Wow! I like it! Jason, from notableguitars, threw in a bone saddle for me to try on my new L-03R. I was going to wait until my new strings arrived, but I couldn't wait. So I slackened the strings and pulled the pins and ball ends out, took the Tusq saddle out and measured it, and then sanded the bone saddle down to size. I can't believe the difference. The L-03 was starting to grow on me, and I started to really appreciate all the areas in which it out-shined my Silver Creek. But there was something missing that the Silver Creek had, and it was this balance and sweetness, which I just figured must have something to do with the smaller size (OM) and the Engleman spruce top (and better strings maybe? :rolleye: ). But the bone saddle fixed that. With the Tusq, the low end was just a little too dominant. And the mids and highs played alone had amazing clarity, but were slightly sterile and didn't really evoke much emotion. The bone saddle has really balanced out the strings and added a pleasant sweetness. I know some people have said that they preferred the Tusq after trying the bone, but maybe it's just guitar (and string) specific? I was beginning to think these strings sucked, but maybe they're not that bad after all. Anyway, I did expect to hear a difference but I didn't expect it to be so positive. :smile:
Glad to hear that you are loving your new Larrivée.
I'm confused a bit though. Did you change both the Saddle and the Nut or just the saddle.
Your description of removing the pins and sanding the bone down to size, sounds like saddle work at the bridge end of the strings.
The nut is the slotted string guide at the end of the neck just before the tuners. Did you change that also?
I get those two mixed up all the time...
BTW Jason is a gem to work with, isnt he..
Oh "crum"......no wonder you're confused.....I meant saddle........what a dumbass :rolleye:
Geez.....I said "bone nut" 4 times too :humour: I could see screwing up once, but 4 times? :rolleye: I hadn't even had my first beer yet either. How embarraskin. Thank goodness for the edit feature. It's not like I'm new to this either. I've done my own setups on my Strats for 3 years. I even have a set of NUT files. :rolleye:
I DO know the difference......
1) saddle
2) nut
[attachment deleted by admin]
Thank god he put up a pic of those kind of nuts... :winkin:
Good on ya, mate. Your really havin' some fun with the new git. Thanks for the update...might have to try the same on the D. But if you think it'll rob the bass response (the reason I got the RW), then maybe not.
Quote from: KY MOOSE on February 10, 2009, 10:26:22 PM
Good on ya, mate. Your really havin' some fun with the new git. Thanks for the update...might have to try the same on the D. But if you think it'll rob the bass response (the reason I got the RW), then maybe not.
Don't worry about losing bass on your RW dread with bone. I did a FWI in mine, I think it blends the chorus better thru the mids and trebs, maybe a bit cleaner on the low end but certainly no loss for me. Besides, it's a reversible change if you don't care for it. Great entertainment, give one a go.
Yeah, it does soften the bass, which I do miss occasionally on certain tunes, but overall the improvement to the string to string balance and sweetness is worth it. But actually, the bass was a bit boomy before too. Of course, that comparison was done with the stock Cleartone strings. Today I got my new D'Addario EJ16 lights, and they do exhibit the same balance and softer bass (but a bit brighter than the Cleartones), but I wonder how the D'Addarios would have worked with the Tusq. I'll have to try that next time.
Btw,Daysailer...The great picture shows you "leading",but did you "win"? :rolleye:
I think the bone improves the fullness of the guitar and the Tusq is one that sounds thin. I tried my original Tusq saddle in my OM-03MT the other day and it was very thin sounding especially on the unwound strings. I don't think you should be losing anything with the bone, and if you are you might want to check the fit.
Glad the bone 'saddle' is working for you..
As has been shared on other threads, experimenting with a bone saddle, different strings and picks is a relatively inexpensive way to really dial in the sound you're looking for, and it might even "temporarily" curb the GAS syndrome :wacko: The operative word however is "temporarily" :nana_guitar
~ Ray ~
Quote from: dragon1952 on February 10, 2009, 10:46:03 PM
Today I got my new D'Addario EJ16 lights, and they do exhibit the same balance and softer bass (but a bit brighter than the Cleartones)
The D'Addario's are a little bright when you first put them on, they will mellow in a day or so.
Quote from: jeremy3220 on February 10, 2009, 11:13:48 PM
I think the bone improves the fullness of the guitar and the Tusq is one that sounds thin. I tried my original Tusq saddle in my OM-03MT the other day and it was very thin sounding especially on the unwound strings. I don't think you should be losing anything with the bone, and if you are you might want to check the fit.
Well I probably should have mentioned that it isn't the best fit. It doesn't fit snugly for some reason, even though it came from Larrivee. I'll be ordering another one from Bob Colosi soon. Man, if I could improve on this any further I'd really be stoked.
I'll be ordering from Bob soon to try this out. What grit sandpaper is good for sanding down the bottom of the saddle? Should you finish with a finer grit to get it smooth?
Quote from: hadden on February 11, 2009, 09:27:29 AM
I'll be ordering from Bob soon to try this out. What grit sandpaper is good for sanding down the bottom of the saddle? Should you finish with a finer grit to get it smooth?
I would probably start with about 120 grit to remove most of the material and 220 for the last little bit. It probably won't make any difference to go higher than 220.
Thanks Jeremy.
Actually, I had just a couple pieces laying around, some 60 and 100. I found that the 100 wasn't removing much so I tried the 60. Even with the 60 it took a long time, but surprisingly it came out smooth as a baby's bottom without even having to use the 100.
Quote from: dragon1952 on February 11, 2009, 05:09:19 PM
Actually, I had just a couple pieces laying around, some 60 and 100. I found that the 100 wasn't removing much so I tried the 60. Even with the 60 it took a long time, but surprisingly it came out smooth as a baby's bottom without even having to use the 100.
Yeah, it wouldn't hurt to drop down to 80 or 60 if you need to.
I wouldn't go any lower than 80 grit but finish up with 220. Don't try to rush the job if you are doing this for the first time.
And make sure you have the sandpaper mounted to something flat like a piece of glass. I used a combination square laid sideways on the sand paper to obtain a perfect 90 degree angle.
So, I'm going to change out my Tusq for bone too. Do you have to pull out the old saddle with pliers or does it come up with finger pulls only?
Cheers
Quote from: bearsville0 on February 11, 2009, 09:52:36 PM
So, I'm going to change out my Tusq for bone too. Do you have to pull out the old saddle with pliers or does it come up with finger pulls only?
Cheers
You'll find out when you go to pull the saddle. It just depends.
I couldn't get a very good grip on mine because I had my action adjusted a little low, so I had to use a pair of pliers but it came out easily.
Thanks guys.
Yes, sometimes the saddle can be seated really tight. Use an old t-shirt scrap for lifting w/pliers so no scratches on the bridge (or saddle).
DO make sure, like Roger said, to get the bottom sanded in as perfect a 90 L as possible, so it transfers those sounds!
Quote from: naboz on February 12, 2009, 11:21:03 AM
Yes, sometimes the saddle can be seated really tight. Use an old t-shirt scrap for lifting w/pliers so no scratches on the bridge (or saddle).
DO make sure, like Roger said, to get the bottom sanded in as perfect a 90 L as possible, so it transfers those sounds!
Your new saddle does not need to be that tight. Snug is good, but if it is to tight it could split the bridge. The wood bridge will expand more with a humidiy increase then the saddle and make a tight fit even tighter.
Thanks again, now I can't wait for the strings on the guitar wear out so I order a bone and enjoy something new.
Quote from: bearsville0 on February 12, 2009, 09:02:21 PM
Thanks again, now I can't wait for the strings on the guitar wear out so I order a bone and enjoy something new.
You might want to think about changing the saddle without changing the strings so you can get a better sense of how the sound changes. Then change the strings.
Change.
I can never wait that long. I just go ahead and rip 'em off of there regardless of age :bgrin:
Actually, you can just loosen them enough to pull the bridge pins out and then a little more if you need to to get the ball ends out. Throw the new saddle in, put the ball ends and pins back in and re-tighten the strings.
Good ideas, thanks again
Quote from: jeremy3220 on February 11, 2009, 09:54:05 PM
You'll find out when you go to pull the saddle. It just depends.
Yes, I had pliers ready when I did mine, but it came out by hand. Almost a slip fit.
Quote from: dragon1952 on February 12, 2009, 10:16:26 PM
I can never wait that long. I just go ahead and rip 'em off of there regardless of age :bgrin:
Actually, you can just loosen them enough to pull the bridge pins out and then a little more if you need to to get the ball ends out. Throw the new saddle in, put the ball ends and pins back in and re-tighten the strings.
It also helps if you put a capo on first, keeps the strings from loosening up on the tuning posts.
So I went ahead and ordered a "fossilized walrus" saddle from the esteemed Mr. Colosi, took the tips provided in this thread and installed it myself. The height was the same as the Tusq that the git ( L-03 walnut) came with so I didn't have to mess with that and risk making it uneven. I sanded down the sides and fit it in and plugged the strings back into the bridge.
Wow, what a difference! Feels like I added a couple hundred bucks to the value of the guitar. The bass is much better defined and each note has a distinct "shape" if you will. It all sounds smoother and "soulful" for lack of a better word. Glad I waited this long as I had been conditioned to the Tusq sound and can hear the nuances and improvements in the FWI very clearly.
Thanks again for your tips and encouragement. :smile:
cool beans
My L-03R recently went back to a Tusq saddle from the bone that had been in there. Mine actually prefers/ sounds better with the tusq. While tone is definitely subjective, I know for sure that the intonation in the 8-11 fret range is much better with the tusq. that was actually the reason for my switch.
How much was the "fossilized walrus" saddle? They're not cheap, so you probably got what you put into it. Might not have been a couple hundred, but probably a little under (not much). They do make a difference; check out the prices for bridge pins of the same material. Say $125- $250, depending on who makes them & the quality. I'm not trying to burst your bubble, but you can mod out your git & spend alot of money. If you think the money spent justifies the end results, God bless you. Tusq is just a decent sounding material, & you get what you pay for. Some think bone sounds better, like I do, others think Tusq is better. Personal preference. Great that you feel & hear that it made that much of a difference. I can't afford fossilized walrus anything @ the prices they sell for. Don't mean to sound negative; just expressing my opinion. LOL
Jeff :guitar
Actually you can get one for around $50 shipped, which comes out to about 2 pizzas worth of coinage. If you go with regular bone, it's about half that. The bridge pins are a lot more expensive because they are a lot more material and much more craftsmanship involved, plus the inlays. But the regular bone pins are less than 2/3 the cost of the ivory. It's all relative I guess. Personally, if I spend $1000 and up for a git, I don't mind springing for $70 Gotohs and $25 (or more) for a nice bone saddle. And if the pins weren't very attractive, I would definitely spend some more to dress things up a bit. But I actually think the Larrivee pins are pretty nice looking. And when you clink them down on the table, they don't really sound like plastic. They must be a really nice plastic. But I definitely don't like the looks of the Tusq saddle. It may sound OK, but it doesn't look very classy. It kinda looks like a toy material to me.
The FWI saddle from Colosi was 49 bucks (US $) including the 6 for shipping.
Guess I was thinking more about pin prices. I'll have to try to get the f.m. saddles for my gits. Can't pass up the tonal increase for that price. Sorry if I sounded too negative. Didn't mean it that way. :smile:
Jeff :guitar
Glad to hear that you like the results. I had an L-03R that I changed the tusq saddle for bone and didn't like it. Granted it gave it more sustain, but the trebles sound thin and kinda harsh. I played it for a couple of weeks like that and I never warmed up to it, so I put the tusq saddle back in the next string change. Both my guitars now have bone nut and saddles and love them. I guess it really comes down to the particular guitar. As I said, glad it worked out well for you.
John
While we're on the subject and have decided the fossilized walrus is twice the price of regular old bone does anyone have experience with both to say that the walrus (or other more expensive materials) is a doubly superior in tone?
f
:?
Quote from: ffinke on March 16, 2009, 09:24:02 PM
While we're on the subject and have decided the fossilized walrus is twice the price of regular old bone does anyone have experience with both to say that the walrus (or other more expensive materials) is a doubly superior in tone?
f
:?
I wasn't thinking in terms of twice the price= double the superiority in tone.
I was thinking could I afford the saddle that Colosi's website described as fitting to what I want soundwise (the elephant looked interesting too but I have an ethical problem with buying those). Colosi says something about the FWI material being a lot harder and well-suited for fingerstyle. The difference of 20 bucks was worth the trial. If I wasn't so lazy I would have gotten one of cow bone and the FWI and gone back and forth, cos the money wasn't that big of a deal.
And besides, the FWI will probably last longer because of its hardness.
Quote from: ffinke on March 16, 2009, 09:24:02 PM
While we're on the subject and have decided the fossilized walrus is twice the price of regular old bone does anyone have experience with both to say that the walrus (or other more expensive materials) is a doubly superior in tone?
It's hard to fit tone into mathmatical equations. I've only had one guitar with a FWI saddle, I can't remember if there was a big difference or not.
I have a Seagull into which I had a Colisi Bone saddle installed. I also have an L03R into which I installed a Colisi FWI saddle. Both insturments were greatly improved, however I was more impressed with the FWI saddle. It is not "twice as good", but the difference was enough that I will choose FWI over bone at twice the price if avalible next time.