"Power Pins" anyone?

[Mike Kolb]

OK, so I'm always a little naturally suspicious of anything that changes the physics of the guitar as we know it.

Recently there's been a decent advertising splash in the guitar mags for "Power Pins" manufactured by Bigrock Engineering, that describe a new way to anchor strings to the bridge.  A big benefit is said to be the protection of the bridgeplate.

In one of their print ads, one benefit is touted as being "decreased string angle" at the saddle, which supposedly helps something?  Interesting that particular "benefit" is missing from the website.  http://www.f1pick.com/bridgeplate.html

Maybe they'd be an alternative to help salvage a really chewed-up bridge plate? ... then again...

I have no dog in the fight... don't own any, never seen 'em in action, nothing.  But I'm curious if anyone here on the board has used them and, if so, what the thoughts might be.   

[Ned Knepp]

Allen,

 I don't know why no one else hasn't taken you up on your offer but I can tell you why I haven't.  I have experimented with the brass bolt-in bridge pin replacements that share much with your design so, while I have not used your design, I'm not without experience with this sort of device. I accept that reducing the break angle over the bridge and changing the mass that is driven by the strings will change the feel and sound of an acoustic guitar. I just don't agree that these are desirable results. My previous experience with pins that share a lot with your design was pretty negative. I got ease of string changes and, obviously, this will protect the bridge plate but I also experienced reduced volume and clarity which left me feeling that I lost much more than I gained.  Beyond that, the issue I find most troublesome about your design is the additional leverage they will create as the strings roll the bridge forward. That's something that I can't test without leaving them on a guitar for more time than I would want to and, frankly, I believe that the potential damage this could cause on a guitar far outweighs the wear and tear of string balls on a bridge plate which is the only benefit your pins offer me. 

I'm intrigued by the pick design you have on your site. With the exception of a single custom made pick, I've never found one that didn't spin between my fingers as I play or did not break because of the designs attempt to correct for this which introduced stress points that weakened the pick. Your design appears to allow for a thicker feel while avoiding the stress points inherent in simply thickening the back half of the pick. Just a thought about the video promoting your picks, I won't pretend to know anything about advertising but I think that producing a pick that is more comfortable to hold, lowering fatigue is enough. Playing faster may be a function of comfort but I doubt if I will suddenly play faster with your pick in my hand but could see where I may play longer. 

[Allen Chance]

Let me know where, and ill send you a sample, if  you would  like. medium or heavy?

[Allen Chance]

Im interested in the pins that you used before, do you have any info on them, so i  can take a look? One thing you can do if youd like , is to take a listen to the sound samples on our site and take a look at the spectroscopic analysis .

http://www.f1pick.com/powerpintestpage.html 

and thanks for your reply.

[Peter Poyser]

 

 

 

Quote: "any info on them, so i  can take a look?"

 

 

I believe the Brass Bolts our friend Ned is referring to, may be "Acoustic Bridge Bolts."

Hollow Brass Bolts with a screwdriver slot in the top that sit well in the top of a conventional bridge, tightened in place with a nut and washer inside, (although wing nuts might be an improvement). Courtesy of Tremendous Dan Erlewine at Stew Mac.

They are really designed to enable fitment of a Bridge precisely in final placement and fully tuned up to pitch, as a last over check for all relevant parameters, prior to committing to the gluing stage, and it has to be said, that this do this job, very well indeed.

But some people have tried them out in various ways, to see how they perform, and what kind of other applications they could prove to be useful for. I think it's fair to say that generally, an overall view might be that whilst they are great at what they are designed and intended to be used for; because they have an effect on Tone making it distinctly more Trebly, they are not seen as a properly suitable solution for other problems.

 

 

We must respect, that part of the "knee jerk reaction" from "Traditionalists" that was referred to earlier, will come, certainly in this environment,  from people of Great Experience, that are Already Fully Persuaded that adding Bridge Mass is a Bad Idea, and will have a Negative Impact upon a Fine Instruments Tonality.

This last point is significant, and indeed confirmed by an appraisal of the Spectrograph Measurements. The Fine Instrument, the one most Responsive and Resonant. Demonstrates a marginal but clear and distinctly measurable shift in its Fundamental Resonant Frequencies. Or put another way, in particular, the most Noticeable Effect to a Player, will be a Slight Lessening of Bass Resonance of the Instrument.

 

 

All Musical Instruments of Quality, and even Electronic Pickups have a Fundamental Resonant Frequency.

This Basic, Elemental, Response, is a Defining  Hallmark Characteristic of its Tonality. The Factor that Colour's  every part of its Sound.

Although Spectrograph Data is interesting. Holographic Imaging and Chladini Plates would probably show the effect more distinctly.  http://www.mguitar.net/tip/594

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/guitar/patterns_engl.html

 

 

Please do not think this is meant to be in any way at all critical.

Because I am not that type of person. I would rather speak the truth with kindness, whenever possible.

I think it's good that an attempt has been made to present a scientific basis for arguing the attributes of the design in a measurable way.

However, in the light of that, I should make the point that if you go down that route, it's also the case that in these instances, an Anechoic Chamber is the proper place, to make a Recording for Precise Measurement.

With full and complete respect, not a Mid Level Recording Studio. They simply do not have the Correct Type of Microphones Necessary for this Type of Work. High Quality Recording Studio Mics, have Manufacturer Measurement Specification Graphs that frankly, are often all over the place, with older Mics often featuring massive Low End Bumps, and far newer Mic's, Bumps and Boosts in the Treble, mainly for Presence Lift.

Some, often the Best Sounding, and most Expensive  are like an outline of the Himalaya's.

I know some of the Best Microphone Designers on the Planet.

 

 

 

I.E.

These Recording Studio Mic's are Designed to give a Certain Sound.

They are By Design, made to Capture a Compelling Sound that will moves the Final Listener, Emotionally.

They are made to enhance the Tone of what they are Recording. The Flattest Mic available in the Studio alluded to, has a strong treble lift, inherent to its Design. It's a fact.

So for this type of application, you need an Anechoic Chamber to be able to Totally Isolate the Sound Source from the effect of any Reflected Acoustic Environment, Comb Filtering etc. and you need to use a Ruler Flat Scientific Microphone, to be able to make a Precise Measurement.

The Standard Industry Tool is a B&K Measurement Mic.

http://www.bksv.com/Products/transducers/acoustic/microphones/micro...

 

 

You might be interested to know that a Company I have "an interest" in, has recently been utilising the services of "The Largest Anechoic Chamber in the World."

This belongs to the US Air Force, (I have good links to the Military, Air Force and Navy Services) and is based at the edge of Edwards Air Force Base, where the Space Shuttle usually lands.

At the U.S. Governments discretion, certain Companies have been graciously able to hire these facilities for commercial purposes, at particular times when they are not otherwise needed, to enable them to Test Evolutionary New Products.

This Anechoic Chamber is so large, that a "Galaxy Transporter Aircraft" can not only fit completely inside, but there is a huge distance between the Aircraft and the sides of the Chamber. The Galaxy Transporter actually looks, strangely dwarfed, inside it.  It is truly enormous.

We have many Anechoic Chambers of our own, at various sites, most of them as you would expect are Designed to be Acoustical, but some are especially designed to isolate Electrical and Magnetic Interference, whilst others are Amazing Environmental Chambers with Wind Tunnels.  The latest one we have had built, has five different Environmental Chambers (including a Wind Tunnel) on one singular site, which is extremely handy indeed. Both Arctic and Sahara Conditions are completely reproducible. 

 

 

The salient point relevant to the thread is.

Traditional Flatpicker's, with almost obligatory Medium Gauge Strings, needed to Fully "Drive" the Resonance of the Top, would pick up on any such Shift in Resonant Frequency Immediately. 

Just shifting to Light Gauge Strings, would be to utterly devastate the Tonality of such a Player's Instrument, to their Mentality and Way of Thinking. So we must strongly appreciate. Their Ears, would easily pick up on such differences, very quickly.

It's important to understand this, and part of the reason I began my earlier post by making the point that in order to Sell this Gadget Successfully, you need to Address a Niche' Market, and Deliberately Focus upon a Particularly Well Targeted, Narrow Market Demographic.

 

 

I strongly believe.

The Type of Person that would be attracted to such a device, is someone that owns an Instrument, rather less responsive than a Good Martin Guitar of High Quality.

Someone whose Instrument Top does not require Medium Gauge Strings at least, to fully enable the Vibrations to be Strongly Transferred so as to allow it to compete with a Banjo, and perhaps an Accordion, in the same Ensemble.

The Low Suicide Rates of Acoustic Guitarists featuring in such Musical Ensembles. Harmoniously adding the verisimilitude that it is a Musical Ensemble, despite the presence of these other, well beloved Instruments, says much for the impressive hardiness of Traditional Folk Musicians. Peggy Seeger lives nearby these days, and has been equally as impressive, in her attempts to Save a Local Swimming Pool.

I am impressed by them all.

 

 

However.

The Essential Factor is.

It is Players who want an Acoustic Guitar Fingering Experience that is as close to a Typical Electric Guitar Feel as Possible, that may find your Gadget, a Strongly Useful Aid in this Quest.

Whatever Acoustic Guitar such individuals Play. It is likely to be fitted with Extra Light or Super Light Strings, so they are not genuinely going to be concerned too much, about what would be to "their" Ears, a Subtle Loss of Tone.

For such a Player, the Distinct Advantage in Playability, perhaps Enabling and Facilitating, more Extreme Electric Guitar Techniques, than have been possible and available to the Acoustic Players in the Past. Will completely outweigh any Perceived Tonal Loss, which is something they will in all probability, be Fully Compensating For Electronically, at their Pre-Amplifier or Beyond with Assistance, anyway.

 

 

To my mind.

This is the best manner in which to Target the Marketing of this Device.   

If you try to convince Traditional Acoustic Folk Musicians, I think the Energy you Apply and Inevitable Subsequent Disquisition, will prove to be Completely Counterproductive to your Aims.

 

 

Although I am a Traditionalist myself.

I believe that certain well established Traditional Designs.

Have Inherent Defects, that Companies should have Research and Developed.

I believe Continuous Improvement should be an On Going Process and by now, Many remaining Unaddressed Problems should have been Put to Bed.

This is not only the case for Acoustic Instruments but also Electric Instruments too. A Local Instrument Dealer was bemoaning Telecaster Jack Sockets to me the other day. I think I will probably give him a Specialised Tool for Replacing the Back Bracket, behind the Jack Socket Cup, as a Christmas Present.

 

 

At least one of the Long Standing Guitar Manufacturers.

But I believe all of them, either separately or together, should have Fully Researched and Developed Proper Solutions for the Remaining Inherent Weaknesses in Acoustic Guitars by Now.

There seems to be far too many New, Expensive Acoustic Instruments, demonstrating Profoundly Deep and Lamentable Problems and Requiring Very Major Repair Work, Very Early in their Life these days. far Earlier than should Reasonably be the Case.

 

 

Good for Luthiers, huh?

It's a Message about Materials.

A Message about Manufacturing Methodology.

Excellent Designs always avoid such problems in the first place.

For Good Designers and Development Engineers are like Good Butlers or Valets.

They have what I call "The Gift of Anticipation". They have the Right Solutions Already in Place.

Long before even their Master (or the Customer) is consciously aware that they Require a Particular Something.

And Good Manufacturing, will on a daily basis, incrementally remove all Variables, Weaknesses and Defects, from Production.

 

Find a Great Player.

A Versatile Performer, that can exploit every possibility.

That the New Bridge Power Pins provide in Easier Fingering and Extreme Playing Technique.

 

Demonstrate to Players, what it can do for their Playing.

You Tube is a Good Place for such Demonstration.

This is where I would Focus and Target Sales.

 

 

Good Luck with your New Product.

And a Big Thank You, for so swiftly and directly handing the understandable concerns of our inimitable Fora Friend, Dave Collins.

 

 

 

 

P

Below is a Holographic Picture of a Guitars Internal Resonance at a particular frequency.

 

[Allen Chance]

Peter,

Im totally overwhelmed by the all of this, just wanted to acknowledge and express my appreciation for all of the time and effort you put into your reply. I need a little time to absorb all of it, so i will ask you a few questions as i do my homework. My first question is what does the light color on the hologram mean, volume? Like I said thank you for your insights.

Allen 

[Ned Knepp]

Peter, 

 I suppose I may be an exception to the rule but I haven't played strings even close to medium gauge in 10 years and that guitar didn't belong to me. I've never found heavier gauge strings particularly comfortable to play and have always preferred strings in the light to extra light gauges for my guitars. I find them much more comfortable and I believe they respond better to small inputs, Being more sensitive to light input, I think they are more effected by bridge mass and break angle. Perhaps the larger mass of medium or heavy gauges of strings more easily overcome those issue with their own greater mass and the energy required drive them.

In actuality, on the classical guitar you picture, which I believe would be classified as Helmholts patterns, the strings are mounted in much the same manner as Allen's pins.  This picture is showing patterns in an instrument that is designed for the much lower tension of gut or nylon strings.The tops of these instruments are designed to be lighter than the top of a steel string guitar and I believe the patterns on an X braced, steel string guitar would differ somewhat from these patterns.

 I won't claim to be very well versed in classical guitar technique but I do understand that there are some fundamental differences in the way the guitars are designed to support the pressures of the strings and, consequentially, different in the transmission of vibrational energy sourced from the strings. The bracing of a steel string guitar must make strength orientated compromises to vibration propagation in order to support the steel strings and the pin bridge has evolved to help mitigate these changes by strongly coupling the vibration of the strings directly to the top. To this end, the break angle over the saddle of an steel string guitar, focusing more string pressure on the bridge, is a critical aspect of the process of vibration transmission to the top. Most of us have, at one time or another, come across a steel string guitar that has had the saddle shaved low with a accompanying decrease in the break angle and it is almost universally agreed that this results in a less desirable sound. It is, in fact, the reason that steel string guitars are not usually built with such low saddles in the first place. The bottom line is that the pressure exerted upon the saddle is one of the keys to good volume and tone production in a steel string acoustic. String gauge is a factor but I believe you have it backward as to the sensitivity of those gauges and,  just to say, I actually know quiet a lot of flat pickers that run lighter gauges of strings now. 

I can understand where this may not be such an issue with an electric or even an amplified acoustic since it it easy to increase volume and change tone with the twist of a knob or the tap of a toe. I can see that trading pressure on the saddle for a softer feel could be desirable in that instance. For someone like me that plays "naked", I want everything I can get from the guitar because that ALL I have.  

[Ned Knepp]

Allen,

 You are generous, thank you,  but my comments were not intended to solicit a "freebie". When I get around to it I will probably order several of them and pass them around for friends to try too. I'm curious about how you determine "medium" and "heavy". I started playing with the thinnest picks I could find and gradually progressed to much firmer choices over the years. I can't tell you if it's medium or heavy because I determine it by flex, holding the base against my second finger, the tip against my first finger and pressing with my thumb. What I like is a pick that flexes about 1/8 of an inch or so, perhaps a bit less. I also prefer to play with the shoulder instead of the tip. It just feels better that way. Is there a more professional way to determine flexibility? My experience seems to indicate that everybody making picks has a different idea of what is what.  

I'm aware of the pins Peter posted but have not tried them. I still have some of what I'm talking about in my bins so I took a (bad) picture which will, at least, allow you to see what they looks like.

I apologize for the quality of my picture, it's my phone camera. My fingers are covering up the threads which are about as long as what is showing. They came with various size holes to accommodate the different strings sizes and were easy/quick to install. The only place I've seen them since is as an optional mount for bridge doctors.  

The pins that Peter posted would be a bit more acceptable to me since they would not get into the way of my hand and wouldn't lower the break angle on the bridge. There is still the issue of added mass that would make me hesitate.  As an acoustic player, break angle and bridge mass are important to me. I want as much energy transmitted to the bridge/top of the guitar as possible and, unfortunately, lowering the break angle and/or increasing the mass seems to negatively impact that.

A good setup goes a long way toward correcting the issue of string tension that can pop up. I've also found that string choice can make a difference too. My main two players are examples of this. One is a 14 fret model Dred that feels very easy while the other is a 12th fret Dred that always feels a bit tight. I can push both of them pretty hard before they start to sound odd yet they also respond well to a soft touch. I improved the tightness of the 12th fret guitar by using a different manufacture and gauge of strings. It still feels tighter than the other but that is one of the things that I enjoy about it. I guess that what I'm saying is that I believe I understand the intention of your pins but prefer to correct the issues you address in a different way. I want to keep my sharper break angle and (possibly) stiffer feel in the interest of keeping my volume and clarity. I've done too many string changes to need an easier way to pin them but if you can come up with a quick way to get the strings wrapped around the posts properly and tuned to pitch I'm with you. ( By the way, that goes double for slotted headstock!)    

[Frank Ford]

Ned -

Thanks for posting that photo and for the reminder about the JLD bridge system thing.  We don't use them here, and I'd actually forgotten where I'd seen those brass bridge pin eliminator thingies.  I also agree with your comments about wanting downward pressure on saddle.  And I agree - not only do we believe that good contact is important for acoustic tone, but we also have lots of under-saddle pickup elements to keep happy.  Without sufficient downward force, the balance and output of those things can suffer.

[Andrew]

I know this is pretty off topic Frank, except that it may fall under the category of 'miracle bridge devices', but Id be interested in the reasons why you dont use bridge doctors. I recently tried the pin mount version and was unimpressed. Id like further insight before I write them off, or whathaveyou.

[Ian Barker]

Andrew, I think FF meant that he uses the alternative method of mounting the Bridge Doctor, by drilling and screwing through the bridge to secure the post.  An inlay dot to cover the screw is IMHO more unobtrusive than the brass screws, and that method retains original break angle.

[Allen Chance]

Ned, 

Thanks for pic of that pin, very interesting.  Do you think that the six bolts could be responsible for an increase in volume, if that actually turned out to be an effect of the power pins? As far as the picks go, my pleasure, i hand them out all the time , so im glad to do that. Medium sounds like it would be good for you. Send me an address no problem. Frank Ford got a set of the pins to test today, will be very interested in his evaluation.

Allen

[Ned Knepp]

Allen, 

I don't think the pins resulted in an increase in anything tone or volume wise.