Official Luthiers Forum!

I'm working at restoring a little old guitar, and one of the steps is replacing the bridge. As you can see in the picture, there is no compensation at all, and I was kind of hoping to improve that. There's pretty well no room to move anything, though.

My plan is to put silk and steel strings on it, or if that fails, folk nylon. I have some minimal experience with nylon, which apparently has no need for compensation. I have no experience with silk and steel.

SO...what would you do? Are there any intonation problems with silk and steel strings on a non-compensated bridge? Would you just make the new bridge as close to the old one as you could, if it were you?

Thanks for your input.

If it were me, I'd make a slightly wider bridge & cut the saddle slot at the usual angle.
Just my 2cents worth.

For what litttle my opinion is worth, I would look at the fret calculator on Stewmac based on the twelfth fret and see what compensation they calculate. Measure all the frets to see how closely they match the calculator as a check. This is just the first piece of information you should have .

Bob

Before you go too far a few questions
1 what kind of guitar
2 year produced
3 steel or Nylon ?
4 what is the bridge plate like?
The reason I am asking is that pre 1923 most guitars were gut stringed not steel . Early steel strings didn't have the compensation angle figured yet. Stew mac fret calculator is for scale length . A compensation length is different . Scale length is a static length , compensation is trying to match the working length of the string to the scale length .
With this being an older guitar I can assume it is a smaller body than a dred . You would be finger pickin or light strumming so you would be using a high action . The higher the action the more comp length you need . If you double the 12th fret length and add .100 following the line of the 1st string , and adding another 1/8 to the 6th string , you will hit intonation pretty good with a .100 thick saddle.
If you have a gut string designed guitar , you may be over stressing the top . Here with Gut you would want to use a straight bridge.

_________________
John Hall
blues creek guitars
Authorized CF Martin Repair
Co President of ASIA
You Don't know what you don't know until you know it

Thank you for your replies, especially John.

1. Washburn, made by Lyon and Healy, a Style 23. In Martin sizes, it is closest to the 0 (ought) size.
2. 1907 or 1908, according to Gruhn's.
3. That's what I would like most to figure out. More on that below.
4. The bridge plate seems to be hard maple that runs nearly the entire width of the top. It is worn a bit, which I hope to fix with a thin brass plate like StewMac's.

When I received the guitar, it had phosphor bronze acoustic guitar strings on it. I suspect that is what broke the bridge up, and lifted part of it off the top. Whether they were lights or mediums I haven't taken the time to figure out, but they were much heavier than I would have dared to put on this little guitar. There are only three braces across the top, not parallel to each other, and that formidable bridge plate. Is that ladder bracing? Also, the braces are square in cross-section. I might have expected a profile slightly more refined, but this was not a high-end model.

The headstock is slotted, and the tuner posts are about 1/4" steel- not something I would have expected from a nylon or gut stringed guitar. The bridge as you have already seen is pinned, and those two things are what make me lean toward silk and steel strings. I'm putting this little unit back together again largely as a favor, so I didn't want to be as invasive as filling the bridge pin holes and adjusting the bridge footprint. I will if I have to, though. Suggestions?

Anyway, I will measure the scale length and make sure the compensation is within specs, and go from there.

Stew-Mac's Fret Position Calculator will give you the compensation.

I'm with Daniel on making a slightly larger bridge to allow for compensation.

I would plug the old holes and put a new small, thin maple plate on top of the existing bridge plate. It would be only slightly larger than the area covering the new and old holes. Is your guitar ladder braced? I don't know of many guitars that have that big of a bridge plate that aren't ladder braced.

_________________
Ken Franklin
clumsy yet persistent
https://www.kenfranklinukulele.com

Hi Lincoln,
From the picture the existing bridge looks repairable. If I were putting this back together as a favor for a friend I would fix the bridge and reglue it close to it's original position,maybe adding a little compensation by moving the entire bridge back a little if none was originally added.
The guitar most likely was strung in gut originally, and nylon would be a good choice today. It might hold up to silk and steel strings. Washburn guitars were fairly lightly built and didn't have reinforcement in the necks. When strung with steel the neck often bows and the top deforms. If you don't want to have an on going repair project I would avoid steel strings.

Thank you for your replies. I have been buried in work and projects, but I'm finally back to this one, at least for now. I'd like to get it done in the next few weeks or so.

Do you really think I should try to put the old bridge back on? I guess I didn't mention that when I got the guitar, the bridge was broken apart, and partly lifted off the top. It had steel strings on it, and at the time I estimated medium gauge, but I didn't measure them. I put the bridge back together after I took it off the top, mainly so that I would be able to make an acceptable copy. Even though I used fish glue to put it back together, I don't know if I would feel confident enough to string it up with a reconstructed bridge. Maybe it would be fine, I don't know.

Here is a picture of the bridge and its cracks (there was too much wood missing to make the joints invisible), as well as the new one as it is right now.

Thank you for your time.

I would do your best to maintain the original footprint, and avoid enlarging the bridge unless unavoidable to achieve fair intonation. Also though, I would likely prefer to replace the bridge rather than repairing and gluing back on the original. There's a fine line between priorities of preservation vs restoration, and more often than not the latter trumps the former in these instruments with priority of ideal function winning out over strict originality. Of course the style and size should be maintained as closely as reasonable to the original, but with the old bridge I see two issues. First is the severity of the damage, as it looks as though it's been open for some time and you mention some fair amount of missing material. Second, it likely stands room for improvement in intonation and stability.

Have you measured the nut-12th length and the length to the saddle slot where it sat with the original bridge yet? This can be key in determining how far you may have to go with staggered intonation moving back on the bass side.

Whether originally strung with gut or steel, the priorities of what to set it up for now may not be entirely limited by original intentions. I may hesitate to use standard steel strings, but if the top is holding a healthy shape and not buckling after all these years, then silk and steel may be a perfectly fine option if that is what the player would prefer. If the top seems compromised, then you may need to look in to limiting the setup to nylon, or doing some brace reinforcement / modification to handle the increased load of heavier strings. It's not a crime to do such modifications on most of these old Washburns.

I would also encourage a second look at the bridge plate. Often (not always) a bridge crack like that can be indicative of significant bridge plate damage, worthy at least of a cap or patch, possibly even replacement.

And finally, if you are making a new bridge and need to move the saddle slot back for intonation, I would not rule out the possibility of plugging the old pin holes, gluing a small cap on the bridge plate, and moving them farther to the back side of the bridge. From your photos it looks like you have a lot of room to move the pins and saddle slot back, while still maintaining the original footprint size of the old bridge. Something to consider.

Get us the 12th fret and original saddle measurements if you can, and it may be easier to help. I have fret measurements from a 1904 312 and a 1905 115 Washburn on file, but they are surprisingly notable different scale lengths.

I have an 1890's Washburn with a Durkee bridge on my bench right now (obviously originally built for gut strings) that I am actually setting up to accommodate light gauge standard steel strings, and am quite comfortable with this choice. When choosing what it can handle, it's often more a case by case judgement of just that, and not entirely dependent on what it was originally designed for.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Chances are that this isn't a steel string. More than likely a gut stringed instrument . The 1920s was the era for major changes to steel string. Even then the compensation was not figured out . The gut strings don't need to be compensated as a steel string does. I would try and suggest you keep this as original as possible

_________________
John Hall
blues creek guitars
Authorized CF Martin Repair
Co President of ASIA
You Don't know what you don't know until you know it

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Filippo- I had not thought of filling the cracks with ebony. That could still be made to work, or dark BRW dust. The bridge is, in fact, BRW; I scraped the bottom of it to clean it, and the smell was unmistakeable. For as easy as that bridge would be to replicate, I would probably rather use a new bridge, though- the old saddle slot would benefit from being much deeper.

David- I measured the distances this morning with my ruler, after securing the bridge with a couple of the old pins. I found these measurements:
Nut to 12th: 314.5mm
12th to Low E center of saddle slot: 315mm
12th to High E center of saddle slot: 314.5mm
Thus, no compensation. I will certainly look closer at the bridge plate, but I don't remember seeing any cracks when I inspected it before.

John- That is pretty much what I wanted to hear. I don't have a lot of time and money for this project, and the owner just wants it playable again, so I would rather do a little bit of work, and get it done well, than turn this into a museum piece.

Todd- I don't think I will go to those lengths to get this one up and running again, but it's good to know that it is appropriate to "make something work" without getting hung up on nostalgia. I'm sure this one will do fine with folk nylon strings. I don't know how long it was left unplayable, but the neck seems nice and straight for its age. Of course, it needs to be reset, but that's all part of the plan anyway.

Thanks, all! I'll plan to continue with my new bridge, keeping the original footprint, and make the saddle slot a little bigger everywhere. Hopefully I'll be done in time to deliver it in the middle of October!

One more question: how thick (or thin) should I make the cap for the bridge plate? It is indeed cracked, and will need some help. I have some hard maple or bubinga that I could use fairly easily.

Is a small brass plate like Stewmac sells here http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Bridges,_ta ... &xsr=15682

a good repair here? For that matter, is it a good repair at all?