Hipshot A-style or Ray Ross bridge or ?

[Turnaround]

True, but RR probably uses a beefed up high-tensile steel 4mm intonation screw (hopefully) instead of the typical 3mm. As long as the components are sufficiently strong and high quality, which i expect they are, and they look like they are, the 60 pound tension of a string is not large compared to the strength of the components.

Interesting assumption. it may well be true but why would you want to subject the intonation screw to this kind of bending stress regardless.

The maximum stress on the RR intonation screw will be string tension plus the force needed to overcome friction between saddle and baseplate. Despite the downforce this friction will not be huge due to having 2 large smooth flat surfaces sliding against each other.
I think it is possible the components are strong enough for this to not be a problem.

Why put all the string tension on the intonation screw? There is no string tension on the intonation screw in a conventional design. It's a compromise that is needed in the RR design, but it seems to me that there are a lot of compromises we have to accept in this design. I still wonder if the stated advantages of this bridge are worth all those compromises. Perhaps they are.

 

[kodiakblair]

I voted "other". If time wasn't pressing I'd hang off until Rinaldis release their Evo - 5.

Only 4 string version available ATM and the talk is material will change to titanium.

https://www.rinaldisbass.com/bass-bridge

 

[Turnaround]

I voted "other". If time wasn't pressing I'd hang off until Rinaldis release their Evo - 5.

Only 4 string version available ATM and the talk is material will change to titanium.

https://www.rinaldisbass.com/bass-bridge

Yikes that's expensive! To get one into the USA it will cost you $338 with shipping (in Canada $447). And the 4-string version is "Calibarated for each string: 45-65-85-105". Not sure what that means if you want to use other gauges. Not sure if you would call this one "saddle-less" like the RR bridge. It looks like cross between the Babicz and the RayRoss.

 

[funkinbottom]

I love my Hipshot A bridges. I use the aluminum (chrome) Light, easy string change, plus an extra milometer or so of side adjust to fine tune your spacing. I also have a B style that i like. No side adjustment and more vintage type saddles but has the quick load slots for easy string change.

 

[ixlramp]

To my eye, the screws look like 4mm (metric M4), they look thicker than the typical M3 intonation screw.
M4 was used for the headless tuners on Hohner Steinberger copies.

why would you want to subject the intonation screw to this kind of bending stress regardless.

Because the RR design seems to be simple and perhaps one of the simplest design for a saddleless bridge, and if the bending stress is not a problem considering the strength of the screw then there is no problem, it is worth using a simpler design.
I agree the design requires a very strong screw. Maybe a M5 screw would be better, i cannot judge, M4 may be fine. It would look more satisfying and 'overbuilt' to me with M5s.

Why put all the string tension on the intonation screw? There is no string tension on the intonation screw in a conventional design. It's a compromise that is needed in the RR design

All the string tension has to be on the intonation screw, there is no way to avoid this on a saddleless bridge.
It is not a problem, as headless tuners manage string tension fine with M4 screws.

 

[Turnaround]

To my eye, the screws look like 4mm (metric M4), they look thicker than the typical M3 intonation screw.
M4 was used for the headless tuners on Hohner Steinberger copies.

Because the RR design seems to be simple and perhaps one of the simplest design for a saddleless bridge, and if the bending stress is not a problem considering the strength of the screw then there is no problem, it is worth using a simpler design.
I agree the design requires a very strong screw. Maybe a M5 screw would be better, i cannot judge, M4 may be fine. It would look more satisfying and 'overbuilt' to me with M5s.

All the string tension has to be on the intonation screw, there is no way to avoid this on a saddleless bridge.
It is not a problem, as headless tuners manage string tension fine with M4 screws.

Similar to this I suspect. Looks to me like the string tension in this carried by the threads on the tubes. It's guesswork though since there is nothing I found on the site that explains how to use this bridge.

https://www.rinaldisbass.com/bass-bridge

 

[kodiakblair]

Yikes that's expensive!

Hugely expensive in Europe too

I was following the development on a UK thread so will ask the question regarding gauges, I imagine it might just be a case of changing the tips.

 

[Matt Liebenau]

@Rinaldis is on here too. Usually in the LC. Definitely beautiful hardware.

 

[Rinaldis]

Similar to this I suspect. Looks to me like the string tension in this carried by the threads on the tubes. It's guesswork though since there is nothing I found on the site that explains how to use this bridge.

https://www.rinaldisbass.com/bass-bridge

Hi , Sorry but I didn‘t Updated my webpage,I‘m actually on holyday...but you can Check out the Video on FB how the Bridge work.....

 

[JimmyM]

the nerds working for the string manufacturers are not particularly concerned:

Announcing The Ray Ross™ Saddle-Less Bass Bridge

And the wave form data and frequency analysis show no reason for concern:

Announcing The Ray Ross™ Saddle-Less Bass Bridge

Granted, I haven’t read all of the online posts and reviews. Maybe I am missing the post by the string manufacturer’s rep saying that their data indicate some sort of fundamental design flaw.

The only thing I'd argue is whether the increased sustain is a good thing or not. I don't actively seek it, I know that.

 

[rzamites]

I bought a RayRoss for Gracie, but only because it looked cool AF. Time will tell on how it performs. That said, I voted for carrots.

 

[micguy]

The Ray Ross is a neat yet flawed design the ball-end of the string was not designed to be part of the active vibrating length. I cannot imagine how this would NOT have a negative effect on the tone / overtones and intonation.

They are certainly going against the now fairly common practice of running less winding over the bridge on the lower strings.

But my knock is not that - with the Ross bridge, you don't have any string behind the bridge "saddle", and that means you're going to end up with more at the other end - you'll be winding the fat part of the string around the tuner on your E or B string on a lot of basses. I have basses where I have string through accommodation to deal with this issue on the lowest string; their design makes that situation worse.

 

[MattZilla]

I strongly prefer just about anything over that goofy RR adjustable tailpiece, and rather like Hipshot’s more than most other bridges.

Even if I didn’t have a distaste for Raymond’s claiming unverifiable physics attributes (verifiably incorrect, in fact) or his behaving like a goof when his unnecessary uneducated marketing claims get called out... the design is unfriendly to palm-muting and other near-bridge techniques.

People buy whole cars for over $30k just because they look different, not even cool, just different. “It sorta looks cool if you keep it clean” is the only marketing spiel he should have on this and if you think it looks cool or just value “looks different” as much as many people (looking at you, 2013-2020 Lexus owners) then you absolutely should buy it and use it. It costs less than $30k and looks different.

If I were building mostly from scratch but buying a bridge, a Warwick bridge & tailpiece off eBay is what I’d go with for any singlescale build. Adjustable, lockable, durable, quick string changeable, doesn’t poke your hand when palm muting. The only thing nicer is a single piece of hardstock (ebony, aluminum, whatever my heart/ears desire) shaped for a particular model and gauge-set of strings plus a matching quick change tailpiece.

If it’s a quick flat mount you want, the A is at the top of my list and it’s because it is as near as one can get in a flatmount to the Warwick which is the current pinnacle of my lived-with bridges. An Alembic unit might be XY.Z% better. I don’t know.

I don’t know that everybody does this with the Hipshot: I have each saddle using only one height screw as support so the saddle effectively has a triangulated locking against the opposite sidewall. It’s a slight bit more thoughtfulness & time than a classic Fender plate to set height (up with both screw, drop the “inside” screw, tension string, witness, de-tension, up with both screws, drop... etc.) but it’s doable, stable, and makes for no-issue playing. A great upgrade from a bent plate and barrels.

 

[Rinaldis]

This shows how the bass bridge works.. still the prototype!

 

[Rinaldis]

Hugely expensive in Europe too

I was following the development on a UK thread so will ask the question regarding gauges, I imagine it might just be a case of changing the tips.

Hi , yes my Bass Bridge is not cheap, but it’s not manufactured in Asia !
Each bridge is manufactured & inspected one by one on a high end CNC.
Only aeronautical raw material used & soon a titanium version will be implemented...

 

[Rinaldis]

Attached a few drawings of the final 4 String version

 

[Gorn]

Hipshot makes good stuff.

 

[Rinaldis]

Hipshot makes good stuff.

Yes you name it , I’m using Hipshot on the mostly basses I’ve build since 1996!

 

[ixlramp]

People buy whole cars for over $30k just because they look different, not even cool, just different. “It sorta looks cool if you keep it clean” is the only marketing spiel he should have on this and if you think it looks cool or just value “looks different” as much as many people (looking at you, 2013-2020 Lexus owners) then you absolutely should buy it and use it.

It is wrong to portray the RR bridge as being nothing other than 'looking cool and different'.
It is (obviously) a genuinely and radically different structure for a bridge and way to support one end of a string, which i suspect has significant advantages.
For what it does, the design is quite minimal and simple, not over-engineered.
There is far more reason to be suspicious of some 'high mass' bridges.

Unfortunately, RR's marketing style, which often contains extreme exaggerations, untruths and obnoxious arrogant hyperbole, is making them look bad and making some people mistrust them. This is unfortunate because they actually have a very innovative and valid product so actually have no need for 'snake oil marketing'.

 

[JimmyM]

It is wrong to portray the RR bridge as being nothing other than 'looking cool and different'.
It is (obviously) a genuinely and radically different structure for a bridge and way to support one end of a string, which i suspect has significant advantages.
For what it does, the design is quite minimal and simple, not over-engineered.
There is far more reason to be suspicious of some 'high mass' bridges.

Unfortunately, RR's marketing style, which often contains extreme exaggerations, untruths and obnoxious arrogant hyperbole, is making them look bad and making some people mistrust them. This is unfortunate because they actually have a very innovative and valid product so actually have no need for 'snake oil marketing'.

Ya, he gets quite testy at times when people question the mechanics of it. Caviar emptor. But I have no problem with his design and I have no problem with him defending it, even though he gets...um...overzealous. I do agree that high mass bridges can often suffer from gross over-engineering, and they don't do anything special that a decent bent plate bridge with threaded saddles doesn't, with the exception of more stable saddles. But that isn't enough for me, so I went and replaced every bridge I could on every bass I own with threaded saddle bent plates. Some people love the high mass, but I'd rather lose half a pound off my basses.

My only real problem with the Ross bridge is it's a solution looking for a problem that I don't think any of us had. I rarely break strings anymore, can't remember the last time I broke one for any other reason except taking them on and off too many times (oh, and that time I forgot to zip up my gig bag last year), and the tiny little extra bit of sustain you get with the Ross means nothing to me. But I do like stuff that makes things simple for the end user, unlike my Kahler 5-string fixed bridge which is a nightmare to adjust, so I can dig that aspect of the bridge. I just don't want one. My little $30 bent plates work just fine.