mavrothis
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1674
Registered: 6-5-2003
Location: NJ/NYC
Member Is Offline
Mood: big band envy
|
|
Bridge grooves for treble strings
Hi oud makers and repairers!
I changed strings tonight on one of my ouds, and remembered to take some pictures of a repair Haig Manoukian did to its bridge.
I came to him a while ago with a very common problem: the holes in the bridge for my treble strings had elongated over time and had effectively raised
the action on the treble strings. This not only made playing higher notes on these strings more difficult, but also made them louder and bitier than
I wanted them to be. So, my instrument seemed out of balance, with a very powerful 1st course not blending so well with the others.
Haig filled in the old holes and drilled new ones (for the trebles only), and actually placed them slightly lower than the other holes in the bridge.
This feels very comfortable actually, and I don't notice as I play that the treble strings sit a little lower than the wound strings, though it is
visible.
But, the most interesting thing I think is that he made grooves in the front of the bridge, just for the treble strings, where they can sit once the
oud is strung and tuned. It is amazing how the strings do not budge from this low position on their own. Typically, once an oud is tuned, the
trebles tend to slide up and out, and you can only push them back down so far.
So, the point of this post is to encourage the luthiers here to explore this idea and perhaps incorporate it into brand new instruments, and thus
avoiding what seems to be the almost inevitable filling and redrilling of treble string holes down the road.
Thanks guys,
mavrothi
PS - Once the oud is strung up, the grooves are not visible b/c they are filled/covered by the string windings. 
|
|
|
Ararat66
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1025
Registered: 11-14-2005
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: mellow yellow
|
|
Hello Mav
That's really interesting - I have noticed this too and it may be why my trebles are a little stiff - I hadn't thought of this at all, and I suppose
it is more pronounced on the treble strings as they are essentially sharper. What is the action of your top two treble strings now at the neck joint
(nearly said 12th fret)? In fact what is the action of your other four strings come to think of it?
Luthier tricks and magic is the stuff of legend
Cheers
Leon
|
|
|
mavrothis
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1674
Registered: 6-5-2003
Location: NJ/NYC
Member Is Offline
Mood: big band envy
|
|
He Leon,
The action at the neck joint (aka 7th fret) is 2.9-3.0 mm.
Isn't that interesting? Even though the treble strings sit lower at the bridge, they are all about equal at the neck joint. The nut plays a roll
here too, but still, it's interesting.
My playing style and the style of this oud (based on the Manol design) make this action very comfortable for me. I've also been tuning down lately,
so it is even more comfortable.
Thanks Leon,
mavrothi
|
|
|
Ararat66
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1025
Registered: 11-14-2005
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: mellow yellow
|
|
Hi Mav
Just resurecting this thread - out of interest, what is the height of the underside of your strings from the soundboard, it may be helpful to me.
Cheers
Leon
|
|
|
mavrothis
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1674
Registered: 6-5-2003
Location: NJ/NYC
Member Is Offline
Mood: big band envy
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Ararat66  | Hi Mav
Just resurecting this thread - out of interest, what is the height of the underside of your strings from the soundboard, it may be helpful to me.
Cheers
Leon |
Hi Leon,
The string height is approximately 7 to 8 mm from the sound board.
Mavrothi
|
|
|
Ararat66
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1025
Registered: 11-14-2005
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: mellow yellow
|
|
Cheers Mav
I'll see how it turns out.
Leon
|
|
|
mavrothis
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1674
Registered: 6-5-2003
Location: NJ/NYC
Member Is Offline
Mood: big band envy
|
|
You may want to try using a file used for the nut grooves. That will help make a nicer groove.
Hope it goes well.
|
|
|
jdowning
Oud Junkie
Posts: 3485
Registered: 8-2-2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
From a lute maker's perspective the design of the bridge seems to be excessively 'top heavy' - the amount of material left above the string holes
making it pretty well impossible to tie the overhand loop of the strings close to the front face of the bridge.
Rather than filing grooves in an effort to reduce the angle of the overhand loop, a better solution might be to remove redundant material from the top
of the bridge? This would also have a potential benefit in reducing the overall weight of the bridge? See the attached sketch.
The bridges of surviving lutes are low in overall height with the string holes drilled close to the top of the bridge. Sometimes an 'overhang' is cut
in the front face to allow the strings to be pulled precisely to the front edge of the bridge. (there is also usually an overhang cut in the rear of
the bridge to facilitate tying of the strings in close contact with the bridge surfaces - so minimising vibration losses between string and bridge.
The string holes in lute bridges are drilled closer ( in height) to the sound board on the treble side than on the bass side. This was originally
necessary to provide additional string clearance due to the thickness of the gut basses but is still a useful feature with modern overspun basses in
order to minimise string clearances over the fingerboard - the overspun basses having a greater amplitude of vibration than the treble strings.
Originally ouds were strung with gut or silk so most likely once had bridge designs similar to those found on the surviving lutes. A modern 'top
heavy' design of bridge would certainly have made the effective tying of the large diameter gut basses something of a challenge!
Minimising bridge weight was certainly regarded as desirable in earlier times. The 14th C writer Ibn al-Tahhan al-Musiqi states (Farmer translation)
"As for the bridge, it should not be made of ivory, ebony, gold, or any precious thing, because it makes the sound of the oud dull" Modern luthiers
beware!
|
|
|
mavrothis
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1674
Registered: 6-5-2003
Location: NJ/NYC
Member Is Offline
Mood: big band envy
|
|
Hi there,
I see your point, but this height allows for action adjustments as the weather/seasons change, which is helpful.
Also, I think the trebles would still end up eating through the wood over time without the grooves, so you would be in the same situation as
before.
Adding grooves doesn't harm anything. Perhaps a compromise can be found by slightly lowering the height of the bridge while including the grooves for
the trebles to keep them in place?
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
