Two foot vs three-foot bridges on BUs

Any luthiers have a comment on the relative merits of different banjo uke bridges?

I've read two-foot bridges are better with nylon strings than the typical three-foot style.

What about materials? Mine comes with the Grover maple/ebony top (3 foot) but I've read solid maple may be better for nylon.

What about bone or graphite?

I'm also trying to find a thicker, denser bridge to give it a warmer sound. Any suggestions for a good source?

Mine is 5/8" and the action from frets 1-12 is great, but it has a little tinny buzz at 15, so would a taller (11/16?) bridge help that without hurting the rest of the action?

I make 4 foot bridges - one for each string. Less chance of having it deform over time that way, in my opinion.

Is the tension on a banjo uke sufficient to deform the bridge that much? I can see it with steel strings but not nylon. Maple is pretty strong.

And if four feet, why not a solid bar?

You use a solid maple bridge - have you experimented with composites like ebony/maple or other materials?

Two foot bridge ..Three..now four ???..This ones four but not the usual type.
Read about it here.
http://www.ukulelecosmos.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=21722

Nice piece. I'd buy one myself, or take a whack at carving one from the ebony... although my woodworking skills are more along the lines of fence and deck construction...

The bridge in this picture looks like a five footed, but it is actually a solid bottom and top with holes drilled through it to make it lighter. This was on a mountain banjo with nylgut strings and a groundhog hide head. It had a nice mellow sound. Sorry the picture isn't more clear, but this banjo is now with its new owner. I've always tried to make the bridges lightweight and stiff to transfer as much of the string vibration as possible to the head. This one was maple and purple heart.

Roger Siminoff covers bridges in his book The Luthier's Handbook (Chapter 5, pp. 36-43). About banjo bridges he writes, "The bridges with strings positioned directly over feet do offer a 'brighter,' 'snappier' sound with string-to-string balance. With strings positioned over the spans or 'arches,' the bridge yields a more mellow quality, but still good string-to-string balance."

I've looked at numerous bridge images and on most there is no direct foot-string correspondence or leg-string correspondence. The strings on mine, for example, are not positioned over the leg, but over an arch. They may be above a foot, but the path to that foot is not a direct one.

Been researching and reading. Here's one site with lots of options, including one bridge with the one-to-one leg setup.

This site says (emphasis added), "The reason for breaking the banjo bridge into separate feet is to allow the bridge to flex to the concave shape of the head, keeping the contact pressure even crossed the base of the bridge, the looser the head the more of a curve the bridge has to conform to. Neither the number of feet, nor the sizes of space between feet openings in the bridge base seem to affect the tone."

But that would suggest to me that the best design would have slightly radiused feet to fit the curve better. Most I see have flat feet.

The writer also notes, "...the bridge needs to be tuned to the frequencies of the strings. So the head contact under the deepest lowest strings of the bridge base needs to be the widest, and under the highest-strings the base needs to be very narrow."

Which makes sense to me. But that would mean making my own, since I'm unlikely to find something commercial with those specs.

This site has a PDF template for making your own mandolin bridge, but a design I'm not familiar with. Might work, with some modification, for a banjo uke...

ichadwick said:

But that would suggest to me that the best design would have slightly radiused feet to fit the curve better.

Click to expand...

I sand a slight radius like that... I also lean the bridge back a little so that the angle of the strings on both sides is roughly equal.

Ian,

I always remove the three-foot bridges and replace with a two. In my experience refurbishing banjo ukes over the years, the sound from a two foot bridge is crisper and the smaller the feet, the punchier the sound. And no- the string tension of a nylon strung banjo uke is not enough to warp or break the two foot bridge; I've got one from the 20's that never been replaced - it's about 85 years old and works fine. The two legs are the same width, by the way.

I also lean the bridge back slightly so that the angle of the strings is roughly equal on both sides. And yes, I suppose that the feet are slightly 'radiused' after sanding. BTW, I always start with a 1/2" bridge; it's easier to sand down to where I want the bridge starting with 1/2"; most of my bridges, depending on the instrument, are between 5/16s" and 7/16s" to get the low action I prefer. Getting three-foot bridges down to that height often removes the feet alltogether, which hasn't been very stable. Another example of the two footers working better.

I picked up some small bits of oak to try my hand at making a bridge. Just waiting to clear out the basement from the winter's collection of stored goods so I can get at the workbench. Found some bits of parquet flooring that should work - about the right height, solid oak. Also bought a bit of oak trim at a local hardware store I can try to work into a bridge. No maple though...

I have made at least 200 bridges for banjo ukes and have tried almost everything. All the different approaches can change the sound of the banjo uke, but it is only one of dozens of factors in the instrument's sound. That being said, almost every banjo uke bridge I have every made is hard, straight grain maple with two feet. 1/8-1/4 inch thick at its base. I have made a few ebony, rosewood and walnut bridges that are great too.

I have to admit that when I first read the subject I thought, "Two and three foot bridges? Just how big are the heads on these things? They would have to be ENORMOUS!"

bbycrts said:

I have to admit that when I first read the subject I thought, "Two and three foot bridges? Just how big are the heads on these things? They would have to be ENORMOUS!"

Click to expand...

You know, I know better and thought the same thing...