# Bridge Pins - Difference in Tone?



## ed2000 (Feb 16, 2007)

What's the deal? Is there an improvement in tone/sound by replacing bridge pins with higher quality/better materials? I don't understand because what effect will the pins will have on tone from a stationary part of the string? Referencing to a '75 D18.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

One of the reasons people used to use brass ones was the older belief that more mass equalled more sustain & better tone.
Mostly it just made for heavier guitars.

I've never experimented with different materials--but if they don't wear out as quickly, that can help--and if they hold the strings better--that helps.


----------



## ronmac (Sep 22, 2006)

I'm a believer that everything matters, but not everything will make a perceived difference. Replacing bridge pins to change (notice I didn't say "improve") tone would be one of the last things on my list.

Newly washed cars often drive better, so there is a possibility you will receive some satisfaction if you go ahead with this.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

I think that the theory is that softer or more flexible pins (i.e. cheaper plastic pins) absorb some of the string vibration rather than transferring it to the bridge.

Edit: With respect to your guitar, it probably already has decent pins, so any difference would be marginal.


----------



## rollingdam (May 11, 2006)

I have done a lot of experimentation with bridge pins and the differences are mostly aesthetic.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

I've done considerable experimenting with bridge pins over the years. Wood is wood, the differences in wood species is purely aesthetic to my ears. I have ebony on most of my guitars because I like the look and most of them were designed and shipped with them. I can't really hear a difference between plastic and ivoroid, though the latter looks better. Brass does sound brighter to me, especially with new strings, and especially with strings that sound brighter generally. I have experimented with combining pins of differing materials and concluded that one material for a complete set sounds better.

To some degree, if there's a difference in string materials that changes tone, then it may stand to reason that anything that contacts the string, including the pins, can do the same. Whether it's appreciable, detectable even, is debatable.

The guitar may make a difference. My personal collection only involves all solid wood instruments except my Weissenborn copy. I don't know why anyone would bother experimenting with pins on laminate instruments except to improve the appearance, and for that one would need to be up close anyway.

Many years ago I had an interesting Washburn dreadnought with brass nut, saddle, and pins. That thing was loud and exceedingly bright, and would cut through the mix in a band situation very well, but it sucked as a solo guitar. The pins probably made little difference with that as the nut and saddle were brass, but material on some level if it contacts strings, can have an affect. A capo did mellow it a little, but not enough to make me keep the guitar.

But here's a thought. If the classic sound that has formed what people like in acoustic guitar tones, a D-18 with stock plastic pins for one example, is what we're after, why change anything?

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## dtsaudio (Apr 15, 2009)

I've had one experience with changing the bridge pins. Many years ago I had a Yamaha acoustic, terrific playing guitar, always stayed in tune, built like a tank. The only issue was it was a really dull sounding guitar. Changing string type and material didn't do a whole lot. I got it in my head to change the bridge pins, and made a set (I worked in a machine shop) from brass.
Brightened the guitar immensely and made it sound like a good acoustic should.
That said, I've owned several acoustics since then, and have never found the need to change the pins. For a different tone I go for different string materials instead.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Bridge pins are like headstock weights, in a way.

Numerous players have experimented with adding weight to the headstock in order to improve sustain. Here is one of the more notable examples: the Groovetubes "Fathead" https://reverb.com/item/9043-groove-tubes-fathead-1970-s-brass

The thing about such weights is that they don't just "work" on all guitars. They can provide an audible improvement to the extent that there is an existing imbalance in mass between the headstock, neck, and body...given the string gauge used. In other words, there are some fairly specific constellations of conditions that headstock mass provides a perfect solution for. But outside of that set of circumstances, it/they does/do nothing.

Same thing with bridge pins. It is easy to imagine that there are guitars where some combination of bridge density/mass, bracing, neck scale, string gauge, and neck joint (including what fret the neck joins the body at), can result in something wanting in the sustain that is "fixed" by heavier bridge pins. But the same pins add nothing of any particular value to most other guitars.

In other words an _actual_ solution, but a solution to a very very specific problem. As long as such replacement pins aren't terribly expensive, or involve risky irreversible modification to the bridge, worth experimenting with. Just don't be surprised if no difference is heard.


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

On my Taylor, I had Bob Colosi make me a bone nut, saddle and bridge pins to replace the Graphtech Tusq parts. The only thing that made a difference to my ears was the bone saddle. The guitar sounded snappier and a bit more articulate in the high end. 

As for the bridge pins, my choice was more for experimentation, but it ended up being a replacement for cosmetic reasons.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

The added mass of brass pins will affect the resonance of the top. Whether it is noticeable will depend on how responsive the top is to begin with... most factory built guitars are over-built and subtle changes are unlikely to be discernible.


----------



## oheare (Jun 18, 2012)

I bought a couple of sets of John Pearse Bronze pins a while back. I tried them in my Beneteau, and didn't like them, made the guitar to "clangy", just didn't do it for me. Those pins went into a friend's Beneteau, made the guitar better, clearer. Another friend put the other set into his old Taylor (like late '70s, maybe), and they seemed to clear up a little low-mid mud.

One guy's opinion. YMMV.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

I like to buy guitars that I like the sound of without having to change things. I went through a phase where I changed everything on guitars including bridge pins on my acoustics. Mostly I just sink in to an endless cycle of dissatisfaction. 
I changed bridge pins once on a D28 Martin to ebony or some kind of wood. I seem to remember that it made the guitar less trebly and darker sounding. I have an HD28V now and I think they come with bone bridge pins. Whatever they are I wouldn't change them or anything else. And when I get my next guitar (probably an OM28V) I'll make sure that I'm satisfied with it the way it comes.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I agree with you but, as with anything, the virtues that make one select something, once lived with for a while, can lead you to think "I _like_ that aspect, but I wish it could have juuuuussst a little more of it." As well, sometimes, one is distracted by certain qualities that stand out, leaving shortcomings in the shadows; the 5-star qualities might lead one to overlook the 2-1/2 star aspects, and over time one starts to notice those latter aspects more.

When it eventually comes to that, the idea that a simple solution might exist for them is immensely attractive.

On the other hand, I'm not the sort to buy a non-budget item, use it for a bit, and then return or sell it, if I end up not liking it as much as I thought. I know some members here go through a surprising amount of gear in a year. I'm not criticizing them for it; I just don't think the same way as them. And for people like me, "little things" like bridge pins, or roller bridges, or headstock weights, or nuts/saddles/strings of different materials, are welcome changes to make existing gear more satisfying.


----------



## JCM50 (Oct 5, 2011)

Mooh said:


> The guitar may make a difference. My personal collection only involves all solid wood instruments except my Weissenborn copy. I don't know why anyone would bother experimenting with pins on laminate instruments except to improve the appearance, and for that one would need to be up close anyway.


My acoustic has lam sides and back and I'm thinking of replacing the stock pins that appear to be plastic. I'm going to try Ebony to see whether it will improve the instrument's response. They're cheap enough to try out. 

Just wondering though, is there anything I should look for in terms of taper and diameter when selecting bridge pins?

- - - Updated - - -



mhammer said:


> And for people like me, "little things" like bridge pins, or roller bridges, or headstock weights, or nuts/saddles/strings of different materials, are welcome changes to make existing gear more satisfying.


Roller bridges? Argghghghghgh!


----------



## rollingdam (May 11, 2006)

http://www.guitarsaddles.com/products.asp




*BRIDGE PIN APPLICATIONS*​ GuitarPin Size(s) UsedNotes*Alvarez*variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below*Avalon*Size 1*Blueridge*Size 1T or 1.3T*Bourgeois*Size 4.2CNormally cut to .223" underskirt to match manufacturers pin*Breedlove *Size 1.3T*Collings after 2002*Size 4.2CNormally cut to .223" underskirt to match manufacturers pin*Collings before 2002*Size 1*Epiphone*variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below.*Fender*variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below*Gibson *Size 1T, 1.3T, or 2ANeed measurements as shown in diagram below.*Goodall*Size 1Underskirt is normally about .205" A size 1 can be fit, although sometimes a 1.3T will work fine depending on guitar*Guild*variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below*Huss & Dalton*Size 1.3TOccasionally I'll find a size 1T on these, but not all that often.*Ibanez*variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below*Kronbauer*Size 1*Larrivee*Size 1You can also use a size 1T*Martin after 1994*Size 2A*Will *require some degree of fitting, particularly on newer models. Pins stick up from factory... so do mine.*Martin before 1994*Size 1On ANY old Martin, it's best to check first.. many of these guitars have been modified over the years*Maton*Size 1.3T*Morgan*Size 1*Olson*Size 1Underskirt is normally about .205" A size 1 can be fit, although sometimes a 1.3 will work fine depending on guitar*Santa Cruz*Size 1*Seagull*Size 1T or 1.3TNewer models work better with the size 1T. Size 1.3T otherwise*Tacoma*Size 1TSame as a size 1, but with the string slot cut through the skirt*Takamine *variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below*Taylor*Size 1You can also use a size 1T*Washburn *variousNeed measurements as shown in diagram below


----------



## oheare (Jun 18, 2012)

rollingdam said:


> http://www.guitarsaddles.com/products.asp
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks! I've kind of wondered about that.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

JCM50 said:


> Roller bridges? Argghghghghgh!


Sorry, shouldn't have mingled solutions for Bigsbys in a thread on acoustics. My bad.


----------

