Ray Ross Bridges

There was a thread on these a little while ago. I believe the consensus was that it's not a good design. The conversation didn't go well.

 

Considering nobody in the previous thread had so much as seen one in the flesh let alone used one, the consensus was basically "it ain't like the old ones so why bother".
I'm of the mind that if someone has invested the time and $$$ to engineer and bring to market something new and different that they deserve at the very least the opportunity to have it reviewed properly and not by a bunch of arm chair quarterbacks looking at pictures, scratching their heads and trying their best to remember their grade 10 physics.
Be patient, someone, somewhere will buy one....someday....maybe.

 

I don't think that was the argument at all. I think a lot of knowledgeable people (not me) made thoughtful points about its design flaws that don't necessarily require an on hand sample.

 

Perception vs. reality.
I'll wait for reality thanks.

 

Amen

 

I have doubts about the design, but I am willing to hold my thoughts in abeyance. I'm not curious enough to shell out the $265 it would take to acquire one to try.

 

Announcing The Ray Ross™ Saddle-Less Bass Bridge

Pg 10 is my favorite

"I will also state, i never went to college, barely graduated highschool. Everything i know has been self taught. I dont know anything about fluid dynamics. I dont even know what "classical mecahnics" is.
I do know beyond a shaddow of a doubt that my bridge DOES something for the bass. My patent atty doesnt understand it, my machinist told me it wouldnt work (who is also a bassist). I went to the local college to have an engineering professor do the downforce math, because i couldnt. Whatever claim i made, i wanted it to be verifiable. He didnt get it either."

 

Looks like the price is down to $140 for a brass version. That's still $140 more than I need to spend on novelty.

 

I'm not as curious about the design statements as I am the strings. This certainly isn't a bridge for strings with a silk wrap, and I wonder about other strings as well. The end of the string at the ball wasn't really intended to be part of the vibrating length of the string. I don't know if that matters or not.

 

Good point. That messy bit of winding by the ball end.

 

You are fortunate if you can get this part for $140. By the time I get it imported into Canada, with dollar conversion, shipping and taxes it comes to about $250.

 

Did we talk about this bridge before? interesting design without any string saddles.

more info here: Ray Ross Bass Bridge

 

Just a little... Just do search for "Ray Ross"

- John

 

I originally posted in the Luthier's Corner, I'll search. Sorry for the repetition!

 

"Tone pin" Nothing raises more skepticism in me than the over use of the word tone as an adjective.

Steinberger did the straight pull thing in the '70s so I'm not so sure this is an invention. But this removes the saddle, instead you get an inch or so of string in the "tone speaking length" that is different than the rest of the string in that it has different amount and thickness of wraps and areas with no wraps. Now you have an inch or two of string that won't vibrate in the same way as the rest of the string introducing all kinds of upper harmonics and inhibiting the tone fundamental.

Where's those other threads? I guess I'll have to search....

EDIT, found it. Announcing The Ray Ross™ Saddle-Less Bass Bridge

 

It seems that Bacchus is using the Ray Ross bridges on some of its new models.

WL4RR-BKP | Deviser ｜株式会社ディバイザー｜長野県松本市のギターメーカー

 

I saw those Bacchus/Ray Ross basses the other day and almost started a thread about them. I thought differently after finding a heavily edited and problematic thread about them. For my part, I suspect the bridge is a workable design, but I do think it would be better served by strings that were designed for it.