Ranking best-worst: Bone, Tusq, Plastic. The bone is fuller and,as you said, has more depth. It's more musical. The Tusq is loud but is thinner and, although it's superior to the plastic, it had worse highs than either the plastic or the bone when playing in the upper register (22:45--23:28). Thanks for the Vid--I just ordered a bone saddle to replace the tusq saddle on my new Godin acoustic, hoping to tame the nasty/harsh highs. Based on your vid, I think I made the right move.
Thanks for a great demo, i prefered the bone overall. They all sound good and each has its place for playing style and the guitar. Strings, picks etc are other factors etc..... thanks again for a great demo!
Nice vid. Exactly what I was looking for. My spruce/mahogany guitar has a bone nut and saddle and my daughter's new spruce/mahogany guitar has Tusq. The difference between the two guitars sounds a lot like the difference of the two materials in your vid. I'm a strummer and prefer the bone since I don't care for the Tusq sparkle. My daughter is a finger picker and I think the Tusq produces a little more volume and string separation. It seems about right for this style without having the pick attack bringing out the high-end sparkle. Thanks for the vid.
Nice test. I have bone on a dozen guitars and tusq xl on probably 6 more. They do sound different, but in the looks categorie bone when polished looks nicer In the end, there is a difference in sound, but depending on strings pick and technique there is no correct choice for any guitar, just situations.
I find listening to these samples that bone either brings more high freq in front or loses some lows and tusq keeps the freqs better overall. I have bone nut and saddles in a Yahama FG and almost no lows at all.. I will try tusq next
I do not see any comments at all about cost and how to do the work ... go look and find out if you want to spend the money needed and the skill level needed....
I did the comparisons as good as I could. My very first youtube video was two years ago and it was looking at the same subject. It was recorded with an iphone camera and even then you could hear a difference. In my opinion, the biggest take away is to understand that there is a difference. Obviously YOUR guitar is going to sound different, so an EQ is not going to be as helpful as you think it would be.
@@MillerCustomGuitars but we have no way of objectively knowing any difference, this is all subjective. But if you did the same guitar, same strings, just swapping out the saddle materials, showing the EQ for various strings and chords, that would be objective Nd visible. for instance theres a video where the compare dreadnought and concert sizes using same guitat model/line and an EQ. You could objectively see that concert size loses on the low end of the EQ
@@CapnHilts You are right, but in my opinion, all guitar tone is subjective. You want to trust your eyes, but I think it's more useful to trust your ears. And honestly, in videos I have watched, I have found the subjective insight from player more helpful than the clips themselves. This is why I included my summary at the end. Sometimes it's difficult to tell the difference over a UA-cam video, especially if you're watching on a phone. I can tell you what I experienced: The plastic sounded fine. The Tusq had more full response overall, but especially in the upper mids and trebble. The Bone had an even response over the entire spectrum, and also didn't compress as much when I played at loud volumes. Anyway, thank you for watching the video!
@@MillerCustomGuitars I respect that. For reference, these guys did a hybrid science / subjective analysis. But anyway I appreciate the effort that went into your video, sincerely. ua-cam.com/video/gL8gLiL6GeI/v-deo.htmlsi=y7X9g3vZ15Fo90U-
Ranking best-worst: Bone, Tusq, Plastic. The bone is fuller and,as you said, has more depth. It's more musical. The Tusq is loud but is thinner and, although it's superior to the plastic, it had worse highs than either the plastic or the bone when playing in the upper register (22:45--23:28). Thanks for the Vid--I just ordered a bone saddle to replace the tusq saddle on my new Godin acoustic, hoping to tame the nasty/harsh highs. Based on your vid, I think I made the right move.
Lots of great information, very nice!
Great comparison. Makes me rethink the more expensive TUSQ option. I liked the warm sound of the bone demo.
That was my favorite too, and what ended up staying on the guitar
Thanks for a great demo, i prefered the bone overall. They all sound good and each has its place for playing style and the guitar. Strings, picks etc are other factors etc..... thanks again for a great demo!
No, thank you for watching! Providing educational content like this, and having people learn something make it all worth it!
Just what I found going from bone to Tusq. The bone was mellower and the Tusq more lively. A very helpful video.
Thanks man! Really glad you enjoyed it!
Nice vid. Exactly what I was looking for. My spruce/mahogany guitar has a bone nut and saddle and my daughter's new spruce/mahogany guitar has Tusq. The difference between the two guitars sounds a lot like the difference of the two materials in your vid. I'm a strummer and prefer the bone since I don't care for the Tusq sparkle. My daughter is a finger picker and I think the Tusq produces a little more volume and string separation. It seems about right for this style without having the pick attack bringing out the high-end sparkle. Thanks for the vid.
Nice test. I have bone on a dozen guitars and tusq xl on probably 6 more. They do sound different, but in the looks categorie bone when polished looks nicer
In the end, there is a difference in sound, but depending on strings pick and technique there is no correct choice for any guitar, just situations.
Well done!
Thanks bud!
amazing work you've done! thanks a lot for all these parts!
Thanks!
Nice video, thanks ❤
Thanks for watchin!
Great video!
Thanks Alex! And thank you Stringjoy!
I find listening to these samples that bone either brings more high freq in front or loses some lows and tusq keeps the freqs better overall. I have bone nut and saddles in a Yahama FG and almost no lows at all.. I will try tusq next
I do not see any comments at all about cost and how to do the work ... go look and find out if you want to spend the money needed and the skill level needed....
There is definitely a cost associated with doing it yourself, the previous videos address this topic. Check those out!
A String Wrap behind the Nut will Help Eliminate the Ringing and Overtones that are too Harsh!!!! Other than that: Bone Sounded Best!!!! 🎵🎶👍🎶🎵🙏😎
Can someone please do this test scientifically with a proper equalizer sound display thing?
I did the comparisons as good as I could. My very first youtube video was two years ago and it was looking at the same subject. It was recorded with an iphone camera and even then you could hear a difference. In my opinion, the biggest take away is to understand that there is a difference. Obviously YOUR guitar is going to sound different, so an EQ is not going to be as helpful as you think it would be.
@@MillerCustomGuitars but we have no way of objectively knowing any difference, this is all subjective. But if you did the same guitar, same strings, just swapping out the saddle materials, showing the EQ for various strings and chords, that would be objective Nd visible. for instance theres a video where the compare dreadnought and concert sizes using same guitat model/line and an EQ. You could objectively see that concert size loses on the low end of the EQ
@@CapnHilts You are right, but in my opinion, all guitar tone is subjective. You want to trust your eyes, but I think it's more useful to trust your ears. And honestly, in videos I have watched, I have found the subjective insight from player more helpful than the clips themselves. This is why I included my summary at the end. Sometimes it's difficult to tell the difference over a UA-cam video, especially if you're watching on a phone. I can tell you what I experienced: The plastic sounded fine. The Tusq had more full response overall, but especially in the upper mids and trebble. The Bone had an even response over the entire spectrum, and also didn't compress as much when I played at loud volumes.
Anyway, thank you for watching the video!
@@MillerCustomGuitars I respect that. For reference, these guys did a hybrid science / subjective analysis. But anyway I appreciate the effort that went into your video, sincerely.
ua-cam.com/video/gL8gLiL6GeI/v-deo.htmlsi=y7X9g3vZ15Fo90U-
bone 😍
Thanks for watching!
its really the saddle that counts not the Nut, the sound difference is from the saddle not the nut 100% sure
I prefer tusq
Thanks for watching!
Bone and tusq sounder much fuller than the plastic
Skip all the emotional inflections and just deliver a message...
Nah, emotional nonsense is my style man.