SteveXFR

Some interesting stuff. He's a clever bloke. It's a shame there was nothing going back to his metal days, Cream were a million miles away from what Suicidal played. No matter how many times I hear Jaco, I just don't get it.

Interrogation song - Muppets

If you have to ask - Red Hot Chili Peppers

Burn the witch - QOTSA

Prayer of the refugee - Rise Against

Solar benediction - Shrinebuilder

In that case could he afford the required tool kit to set it up?

Stone free - Hendrix

What he said ☝️ There's nothing more to add.

Exactly. Great for shiny bits.

You're expecting people to buy what appears to be the most expensive bridge on the market based on a claim that it improves sustain and tone. You give nothing to back up those claims so I have asked questions which could lead to logical reasoning in the design which would back up your claims. If you chose a material based on the ratio of hardness to weight that would make sense for transmission of vibration without adding too much weight or if it was a UTS vs weight ratio that would also make some sense to help validate your design. You seem to just expect people to buy the most expensive bridge on the market based purely on the word of the person selling it.

Well that's a meaningless mess of words.

So what properties made you choose 6060 grade?

So really you need to spend £640 on bridges rather than "just" £320?

And what made you select that particular grade? There's no such thing as a best grade for every purpose. The correct choice matches the material properties against the design requirements. 6000 series aluminium isn't particularly hard unless you heat treat it or forge it. Don't get excited about it being an aeronautical grade, there's hundreds of them, some very strong, some very hard, some very weak and some very soft.

I guess one very important question is, will it be made from top quality tone metals?

Disasterpiece - Slipknot

Joker and the Thief - Wolfmother

You can't claim its science without evidence, maths or theory to back it up

That doesn't matter, the basic mechanical principles still apply. There is no potential for fatigue.

A constant load causes no wear or fatigue in steel so won't affect construction long term. Dynamic (cyclic) loads can cause cracking over time but strain (deformation under load) is a major factor in that so unless you've got significant flex in the bridge then that's not an issue. Just look at the number of 50's fender and Gibson bridges still going strong from the days long before FEA and fatigue modelling.

You may get lucky and find someone doing vibration analysis for their masters but it would have to fit what they've already planned to do and that's quite specific. It's more likely they'll offer to do it for a fee. Ask on an engineering forum, it's really simple to test and the equipment is really minimal and cheap, you might find someone prepared to do it for beer money.

Are you expecting people to spend a not inconsiderable amount of cash on your product and take your word for it? Lab testing wouldn't actually be difficult or expensive. I used to design and test anti vibration products. All you need is a few accelerometers, a cheap data logger and some skills with excel to produce the graphs.

Most of our home convenience products were just new applications of technology developed elsewhere for industry. Entertainment technology also is generally new applications of existing technology. What really drives genuine new innovation is absolute necessity. That's why so many great innovations came from war and disasters.

That's why I suggested a demonstration to avoid that argument. I'm guessing you and I would be in agreement on that subject but I'm happy to be proved wrong.