<HTML>In a message dated 7/6/2002 12:17:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, RNossaman@cox.net writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Subj:Re: Bridge design Date:7/6/2002 12:17:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time From:<A HREF="mailto:RNossaman@cox.net">RNossaman@cox.net</A> Reply-to:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> To:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> Sent from the Internet >         Terry >I don't know why they didn't use it. Probably some of the design folks >liked it and some didn't. Or cost factors and simplified production issues. Terry, Dale, I don't know either, But have either of you tried to laminate a bridge with that shepherd's crook at the end like is in the A? That somehow doesn't strike me as a production simplification, but maybe it's not that bad after you get the jig figured out, and it does stiffen the low tenor. Adding the transition bridge with a re-design  improves the crossover though. </BLOCKQUOTE>     Ron--No I haven't but I bet it's no cake walk. The bridge I'm describing woud be a simplification over the typical shepards crook. Basically the tenor bridge stops and then juts towards the bass 5 or 6 inches. It is attached to the tenor bridge just to be clear. ... Dale Erwin </HTML>