One of these times I'll try to get around to trying one - I have absolute confidence in advertising copywriters to make something sound great on paper. But until
I hear one... for example (from Schaller):
If the strings are in a common carrier, then each of the individual vibrations is subject to the physical influence of the other vibrating strings in the group, thus compromising their harmonious response. This has undesirable crosstalk effects - the acoustic energy between the strings is nullified and/or, alternately, strengthened.
This is the basis for many, many claims and several innovations designed to fix it - expensive innovations - Hannes, Toone, 2Tek etc. - yet I have never, ever seen any physical proof that the above claim is TRUE. And it would be easy to generate that proof, tone range and sustain are measurable qualities. In the absence of evidence, I can just as "definitively" state the opposite, that the "conversation" among the string's vibrations results in enhanced aural coupling* and reinforcement of the boodly-doodlesnitz. Blah blah blah. But then again:
A further improvement over conventional designs is the larger contact surface over which the vibrations are carried from the bridge to the body. Depending on the design, the coupling with conventional bridges is via tiny stud screws or knife edge tabs only. Therefore, these types of small transfer surfaces are also known as “micro-coupling”.
Now THAT makes sense to me; in fact the only time I would use a single-unit bridge that mounts on two posts only, like the PRS hardtail, would be if it was compensatable**
without the two little hex screws engaged. Depending on a surface area of maybe half a millimeter combined to carry the whole load seems like goofy engineering -
and, of course, I have absolutely no proof either! :laughing3:
But I'm
ME, and so is my money. :cool01:
*(did NOT say "oral coupling", you gutterbrane.)
**(ah spelzo goot nevn my imaginary wrdz z'rite!)
