Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Adjustable Bridge on my 1968 Southern Jumbo


ezra1

Recommended Posts

I bought this guitar used about 7 years ago.

It has weather checking and wear but I like it. It is not a Closet Queen.

The adjustable Bridge has given me some trouble in the past and I am not crazy about it.

I got a LR Baggs Element VTR pickup for it.

My repair guy said that he advises letting him make me a new bridge to install the pickup.

I told him to go for it.

Hopefully I am not authorizing a sin.

Some people like the adjustable Bridge and some don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's your guitar and your money.

 

Personally I wouldn't remove a bridge that doesn't need replacing due to glue joint failure, but again it's your guitar.

 

I'd probably have a bone saddle made that fills in the adjustable saddle's slot, or replace it with a Tusq drop-in adjustable replacement and go with a transducer pickup like a K&K Mini or similar.

 

Incidentally, I think that adjustable Gibsons will be hugely sought after in a few years as so many of them are being altered to fit traditional bridges. We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it were mine I wouldn't change the bridge. Don't know if the current saddle is wood or ceramic, but if it's wood, I'd opt to change it to bone (Philadelphia Luthier Supply) or - assuming I could find one - ceramic. I've tried Tusq and wasn't pleased with the sound, although that's just my reaction. If I needed a pickup, my vote would be for something that didn't involve the bridge. As far as making an insert that fills the original adjustable saddle slot, that's a fun option, and you could even do a bit of compensating. Point is, I wouldn't do anything you can't reverse later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it were mine I wouldn't change the bridge. Don't know if the current saddle is wood or ceramic, but if it's wood, I'd opt to change it to bone (Philadelphia Luthier Supply) or - assuming I could find one - ceramic. I've tried Tusq and wasn't pleased with the sound, although that's just my reaction. If I needed a pickup, my vote would be for something that didn't involve the bridge. As far as making an insert that fills the original adjustable saddle slot, that's a fun option, and you could even do a bit of compensating. Point is, I wouldn't do anything you can't reverse later.

 

Backing everything above. See the situation as an opportunity to experiment.

Go rosewood, (hard to find) ceramic , tusq, bone, wooden insert with ordinary sized bone saddle - and compare according to your taste and choice of song-material.

 

Can you describe the probs with the LR Baggs pick-up - and is it possible for you to post a picture of the guitar (said the ditto SJ 68 owner).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of the adjustable bridge. I've had two changed out in my history with Gibsons; both B25's and thought it improved the non-amplified tone. I 'd also ask the luthier to yank those bolt sleeves out of the top in the process. He can probably make a bridge from Braz rosewood as the blanks are available. I think you'll enjoy the response and simpler look of the 1/8" bone nut. You just have to hope the luthier can really do a clean job. Keep the parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you currently like the sound of the guitar, try the experimental & reversible changes first. Replacing the adjustable bridge could tonally result in losing some of what has drawn you to the guitar.

 

Not a result you would typically expect, but I've experienced it first hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If done correctly, I would pay more for any x-braced Gibson that had been converted from adj bridge to fixed, much in the way you'd rather have a wooden bridge replacement for Gibson's other flub, the plastic bridge. Their third dumb idea, the ladder-braced top, is a much more involved modification. Many here like the ladder brace tone though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My old j160 was not a good acoustical guitar by any means.It had latter bracing, a laminated top, and an adjustable bridge with a rosewood saddle. But, one of the best sounding J45s I've played had an adjustable bridge. If I owned that j45 I am not sure I would change out the bridge. In my mind a standard bridge is always going to sound better, but if the guitar sounds awesome I wouldn't mess with it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If done correctly, I would pay more for any x-braced Gibson that had been converted from adj bridge to fixed, much in the way you'd rather have a wooden bridge replacement for Gibson's other flub, the plastic bridge. Their third dumb idea, the ladder-braced top, is a much more involved modification. Many here like the ladder brace tone though.

The plastic bridge was a terrible idea. About the adjustable feature, I honestly believe it depends on the guitar. The ones I own are awesome, and won't be changed unless they develop some issue that can't be otherwise resolved. I've also played some really good-sounding guitars that have been changed out, but wouldn't pay any more for one than I'd sink into an adjustable that sounded good. The ladder bracing is kind of a 50/50 thing to me. Some of the 1950's LG-1 guitars I've played have sounded really good in a small-body kind of way. From 1960 onward, not so much. X-bracing definitely improved my 1961 LG-1, as did getting rid of the plastic bridge. At one time, I briefly owned a ladder-braced J-45, one of (supposedly) three that were made as an experiment on the late 1950's. I found it totally unremarkable, but the blues guy I sold it to considered it to be his Holy Grail. The whole B-25 thing has never impressed me, although I had one that was just magic and wish I'd never had to sell - beat to hell, plastic bridge and all....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I finalized my decision to buy a 60s era Gibson, I found a shop that had 4 different J 45s of that vintage. They decided on weather to replace the adjustable saddle based on each guitar's sound. Two of the four got the saddles replaced. They were the two I thought were not very good sounding guitars. I liked the adj saddles better, and when I spotted my Epi Texan, I liked that the best of the bunch.

 

Makes no logical sense to have all the hardware, but I'm not changing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought this guitar used about 7 years ago.

It has weather checking and wear but I like it. It is not a Closet Queen.

The adjustable Bridge has given me some trouble in the past and I am not crazy about it.

I got a LR Baggs Element VTR pickup for it.

My repair guy said that he advises letting him make me a new bridge to install the pickup.

I told him to go for it.

Hopefully I am not authorizing a sin.

Some people like the adjustable Bridge and some don't.

 

Take a look at this

 

https://www.facebook.com/Victory-Guitar-Shop-278179168883771/photos/?tab=album&album_id=1165396073495405

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I finalized my decision to buy a 60s era Gibson, I found a shop that had 4 different J 45s of that vintage. They decided on weather to replace the adjustable saddle based on each guitar's sound. Two of the four got the saddles replaced. They were the two I thought were not very good sounding guitars. I liked the adj saddles better, and when I spotted my Epi Texan, I liked that the best of the bunch.

 

Makes no logical sense to have all the hardware, but I'm not changing anything.

👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The B-25 had another weird apparatus, Cowboy, in the form of a very thick oversized pick guard. I liked mine OK but dumped it for a very similar guitar, a '57 LG-2, or to my ear, B-25 minus the heavy guard. When I think about it in hindsight, in light of the importance of top response, I wonder what they were thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The B-25 had another weird apparatus, Cowboy, in the form of a very thick oversized pick guard. I liked mine OK but dumped it for a very similar guitar, a '57 LG-2, or to my ear, B-25 minus the heavy guard. When I think about it in hindsight, in light of the importance of top response, I wonder what they were thinking.

I don't know the rationale for going to the thick pickguard material. All I can say for certain is that it happened when Gibson began to glue guards on top of the finish rather than directly to the top wood - a move intended to avoid the dreaded 'pickguard crack'. Some of 'em diminished tone; all of 'em diminished volume. Lots of us pulled the guards for those reasons back in the day. Some got replaced with thinner ones and some were just left off. My preference has always leaned to the early teardrop guards, but the batwings are OK as long as they're thin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got with my repair guy and he pointed out that there was some funny business going on near the adjustable Bridge.

Upon close inspection we found that the bridge plate had been replaced in 2004.

That guy signed and dated it.

It was a poor installation.

It had a bow in it and he used epoxy to put it in.

So my guitar was not 100% original.

 

My guy was able to get it removed and replaced it and the adjustable Bridge and installed the Baggs pickup.

The top near the bridge is now flat.

I am going to pick my guitar up this weekend and check her out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That guy signed and dated it.

It was a poor installation.

Well, at least you can find and tell him on Facebook.

 

On a serious note I look forward to hear if you notice any sonic difference.

I have this diffuse theory that new bridge-plates might need some time to break in.

Do report, Sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top near the bridge is now flat.

I hope it all works out for you, and it very well might, but:

 

This could potentially be the type of tone changer I alluded to above. The surface area in this region of the top is not supposed to be flat. By applying a new bridgeplate & bridge which reduces the arch of the top, it might stiffen the top in a manner which does not allow it to resonate as freely as before.

 

So you may or may not experience a change in tone for the better or worse - it's a crapshoot. This again is why I recommend leaving everything alone if you enjoy the tone you're getting, and the area in question is structurally stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flat top at the bridge area drew my interest, too. Strictly speaking, calling a guitar a flat-top is a misnomer, as the top should actually be parabolic. That urge for true flatness was one of Norlin's errors in the 1970's. Still, you may be just fine. Only time and observation will give any sort of definitive answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The repair went well.

The guitar really rings out now with the replaced bridge plate and new bridge.

Full and round acousticly.

It wasn't bad before but a marked improvement now.

The action is better and I like the pickup too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really liked my '67 J45 with the adjustable gubbins fitted, but eventually curiosity got the best of my and I made a rosewood insert for it with a routed slot that was a perfect fit, and dropped that in with a saddle fabricated from a Tusq blank.

 

WOW, what a gamechanger...the difference was HUGE and it now sounds like the best J45 I've ever heard. Very much like my former bandmate's '53 J45 but mine is less dry and more lively.

 

Soon I'll have the bridge replaced entirely as the current one is lifting a little and has a poorly executed old repair which needs putting right.

 

If you're after improved tone and don't care about resale/originality, I say bin the adjustable stuff and go fixed and you'll be gobsmacked at the improvement ☺

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...