FlyingScotsman - Posted - 06/07/2016:  17:02:10

Is a small amount of bridge 'sag' such a bad thing?

It strikes me that, as your index finger curls in to strike the lower strings, it 'digs deeper' in relation to your thumb so it strikes me that it might be a positive thing that the middle strings are fractionally lower. It's not like the arched fiddle bridge where the strings need to be at different heights in order that your bow can reach one at a time.

banjopickingman - Posted - 06/07/2016:  18:59:29

quote:

---

Originally posted by That Banjo Glossary Guy

 

Which makes me wonder, Just curious: Has a radiused bridge top ever been patented? It's also a very common design, based on many different approaches (how it's done, the radius itself, etc.). Are there any patents out there for this? If not, why not? Does Deering (or anyone) have a patent on radiused (top) bridges

---

You could call it a Frown Bridge.

lazlototh - Posted - 06/08/2016:  03:21:41

Bottom line is that if Deering is issued a patent and any of the "big" manufacturers (or small ones!) want to challenge it, it is unlikely to stand up due to pre-existing art.
The patent office usually takes the easy route and might allow the patent until someone challenges it.
They can then rescind it.

It is a stupid way to do things, but this is the way our patent office works.
In fairness to them, they are overwhelmed with people trying to patent things that should not be patented.

Old Hickory - Posted - 06/08/2016:  07:31:30

quote:

---

Originally posted by That Banjo Glossary Guy

Which makes me wonder, Just curious: Has a radiused bridge top ever been patented?  . . . My guess is, no. Either because no one claimed it, or because it's just too common a thing.

---

I'd say not only common, but recognized by instrument makers as necessary on an instrument with a radiused fingerboard.  I can't imagine that anyone who ever made a radiused top banjo bridge thought for a second that they'd invented it.

Rawhide Creek - Posted - 06/08/2016:  08:37:49

I confess to being somewhat surprised that someone could be in the banjo-building business to such an extent for 40 years and be unaware of what's happening in the banjo world outside their factory doors.

Joel Hooks - Posted - 06/08/2016:  08:46:50

quote:

---

Originally posted by Old Hickory

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by That Banjo Glossary Guy

Which makes me wonder, Just curious: Has a radiused bridge top ever been patented?  . . . My guess is, no. Either because no one claimed it, or because it's just too common a thing.

---

I'd say not only common, but recognized by instrument makers as necessary on an instrument with a radiused fingerboard.  I can't imagine that anyone who ever made a radiused top banjo bridge thought for a second that they'd invented it.

---

Esp. since they date back to the 1850s!

 

 

 

jhko - Posted - 07/07/2016:  11:31:31

OK, I'll chime in here. I'm a successful professional businessman with nearly 40 years experience, so I know a little about this stuff.

First off, banjo bridges are a TINY TINY LITTLE MARKET. Sorry guys, there is no real money in banjo bridges. This whole thing is a tempest in a teacup that honestly is not worth everyone's time (though it IS fun to read. And here I am hypocritically wasting more time on it :-)).

Secondly, Janet and Greg Deering are doing their best to run a small business (and Deering IS a small business) in a very difficult and not very profitable niche- banjos. They are doing ALL OF US a GREAT SERVICE by dedicating their lives to producing instruments that we (and they) love. They certainly are not doing it to get rich or famous. There are a heck of a lot better businesses for that purpose. We need to give them a break.

If you took the time to talk with Janet and Greg (I have), you'd know that they are really trying their best to do the right things, build a good company, be of service to their customers, and promote the love of banjos. Like anyone, they are human and make mistakes. Maybe they didn't do enough research on curved bridges. But they are not out to get anyone, or steal fame or glory from anyone else, or put anyone else out of business. They are great people- caring, honest, generous, thoughtful and generally wonderful. We are VERY LUCKY to have them in our community. We should be supporting them, not chastising them. We really don't want them to throw up their hands one day and say, "forget it, it's not worth it, we're outa here!" and sell off or close down the company (and yes, I've seen owners of larger businesses than Deering do just that).

So anyway, be nice to Janet and Greg. Express your opinions, but be polite and cut them some slack. They need our appreciation, and we should be grateful they are part of our community.

Banjophobic - Posted - 07/07/2016:  11:42:47

Since this banjo world IS such a small niche market, we all know much more about it and keep up with things much better than the average poerson would in large marketplaces. This is why lots of folks were a little upset by this. But we all respect Deering as a company and its nothing personal, just conversing on a forum. 

steve davis - Posted - 07/07/2016:  12:10:10

We don't need advice on how to treat people,Joe.

jhko - Posted - 07/07/2016:  12:26:33

quote:

---

Originally posted by steve davis

 

We don't need advice on how to treat people,Joe.

---

I think you mean to say we don't WANT advice on how to treat people. We certainly NEED it at times. :-). 

bluegrassbanjopicker - Posted - 07/07/2016:  13:52:19

Jhko is right on. We all need advice on how to treat people; there is NEVER a time where we don't need it. It's like saying,"I don't ever need to be corrected."

As for the Deering Smile Bridge, I might try it out. If it makes my banjo explode in the variety of tone, then hooray! If not, I'll just go back to my old Grover. 

bluegrassbanjopicker - Posted - 07/07/2016:  13:54:35

"We don't need advice on how to treat people."
Really?
Well, if that's the case, then we don't need advice on setup, right when we break a hanger bolt because we think the rim is too loose.

bluegrassbanjopicker - Posted - 07/07/2016:  14:00:47

A snide remark about not needing advice on treating people, is not going to accomplish anything profitable.
So long. I'm not chiming in on this thread again unless I really need to.

Old Hickory - Posted - 07/07/2016:  20:31:29

Joe:

It's possible to admire and be grateful to Greg and Janet Deering for their service to the banjo community while at the same time believing that Deering has no business patenting the radius bottom banjo bridge.

That banjo bridges are a small market in which no one will get rich means nothing and is not the point. The point is there are small business people -- some right here on the Hangout and in this discussion -- who have been making and selling radius bottomed bridges for years before the Deerings announced theirs. Unless the Deering patent is challenged, Deering could claim infringement and stop those makers from selling their bridges.

I'm not saying the Deerings would be bad people for doing that. It would be good and defensible business for them. I'm sure you agree.

In your 40 years of successful professional business, have you ever encountered any company that invested the time and expense to obtain a patent that it didn't intend to enforce?

jhko - Posted - 07/07/2016:  21:57:42

Ken:

Thanks for the reply. I agree with much of what you say.

I do think the size of the market has some relevance, since it shows there is little if any monetary gain behind the patent application. Hence, much less motivation on either side to enforce or challenge the patent. The truth is, it is all kind of a big waste of time, much like this thread. ;-).

In answer to your question of enforcement, yes, many, many companies obtain patents without intent to enforce. In the software industry, where I spent many years, companies would routinely build up large portfolios of patents for purely defensive purposes. The idea was, if someone tried to sue you because your software unknowingly violated some obscure patent of theirs, you could probably find a patent they violated in your portfolio, and use that to fend off their attack.

Another reason companies collected patents without enforcing them is because they seemed to have some perceived value when the the company was valued or sold. The patents implied some unique intellectual property, and sometimes would lead to a higher company valuation.

At the Father's Day Bluegrass Festival last month, Greg told me that he had no intention of suing or threatening anyone over the bridge patent. I believe him. Janet said much the same thing in this thread. Honestly, they are probably regretting the whole patent application after the strong reaction we've experienced here. I think the only real value of the patent is the marketing value, the sense of uniqueness when selling to some less informed new customer. "Patent Pending" implies a certain level of novelty, which might swing a sale.

The only other use of the patent I can think of is if some copy-cat overseas company tried to knock off Deering banjos and bridges. The patent might come in handy as legal ammunition to scare them off.

Again, all this is much 'ado about nothing. But here I am still jabbering away anyway. I guess I just like the Deerings and want to support them. But then, I like most all the other bridge and banjo makers as well.

Thanks again and Best Regards, - Joe O.

Rawhide Creek - Posted - 07/08/2016:  13:01:27

Joe, Ken--

After over 20 years in engineering, much of it in electronics design, I have to say that I've never seen an occasion where a company acquired a patent without the intention of enforcing it down the road somewhere.

Electronics, especially, is a field where people try, time and again, to patent circuits or devices that are (often clearly) "prior art".

One of the questions I got from clients with some regularity was, "Can we patent this?"  Usually the next question was, "Why not?"

I, too, appreciate the Deerings and everything they contribute to banjodom.  However, in this instance, It is my opinion that they should simply withdraw the patent application, inform the banjo community that they have done so, then sit back and enjoy the accolades.  The good will would be tremendous!

jhko - Posted - 07/08/2016:  14:39:43

Thanks for the response Russ. I just want to reiterate again that I *definitely* have seen companies with purposely unenforced patents, at least in the software industry (where patents are kinda a nightmare anyway). I must say, however, I'm kinda with you on your main point. A withdrawal of the bridge patent is probably the best move for Deering at this point.

SHBosch - Posted - 07/08/2016:  14:45:14

Just my opinion but I really doubt the Deerings have any intention of issuing cease and desist notices to small builders but they may want to stop the big guys from using "their" invention. 

banjopickingman - Posted - 07/08/2016:  15:36:45

It seems to me that seeking to patent something that you know to be someone else's invention is a disreputable way of doing business. The Deerings can no longer plead ignorance, so it becomes a matter of their personal integrity (barring a more formal challenge). 

steve davis - Posted - 07/08/2016:  15:49:40

Records of sales are pretty good protection from idea stealing.

gospelman97 - Posted - 07/08/2016:  15:58:23

quote:

---

Originally posted by SHBosch

 

Just my opinion but I really doubt the Deerings have any intention of issuing cease and desist notices to small builders but they may want to stop the big guys from using "their" invention. 

 

---

Who are the other "Big Guys"?  Recording King?  I would think everyone else is smaller than Deering?  Just curious. 

Old Hickory - Posted - 07/08/2016:  16:28:30

Joe:  We're going to have to agree to disagree.

The only patent-owning companies I ever dealt with in my advertising and marketing career patented their products or processes so that they (or others they licensed) could be the only ones offering them during the limited life of those patents. And they spent considerable amounts of money protecting their patents, including court cases.  I can't deny that you know companies that obtain patents for the sake of having them. Just saying it's not my experience.

And of course I have to take you at your word that Greg Deering said he has no intent of going after any of the people who were making radius bottom bridges long before he even thought to.  But that raises the question of why, then, patent it?  To have a piece of paper saying you invented something you didn't?

Frankly, I hope someone challenges the patent so that this whole thing can be closed.

I have no problem with Deering registering a trademark on the "Smile Bridge" name and logo for his version of the otherwise generic radius bottom bridge. That, to my mind, would be a better way to go.  Deering could promote the heck out of the Smile Bridge and claim to have a secret process for precisely designing and achieving the perfect curvature to produce outstanding sonic results.  They just couldn't claim to have invented the thing.

Banjophobic - Posted - 07/08/2016:  16:45:40

quote:

---

Originally posted by Old Hickory

I have no problem with Deering registering a trademark on the "Smile Bridge" name and logo for his version of the otherwise generic radius bottom bridge. That, to my mind, would be a better way to go.  Deering could promote the heck out of the Smile Bridge and claim to have a secret process for precisely designing and achieving the perfect curvature to produce outstanding sonic results.  They just couldn't claim to have invented the thing.

---

I think thats the way to handle this, if I was Deering. It makes sense, looks better and treats the existing bridge makers with respect and makes Deering look better as well. 

Bart Veerman - Posted - 07/08/2016:  17:13:01

I hadn't followed this topic for a while and was surprised to see it being active again, I guess a belated update is in order:

Janet Deering has assured us all publicly in this topic thread, and some folks privately via email, that Deering has no intentions of interfering with independent bridge makers, myself included. I appreciated her communications in that regard.

Her/their word is good enough for me and I don't see any point to any further posts on this topic and recommend we all get back to picking some tunes.

Many thanks for the incredible support and thumbs up that I and other bridge makers have received in this thread.

Bart.

Edited by - Bart Veerman on 07/08/2016 17:14:47

Rawhide Creek - Posted - 07/08/2016:  22:00:52

I don't know about Janet, but Greg is very close to my age and I'll be 66 next month.  The term of a patent is 20 years.  God forbid, but should they both move on to that great big bluegrass band in the sky before the 20 years  is up, is Janet's assurance binding on any successors?  Or if, 10 years from now, Berkshire Hathaway or suchlike makes them an offer they can't refuse and they go on to a belated but well-deserved and well-funded retirement, will the new owner(s) be bound by Janet's assurance?

Edited by - Rawhide Creek on 07/08/2016 22:07:20

Helix - Posted - 07/08/2016:  22:35:49

A trademark is one of the finest ways an American can participate in the positive exploitation of their intellectual property. You take responsibility and you step up, every segment of society is able to participate in this process.

I think this process of theirs and the $45 is a bit too much, it's way too much.

Here's my problem, I went to an event where a big trailer was parked too close to the entrance of the facility. The Great American Paint job was in town, and people were streaming into the event, just the right time of day to open the trailer to see the Great American Experience. Except the trailer was locked and was now just in the way, really too tacky, gotta do better.

And if a genius, and he IS a genius, except you have to be careful that your dogma doesn't get run over by a karma; if the genius wants to take your video time to explain the bridge, well ok, but just ask him to remove his tuner from that gorgeous banjo headstock, so we could see the workmanship and legacy presented to him to perform on.

These twists and games and arabesques are not interesting to me, they don't make music, they take up your time. I'm more interested in the personalities here and how they represent the music nation where they are just part of the tree, not the whole Great Gatsby. Humility is a virtue.

So I suggest you stand back and take a look, those painted 16 hook banjos for the poor non-profit agencies need a little better spec'd bridge.

Otherwise, those non-profits need constant support during each funding cycle, not just a carnival of mum NESS.

The funny thing is, I emailed Curtis McPeake and he took the time to email me back personally, that won't happen here.

We won't give up helping you become better at this. I'm critical about stupid things that need not happen over and over.

Helix Mariner

 

 

 

WaylonWillie - Posted - 07/09/2016:  05:16:06

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken LeVan

What will somebody patent next? compensated bridges, or putting popsicle sticks under bridges?

---

Oh no, somebody is on to my idea. I have been working on the popsicle stick for several years now. I'm calling it the "old timer"; they are hand-planed (not machined!) to within a thousandth of your desired thickness. ($75)

Owen - Posted - 07/09/2016:  13:49:15

Here's a couple of arm rest covers [the two on the right]  made from popsicle sticks.  They're not hand-planed, but they're all licked be me, or my wife, or grandkids!   [....and I know this isn't the way Earl did it !! ]

Edited by - Owen on 07/09/2016 13:51:01

Helix - Posted - 07/09/2016:  15:34:09

Popsicle sticks are quarter sawn lumber. so are tongue depressors. Not all innovations are such.

Aradobanjo - Posted - 07/09/2016:  15:51:04

quote:

---

Originally posted by steve davis

 

Records of sales are pretty good protection from idea stealing.

---

Hello,

This is not true. Lost sales are the reasons for patent protection. Preventing idea stealing (profiteering off someone's idea) is another reason to patent. 

Jimbeaux - Posted - 07/10/2016:  23:14:32

(sorry if already mentioned)

I know of printed proof that this idea is nothing new.
Walt Koken talks about this kind of bridge in his "Sittin' in the Catbird's Seat" tab book. Don't have the year off hand, but I'm sure it predates this bridge.

Banjophobic - Posted - 07/11/2016:  05:19:45

I'm sure now that Deering is aware of the bridge situation, they will do the right thing in regards to existing builders.

Rawhide Creek - Posted - 07/12/2016:  08:40:48

Here is the reply, received yesterday, to a question I posted to the Deering website about a month ago:

 

 

 

bluegrassbanjopicker - Posted - 07/12/2016:  09:49:49

Deering doesn't need to patent their bridge design. End of story. They are just re-discovering the fact that certain modifications do certain things. Nothing new.

The Pope - Posted - 07/12/2016:  11:21:56

I think Monte Hendricks has been making bridges like this for years...

OldPappy - Posted - 07/12/2016:  12:45:03

Lots of folks been making bridges like that for years, but somehow the "extensive research" Deering conducted missed that fact. Hard to believe, but we know they wouldn't lie about it.

Paulf - Posted - 07/12/2016:  16:44:43

I am glad that Janet did make a statement but for a lot of people who aren't members here and are also unaware of the bridge builders who make bridges with a radius bottom and then see the 'Smiley' bridge on the Deering website will automatically think that it is a Deering creation and be happy to fork out $45 for this new design that will transform their banjo.  At present there are 16 reviews on their site praising such a great creation and there is also a video of Tony Trischka doing the same.  I will always buy from the bridge builders here and have just ordered another bridge from Tim Purcell with the 'No Sag' bottom.  At $22 and with only $4 for postage to Australia thats a great bargain ever with our lousy dollar at present.

rudy - Posted - 07/12/2016:  17:13:17

If I had a successful banjo marketing machine and could figure out a way to market 45 cents worth of maple for 45 dollars I'd apply for a patent on it , too.  Nobody involved in this sort of marketing just fell off the turnip truck.  Folks can choose to be naive as they want to be.  I've read this topic for interest, but chose not to comment as there are so few who grasp what it's all about.  As has been previously stated, a 30 second Google search reveals past art.

Radiusing the bottom of a bridge is such a common place step in proper setup (I've never spoke to anyone personally who DOESN'T do it...) it's really a hard concept to grasp why anyone would make a patent grab.  I've been following this stuff for a while and starting about three years ago I noticed 3 banjo makers who listed patent applied for status for stuff that's been around so long it has hair growing on it.

The plain and simple reason is that the 2013 change in the eligibility of who could apply for a a patent on what substantially changed.  If anyone doesn't understand that it's OK; there are thousands of patent attorneys that fully took notice and advised their clients of the implications.

Let those who have ears to hear do so and act accordingly.  

Edited by - rudy on 07/12/2016 17:25:58

rudy - Posted - 07/12/2016:  17:29:31

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paulf

I am glad that Janet did make a statement but for a lot of people who aren't members here and are also unaware of the bridge builders who make bridges with a radius bottom and then see the 'Smiley' bridge on the Deering website will automatically think that it is a Deering creation and be happy to fork out $45 for this new design that will transform their banjo.  At present there are 16 reviews on their site praising such a great creation and there is also a video of Tony Trischka doing the same.  I will always buy from the bridge builders here and have just ordered another bridge from Tim Purcell with the 'No Sag' bottom.  At $22 and with only $4 for postage to Australia thats a great bargain ever with our lousy dollar at present.

---

That's what marketing is all about; convincing the market that you have invented a better mousetrap.  Unsubstantiated claims don't really matter where there's a buck to be made.  It's the nature of capitalism.

Retro - Posted - 07/15/2016:  08:58:04

I assume before they went into production, they took a look to see if anyone had a patent on this idea.. none was found.. so? there ya go. I remember the Deering's were doing an interview on the radio, the fellow who was interviewing them ask them about the JLS 12 Tone Ring... they were completely clueless had no idea who or what that was, so in light of that I think the Deering's are busy running a business,providing jobs and building an American made world class product and not spending time surfing the internet or Reading archived posts on the hangout about various bridges.Also some of you are getting personal.. theres no reason what so ever to do that, at all.

Tim Purcell - Posted - 07/15/2016:  10:01:14

quote:

---

Originally posted by TT

 

I assume before they went into production, they took a look to see if anyone had a patent on this idea.. none was found.. so? there ya go. I remember the Deering's were doing an interview on the radio, the fellow who was interviewing them ask them about the JLS 12 Tone Ring... they were completely clueless had no idea who or what that was, so in light of that I think the Deering's are busy running a business,providing jobs and building an American made world class product and not spending time surfing the internet or Reading archived posts on the hangout about various bridges.Also some of you are getting personal.. theres no reason what so ever to do that, at all.

---

I have to disagree with you in that "they do not spend much time surfing the internet nor reading Hangout posts". Janet has been a member here since 2008 and visits here as well as posts comments here on a fairly regular basis. You don't build a business like Deering Banjo Co. by resting on your laurels, and in this day and time, the internet is as important as a pen and paper was in the 15th century.

I've had contact with Janet and I have no hard feelings toward her or her company and feel confident in that there will be no legal retribution from Deering whatsoever concerning me continuing to make my radius feet bridges as I have been doing.

Tim

Helix - Posted - 07/21/2016:  06:23:36

Mr. Purcell and Mr. Cunningham, you might want to look at your personal legacies, and at least trademark your work, contact your local Sect. of State, do a name search.

I even saw a graphic here by Scott Zimmerman showing how to radius the bottom of a bridge.

The Deerings have made decisions, they have the right to protect the intellectual property and exploit it in a positive way.

Now Read Tony Pass's patent.

So when a lovely cast bell bronze flatbar type tone ring becomes available, I would be eager to get my hands on one, eager to discard the 3-ply.

BUT...................their patent ALSO claims exclusivity for ALL methods of joining flatbar type brass: lead soldering, silver soldering, brazing, butt welding, just in case evidently.

Remember Steve Martin? Well, he was in an anti-comedy called "The Jerk", there is a poster of a Jerk with his face on it. Well, there was the cardboard cut out issue. Mr. Martin didn't want to do the cutouts, but somebody else was going to get the money, so he went ahead and produced cardboard paper dolls. It's a cynical world in Hollywood.

My point here is that, sure, present makers of radiused bridges will come and go, if they do not protect their work, then they failed to step up and take responsibility for themselves.

The apologia: we only have 50 employees, we are not the big bad wolf, still smacks of false innocence, rationale only goes so far, then it comes down to a clique of upper echelon builders, who employ Maple and other trees to do our bidding.

In a few years, the shouting will all die down and a legacy will be in place. Probably $50 then, you know, inflation.

"There's always someone watching Molder."

I speak on behalf of the little guy. Free trade and sailor's rights. Ideas might be pilfered, claims may be made, but the "sound" is the most important thing. And always should be.

David Cunningham - Posted - 07/21/2016:  12:02:42

It's ok with me now. Not worried. There is a minor flaw in the constant radius design all of us are using and will be patented that way. It's better than a straight base but not optimal. I'd thought that before but it wasn't apparent until doing FEA on it. Surprising Deering didn't find it in their research with their resources. Now my design has evolved from what it was a week ago and none of this has any effect on me now. Good luck everyone. There's always a better way.

Edited by - David Cunningham on 07/21/2016 12:03:42

Old Hickory - Posted - 07/21/2016:  14:47:41

quote:

---

Originally posted by TT

I assume before they went into production, they took a look to see if anyone had a patent on this idea.. none was found.. so? there ya go.

---

The point of a search is not only to find  whether anyone has already patented an idea, it's to find out whether the idea is already out in the market as "prior art."  In this case, it's already been documented in this discussion that bridge makers have been making, promoting and selling radius-bottomed bridges for years before Greg Deering ever thought to do it.

I don't care why the Deerings failed to discover that others had beat them to the idea.

What I do care about is that even with the knowledge that they didn't invent the radius bottomed bridge, they're going ahead with their patent application.

I am not a lawyer.  I do not know whether it's possible to patent a design or product that's already in use by others but not patented by anyone.

I have no gripe with Deering selling radius bottomed bridges for $45 or claiming that their Smile bridge is superior to any other way of radiusing the bottom. I have a gripe with them owning -- and therefore legally controlling -- an idea that's already in use. 

Except for this issue, I admire the Deerings and Deering Banjo Company and think they make great banjos.

jrmorrow - Posted - 07/21/2016:  15:45:31

I agree with Greg Cahill and Tony Trischka. The Deering Smile bridges ( I'm using 3) are the best bridge I've ever used. On three banjos so far. Better than the Deering flat bridge on my new Calico. Drastic and consistent difference. I don't care about the business end and patent stuff. That is none of my business. Got mine for $35 each at Elderly.

Helix - Posted - 07/21/2016:  16:06:02

Thomas Jefferson was sued and lost because he used a dumb waiter design in his barn to lift hay. He developed and implemented the US patent office, but he infringed on a previous design as patented.

Can you spell thin skirt?

Scout70 - Posted - 07/23/2016:  03:58:44

Recently I talked to Greg Cahill about the "Smile" bridge. He swears by it. I then went down to Deering and bought one with the understanding I could return it if I did not like it. I tried it on my Huber Kalamazoo and Gibson. I returned the bridge the next day. There is a YouTube video comparison of bridges where the author comments he thought the Smile bridge mellowed the tone of the banjo. Both my banjos experienced  noticeably  subdued sound with the Smile bridge. The Smile was competing with my Huber and Prucha bridges which in my opinion are far superior.

In my opinion, you are wasting your money buying the Smile bridge. Don't drink the Deering Koolaid.

jrmorrow - Posted - 07/25/2016:  06:49:41

I got more of everything in my banjos when I put the Deering smile bridge on. Some banjos more than others of course. It may work for you. Banjo players usually like to try out stuff especially the less expensive things that make the most difference like bridges. It's not drinking cool aid unless you value others opinions above what you know you like. You may have to change the setup with a different bridge depending on the banjo. But I believe the smile bridge brings more to the table to work with. It does make the banjo sound like you have loosened the head, I've noticed and may give the first string a little more volume, but not detrimentally so on my banjos. Out of all the money I've spent on bridges, which has been a lot through the years, I think it's worth a try. Always give it several days because we tend to think it is better than it really is at first. This bridge is one that I still like after weeks.

Edited by - jrmorrow on 07/25/2016 06:51:28

rudy - Posted - 07/25/2016:  08:18:57

Outside the patent issue:

It's 10 cents worth of maple shaped as a banjo bridge has more or less traditionally been shaped for years with the bottom shaped to fit the natural curve of a head when down force is exerted on it.

And that's ALL it is.

There's no special magic hidden in the Smile bridge design, and no endless amount of computerized modeling and endless test designs tried.  It's time for a reality check.

We've heard from both the "greatest thing since sliced bread" and "made my banjo sound worse" users.  Both are honest opinions, so that should tell you something.

The "magic" that's noted in tone is the same that you'll hear on virtually any bridge when it's first installed.  It takes a bit of time (usually measured in minutes, not days...) before the "settled in" tone comes out.  Yes, you're going to notice a change in tone initially.  After that it's a simple matter to convince yourself that you've spent money wisely.  The process is IDENTICAL regardless of what bridge you choose, and it's even noticeable when switching to another identical bridge by the same maker.

Experimenting with bridges is fine, just don't deceive yourself in thinking that it's always better to spend $45 instead of 45 cents.  The true magic is in the player, with a very small proportion a result of materials or design.  Weight is the most obvious contribution to tonal and volumetric response, and any bridge design can be made with less or more physical mass.

There are dozens of folks producing very nice sounding bridges, many of them post on the Hangout.  They have all independently reached the same formula that results in a quality bridge... low mass coupled with a strong design.  It really isn't rocket science.  You'll most likely notice that many banjo makers use bridges of their own design and making.  That's because we know how easy it is to make a good bridge once you set your sights on a specific tone.

In fact, do it yourself if you have a few small tools in your home shop.  I can almost guarantee that you'll reach the same conclusion if you make a few bridges.

If you really enjoy the process set yourself up as a bridge maker.  With clever marketing you might just be able to get folks to pay $45 for 'em!  

Edited by - rudy on 07/25/2016 08:27:03