Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Tusq vs Bone Challenge On-Line Shootout  (Read 12533 times)
danerada
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 316


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2006, 01:55:16 PM »

I JUST changed out my Tusq saddle for a Colosi bone in my D-09.  Noticeable difference, and the bone is definitely better.
It was a pain to shape the stupid thing though.

I did teh same thing with my D-09 about 7 months ago. It really did make a difference. I am very happy with it, but you are right...it was a pain to get teh shape just right.
Logged

Forum II # 8 of 10
aschroeder
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 49




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: February 23, 2006, 10:39:42 PM »

Those clips are ridiculous. A single strum to judge the difference in sound? I know that's how I test out guitars. I walk up, strum them once, and then buy them.

I have used both bone and TUSQ saddles. They do sound different, and there is no right or wrong answer. But in every case, bone always sounds better to my ears.

Bone is denser than TUSQ. One quick way to tell is by sanding them down. TUSQ sands down very quickly, but bone takes some time.
Logged

Taylor 714ce (Cedar top)
Taylor Koa T5 Custom
Larrivee D-03
Washburn Taurus T-25 Bass

Isaiah 38:20 The LORD will save me, and we will sing with stringed instruments all the days of our lives in the temple of the LORD.
Randy_R
Gold Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7408


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #22 on: February 24, 2006, 05:35:00 PM »

I'll point out that density does not necessarily equate to good sound. If it did, people would make saddles out of lead.

neither does density equate to hardness.
Logged

Randy R., Georgia, USA
Opinions available. Inquire about qty discount.
Forum Guitar III LS03 #15 ser no 108519
lleo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: March 04, 2006, 07:09:37 PM »

Picking the samples the way they are, I prefer the bone sound. It's mellower and rounder. The Tusq sounds brigher, louder and with more sustain. But! Keep in mind that the bone, just to make an example, might sounds good on a guitar and bad on another one. For example: pick a Martin and a Gibson. They sound practically the opposite: bright and loud the first, dark and softer the second. Mounting a Tusq on Martin would only increase the volume and the already high trebles. In other words it would be to multiply its characteristics. By other hand, mounting it on the Gibson, it would to upset a little its classic "in the tube" sound.
Also, alot depends on the strings. So the sample it's good but it must get picked up for what it is.
Logged

Fender Rosewood Telecaster, Fender '50 Classic Telecaster, late '800 italian classical, Larrivée L05
leftync
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 939




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: March 05, 2006, 06:33:20 PM »

sounds to me like they hit more strings on the second strum.

that said, i replaced tusq with a colosi bone saddle and i think it sounds better. like the others said, it's a big pain to do it, but it does sound better.
Logged
sigurdd48
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 168




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2006, 03:40:06 PM »

Different strokes (strums?) for different folks.

I have a new OM-03MT, came with TUSQ, ordered a colossi bone saddle to try. The guitar is new, so it might not be justified to judge tone
After running the bone for a few weeks, I thought it was starting muted (maybe this is the round tone people describe). I switched back to the TUSQ and like the brighter louder tone a bit.
Was second guessing myself, so I switched back to bone. No, it sounds nice enough but sort of like it was holding back. Switched back to Tusq.

The MT may be playing into the nature of the tone and which material transmits it better

I rekon I"ll be doing this for the next several years.
I also rekon that as the axe opens up, I will try other saddle options
Logged

'36 Epiphone Broadway
Mainland Uke
Eastman AC508M
Larrivee 00-03SP

http://www.markevansart.net/
drathbun
Gold Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1123




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: April 14, 2006, 03:51:43 AM »

I picked the Tusq (of course) but bone is definitely better in my L05.
Logged

2016 Martin 000-28vs 12 fret

2014 Taylor 814ce

2014 Godin Multiac Classical

2012 Gibson "The Golden Age 1930's" SJ200

2012 Squier Vintage Modified 70's Jazz Bass

2010 Gretsch Electromatic G5122DC

2009 Taylor GA3-12e

2004 Fender American Deluxe Stratocaster

1981 Rickenbacker 320JG

1968 Yamaha FG150 Red La
prof_stack
Gold Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1929


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #27 on: April 14, 2006, 04:38:45 AM »

Quote
I have a new OM-03MT, came with TUSQ, ordered a colossi bone saddle to try. The guitar is new, so it might not be justified to judge tone After running the bone for a few weeks, I thought it was starting muted (maybe this is the round tone people describe). I switched back to the TUSQ and like the brighter louder tone a bit. Was second guessing myself, so I switched back to bone. No, it sounds nice enough but sort of like it was holding back. Switched back to Tusq
Wow, that's about exactly what I did on my (now owned by Cybernator) L-03MT.  I kept thinking that bone must be better but my ears weren't buying it for that axe.
Logged

Play it daily for best results.
sunburststrat
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: April 16, 2006, 08:52:35 PM »

One strum is not a good way to make a comparision. espcially since they're not even at the same velocity. Sample A is clearly strummed softer and quicker. In Sample B it is blatently obvious that they dig in and take their time, that last string is lagging so far behind. The strummer may have even missed a few bass strings in sample A. Blah, sales gimics.

I agree!  That was my first impression.
Logged

Larrivee LV-03RE, Martin 000-17S
Collings 000-1A, Collings 0M-2HG
National Radiotone
Fender Amer Strat (sunburst), Ibanez AS-200
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: