Can anyone (Bryan?) comment on the benefits of through-slot saddles as opposed to well, I guess closed-slot might be what they're called. I've got a '72 Gallagher G-70 that needs a new bridge, due to a crack that just appeared one day at the bass-side of the saddle slot. I've purchased a replacement bridge from Don Gallagher, but I was wondering if modifying it to a through-slot saddle would offer any benefit.

I've got a few guesses, but they're just that, so some oppinions or even facts would be appreciated.

--Tony

TBo,

The issue of through saddles v. Drop-ins was very recently discussed by several luthiers over on the Acoustic guitar magazine Gear forum. (I recently bought a Merrill OM-28 with a through saddle so this topic really interests me.) If there is any sonic advantage to a through saddle it is a very subtle one. A couple of makers have said that the total contact of a through saddle with the bridge vs. the slightly less solid contact with the bridge of a drop-in saddle should, theoretically, give the through saddle a very slight sonic advantage. Of course, one needs to weigh that (theoretical!) sonic advantage with the very real disadvantage of not being able to easily lower or replace a through saddle. I love my Merrill, but it's very humid now where I live, and the fact that I can't stick a lower saddle in there is bothering me a little. I'm still undecuded on whether the tradeoff is really worth it.

Thanks for the info--I'll check out the AG Forum.

I may be missing something re: losing the ability for easy replacement when using a through saddle. Seems to me there would be no difference---sure you would need to dress the saddle ends on the new one, but a drop in saddle needs all the same tweaks, i.e. intonation, height, etc that a through saddle needs. Just make a couple of saddles for different conditions/set-ups. Am I missing something obvious. I don't have any experience with through saddles---that much is probably obvious.

Raising the action is another issue entirely. With a through saddle you couldn't use a shim like you can on a drop in. But I've always thought that was the lazy luthier solution anyway. Shims are great for dialing in a set-up but not as a permanent solution.

Long, through saddles are traditionally glued in, and thus don't lend themselves to quick replacement. I'm not qualified to say that they need to be glued in, but I imagine there are concerns about the bridge splitting if no glue is used. The bridge for a drop-in saddle has the wood on either side to prevent splits.

Hopefully Bryan will weigh in here with a definitive reply.

Chris Jackson

Well, the glue WOULD impede easy replacement, but nothing a well-placed blow from a ball peen hammer wouldn't fix.....

Seems like the through saddle has very little going for it beyond cosmetics and traditions. Additional info on AG Forum, pointed out by Phoenix, helpful as well.

This is no "definite" reply, just my humble opinion/preferences. Remember when reading my opinion and others that some people claim virtually nothing makes a difference (including the wood of the back and sides...), and other claim everything little thing makes a difference. I'm much more in the second camp than the first.

Long saddles:
Advantages-
1) sound bassier and fuller to me, probably due to a) being longer and distributing vibrations differently, b) being glued in. I've tested both non-glued and glued in the same guitar (same saddle, same strings, same everything, many times over) and I think glued sounds better.

2) you can sight down the bottom of the saddle to make sure it's seated. Until you've done this a few hundred times, you might be surprised at how often a tight "well-fitting" saddle doesn't touch bottom

3) they look better, IMHO.

Disadvantages:
1) harder to adjust since they should be glued in.

2) harder to make. Big deal.

Short Saddles:

Advantages:
1) easier to adjust

2) easier to use an undersadle pickup (which I hate).

3) being less bassy and more focused, they might "cut" better.

4) the bridge is stronger w/out the thru slot.

Disadvantages:
1) can't sight down the bottom. There's ways around this- I typically bevel the edge of the bottom just a little bit to help the saddle sit better. I've seen this work on long saddles.

2) they're not glued in. Take a look at yours and see if there's a gap on the backside, right between the A and G strings....

It's not a HUGE difference, no, and the longer the short saddle is (some are almost as long as true thru-saddles), the less the difference, if neither is glued in. Get yourself a guitar with a long saddle. Play it a bunch and get really familar with it. A/B it against another guitar with which you're really familar with. Have someone else listen from out in front. With fairly fresh strings on the test guitar, remove the long saddle, fill in the ends of the slot with ebony pieces (glued in, of course) and insert short saddle. If you have the parts ready to go, you can do this pretty quickly. Reinstall with same strings. Recompare with your control guitar. I bet you'll hear a difference.

Bryan Kimsey
http://www.bryankimsey.com

Collings slot thru saddles are not glued in.