes.
4) Brekke with solid saddle.

All recorded in one evening, record and swap, record and swap, replace broken strings, record and swap etc

bridge tests - celtic.mp3

bridge tests - low register.mp3

bridge tests - high register.mp3

[soliver]

This sounds interesting but I can't get any of the mp3's to work. They Just download to my computer and show a page of script.

[Bad Monkey]

worked for me.
interesting...

[HonketyHank]

Worked on my Windows PC, but not on my iPad.

Overall, FWIW, my impressions in one word or phrase:
1. Resonant
2. Bright
3. Brighter and resonant
4. Thin

The problem for me was that I tended to measure one setup against the immediate predecessor. So #1 is a fuzzy benchmark for all, even as its sound is more or less forgotten when I start hearing #3 or #4.

And of course, the oval-holiness of the mandolin makes a difference. If I had that mandolin, I would prefer #3.

[Tavy]

This sounds interesting but I can't get any of the mp3's to work. They Just download to my computer and show a page of script.

Hmmm, same here when using Firefox. If you save the file to disk and then play it's fine, but trying open directly in windows media player (or whatever) results in gobbledegook. Looks like an issue with the way the site is configured (MP3 Mime type)?

[gtani7]

That's really interesting (and nice tremolo, too, that's one of my mandolin bottlenecks). Are they always recordeed in same order? I just listened straight out of my laptop with audio technical headphones, i'll try to listen later with a better DAC.

There's three main variables at work, i think: tone/harmonic structure, ADSR envelope, and intonation. I think the bridges will have inherently different intonation when you play up the neck.

Also what is the chain of pick/strings/preamp/mike? I have 3 large diaphgram condensor mikes, 1 SDC, a mixer and a dedicated preamp and depending on what combination, the tracks sound completey different

[dschonbrun]

Thank you for providing the samples. Great to hear how much of a difference the bridge can make in the results.

I'd love to see more makers experimenting with bridge design, feel like there is a lot of opportunity here.

[Jim Garber]

I got the files to open in Quicktime on my Mac and I was able to play them.

What is a Blue Ocean F4? Who made that? Is this one you made, John?

[Tavy]

Answering questions in no particular order:

* No, not one I made, and I got the name wrong it should be "deep ocean" which is almost as obscure, I posted some images and a more "recorded" recording in this thread: http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...-Deep-Ocean-F4 The website for the builder seems to no longer exist, I suspect it's either a one off, or at least one of very few.
* Yes the 3 clips are in the same order each time.
* All use the same signal chain, I did each bridge right after the other in one go to try and keep things as similar as possible between bridges (the mp3's are edited down versions of those takes so you get one bridge after another in short clips rather than different clips for each bridge. Pick was a primetone pointy triangle thingy, strings were GHS Bobby Osborn set, mic was an Octava MK519 large diaphram into a Scarlette 2i2 interface.
* Intonation should be roughly the same for each bridge - that said, in order to do everything in one sitting I did have to swap them around fairly quickly without completely optimising setup for each one.
* At least in theory I have enough samples from each one to be able to plot response curves for each bridge.... if I can be bothered

For my own subjective views:

* #1 and #4 sound much the same to me - they're both variations on the Brekke bridge so they should really do so.
* #2 sounded a bit muted compared to the others, but perfectly acceptable.
* #3 was the real wild card: much brighter than the others, not to my taste, but I can see how it would really cut through in a session.

[Fretbear]

I didn't listen but in my experience a bridge has to "settle" and settle into the top of an instrument for a few days and the bridge itself be played-in under tension to really assess what kind of subtle characteristics it might have over another kind. JMHO

[bbcee]

I had found a page in the Wayback Machine listing instrument prices & a bit about the company from 2007, but I can't seem to locate it now. Anyway, that was the last year anything appeared, so I guess the builder moved on in one sense or another ...

[Jess L.]

... record and swap, replace broken strings, record and swap etc...

String-changes, eh... new string(s) can sound different for the first few days. But presumably you anticipated that possibility and put on all new strings just before starting the recording, so that any that got replaced due to breakage were the same 'age' as the others. Right? Will assume so.

For purposes of this post I will also assume that "all other things were equal" (bridge height, bridge more-or-less fitted to the top, playing style & mood, mic distance, how the instrument was held, whether picking was nearer or further from the bridge, etc etc).

So... observations... mine seem to be sort of opposite of some of the other posts...

After some selective volume adjustments in Audacity, to compensate for Bridge #4's extra loudness on two of the tracks (which was completely throwing off my perception when trying to decide which bridge I liked better), here are my impressions:

1. "Celtic" track:
   
   • Bridge #1. 'rings', good, nice sustain, nice high-frequency overtones
   • Bridge #2. thin
   • Bridge #3. strident/harsh
   • Bridge #4. punchy (maybe would do well in acoustic-only jams?) but not much sustain.
   
   
2. "Low register" track:
   
   • Bridge #1. metallic
   • Bridge #2. harsh/metallic
   • Bridge #3. mellow/good
   • Bridge #4. WRONG CLIP, duplicate of end part of "high register".
   
   
3. "High register" track:
   
   • Bridge #1. ok. Seems to really come to life in some of the highest notes, which have intriguing overtones that I like.
   • Bridge #2. harsh
   • Bridge #3. meh
   • Bridge #4. ok I guess, similar to this track's Bridge #1, but this one is louder and the highest notes don't seem as responsive.
   
   

So, which bridge would I choose?

If the playing situation is such that a mic or other amplification can be used to level the playing field with the other (probably louder) instruments, then I'd prefer Bridge #1 because, to my ears anyway, it sounds better more of the time (in 2 out of the 3 tracks). *After* one compensates for the volume difference, that is. IMO.

But, I would suppose that for large acoustic-only situations where mics or pickups etc are not an option, I'd use Bridge #4. Because at least going by these audio clips, it's louder and would increase the likelihood of being heard over the other instruments.

IMHO, I can't see much use at all for Bridge #2, it consistently sounds worse when compared to the other bridges.

Oddly, the only time I thought Bridge #3 actually sounded better than the others, was in the "low register" mp3.

Addenda blah blah blah:

Of course, tonal preferences and how people hear stuff is affected by at least three things:

- Degree of hearing loss. Despite being old I still have good high-frequency hearing, which in some ways is more of a curse than a blessing.

- The type of speakers or earphones used when listening to stuff. Been using office-supply-store $14 cheapie headphones the last few years, probably made mostly for voice stuff or something, but they're super lightweight and much more comfortable than the large bulky Sony studio monitor headphones I used to have and are arguably better than $5 ear-buds that so many other people use. Once in a while I do use ear-buds but only rarely, and hey they aren't $5 ones, they're $9 ones, so, that's like almos' twice as good.

- Musical genre preferences. I like sustain, instruments that 'ring' a lot, for the stuff I like to play that's a good match. Maybe not so good for bluegrass or something though?

[Billy Packard]

With respect to all the above...

I would add that my Weber Fern which was modified by Bruce Weber, ( he re-graduated the top and back ) came stock with a Brekke bridge. Usually I change strings one corse at a time but once I took them all off. At that time I saw what the Brekke actually was--a big, heavy, solid hunk of brass, with a slight ebony cover over the brass. This was the saddle which sat on an ebony foot.

I changed out the bridge with a Siminoff Loar copy and what a huge increase in everything -- tone, volume, refrain, etc. This mandolin has a dynamic range very similar to the Gilchrist A3 I own.

Billy

[peter.coombe]

Billy, your bridge is not the same as the Brekke bridge under test. The original Brekke bridge which is what I use is solid Ebony with no brass at all. This thread has been very interesting. Just the saddle modification is only half the modification I do to the Brekke so you are not getting the whole story. For me #1 and #4 sound similar with #1 slightly more resonant. #2 sounds brighter and less resonant but still ok, #3 very bright and thin, didn't like it at all. Pretty much my experience from trying out various bridge designs.

[fscotte]

How can you be sure any differences aren't related to variance in bridge to top fit? Even sighting the fit isn't good enough. If bridge A has more pressure on the ends of the feet than bridge B, then audible differences may be inherent.

[HonketyHank]

It is interesting to see that while my relative ranking of the four bridges is somewhat similar to many of the above posts', my conclusions are different. I had to reread the posts and then a light bulb came on with the mention of possible hearing loss.
1. It was known when I was very young that my high frequency hearing was deficient.
2. I worked for quite a few years in environments that now would be labelled "Hearing Protection Required" with no earplugs (a real man doesn't wear earplugs, he just grimaces).
3. I am old.
4. Hearing would not be the only thing that has decrepitated on me.

No wonder I find good deals on sweet-sounding mandolins - everybody else hates them.

[Tavy]

It is interesting to see that while my relative ranking of the four bridges is somewhat similar to many of the above posts', my conclusions are different. I had to reread the posts and then a light bulb came on with the mention of possible hearing loss.
1. It was known when I was very young that my high frequency hearing was deficient.
2. I worked for quite a few years in environments that now would be labelled "Hearing Protection Required" with no earplugs (a real man doesn't wear earplugs, he just grimaces).
3. I am old.
4. Hearing would not be the only thing that has decrepitated on me.

No wonder I find good deals on sweet-sounding mandolins - everybody else hates them.

LOL, I'm reminded of a recent music event I played at - played "Over the rainbow" finishing with a flourish on the high D (10th fret e string) - then afterwards an elderly gentleman leaned across to me and said: "that was very nice, but when you played those high notes I could hear nothing at all". Which rather put me in my place!