Gibson Guitar Board: ABR-1 vs. Nashville Tune_o_matic - Gibson Guitar Board

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

ABR-1 vs. Nashville Tune_o_matic What's the difference?

#1 User is offline   joegeiger 

  • Newbie
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 21-September 11

Posted 21 September 2011 - 05:44 AM

I need to replace the bridge on my 1980 ES-335 Dot Neck Reissue and was wondering what the difference is between the bridges? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

#2 User is offline   tazzboy 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2079
  • Joined: 15-June 08
  • LocationOregon

Posted 21 September 2011 - 11:25 PM

ABR-1 screw into the wood Nashville TOM don't. You can read more about it here http://www.stewmac.c...ive/ts0147.html
Posted Image

#3 User is offline   joegeiger 

  • Newbie
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 21-September 11

Posted 22 September 2011 - 03:05 PM

Great.... Thanks for the reply.

#4 User is offline   vincentw 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Customer Service Team
  • Posts: 1282
  • Joined: 18-May 10

Posted 27 September 2011 - 12:20 PM

welcome aboard Geiger! [thumbup]

#5 User is offline   Angellus 

  • Underground Gibson Player
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 580
  • Joined: 30-March 11
  • LocationLondon United Kingdom

Posted 28 September 2011 - 03:23 AM

im looking to make a Nshville to ABR-1 conversion myself. The Nashville has bushings pressed into the guitar that the posts screw into and as said above the ABR-1 screws directly into the wood giving better tone transfer.

due to the bushings, there are 2 ways to convert

1. remove bushings, fit maple dowels into the holes then fit ABR1 posts into the dowels

2. use callaham ABR-1 conversion kit, (no need for dowels) bottom of the callaham ABR-1 posts has a solid steel base that fills the bushing hole entirely. check out their website http://www.callahamg...rs.com/abr1.htm
Gibson Left Hand Traditional Modified
Gibson Left Hand SG Modified
Gibson Left Hand ES 335 Modified

Guitar Repairs, Mods & Maintenance
Black Crow Guitars

#6 User is offline   sneakerpimp 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 425
  • Joined: 21-December 10
  • LocationThe O.C.

Posted 28 September 2011 - 10:16 AM

use these guys from these guys.

Posted Image

no drilling or anything like that, simply screw these studs into existing Nashville bushings, lock in, then place ABR-1 right on top.
1982 Gibson Firebrand "The SG" Deluxe
Blackstar HT-1R | Line 6 M5 | Behringer SF300 Super-Fuzz | Morpheus DropTune | TC Ditto Looper

#7 User is offline   Angellus 

  • Underground Gibson Player
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 580
  • Joined: 30-March 11
  • LocationLondon United Kingdom

Posted 29 September 2011 - 03:36 AM

View Postsneakerpimp, on 28 September 2011 - 10:16 AM, said:

use these guys from these guys.

Posted Image

no drilling or anything like that, simply screw these studs into existing Nashville bushings, lock in, then place ABR-1 right on top.


its an interesting option but this would be merely for asthetics and would not increase the tone transfer as the tone transfer is lost (IMO) because of the screw in bushing
Gibson Left Hand Traditional Modified
Gibson Left Hand SG Modified
Gibson Left Hand ES 335 Modified

Guitar Repairs, Mods & Maintenance
Black Crow Guitars

#8 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 01 October 2012 - 11:57 AM

This is an intersting topic. I repeatedly here people say "String transfer to the body" as if we were talking about an acoustic. The most sustain is achieved when there is minimal string energy transfered to the body. Think of a steel guitar, very quiet acoustically but massive sustain. The more sound a guitar produces acoustically the more energy is taken from the string thus reducing sustain. However volume induced sustain will work in reverse, like a hollow body turned up loud, they can squeal and howl. What the energy transfer will do is change the harmonics of the string. The pickups are reading the string and responsible for the volume and tembre, but many factors will decide how the string will harmonically vibrate. I have read alot about this debate. I just restrung up my 2 Les Pauls, 2001 LP Classic with ABR-1, and a 2006 LP Standard with a Nashville Bridge. Same strings, same pickups, same tuners.
Yes, there are a lot of variables. The pots are both 500Ks. I believe the caps are the same also. I made a point of making them both the same for comparison, then I realized I had 2 guitars that sounded identical, so some change is in order soon. Well after doing numerous tests, it seems the ABR-1 guitar has slightly more treble and or less bass, it is hard to tell exactly. Sustain seems the same. The Nashville guitar seems to sound fuller (more bass, less treble?). Volume with both gives the same 110db reading when I hit the same muted E chord. Well at least I know the differences between my 2 LPs so when I change pickups I can plan according to the way they inherently sound with the same pick ups I have now, they are 500Ts and 496Rs. Playing both guitars unplugged, I found the Nashville guitar vibrated more in my hands than the ABR-1. They both sound similiar unplugged though, with the Nashville sounding again fuller because of either more bass and or less treble.
VP

PS The difference in the ABR and Nashville attaching posts are obvious, one has a thread right in the maple and the other has thread in a bushing. If the Nashville were to be the "weaker sounding" of the 2 it would be because there may be some slop in the bushing design where energy can be lost through vibrations in the metal, otherwise it seems like a very substantial and solid design.

#9 User is offline   nasticanasta 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: 27-May 11

Posted 12 November 2013 - 12:03 PM

View PostVictory Pete, on 01 October 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

This is an intersting topic. I repeatedly here people say "String transfer to the body" as if we were talking about an acoustic. The most sustain is achieved when there is minimal string energy transfered to the body. Think of a steel guitar, very quiet acoustically but massive sustain. The more sound a guitar produces acoustically the more energy is taken from the string thus reducing sustain. However volume induced sustain will work in reverse, like a hollow body turned up loud, they can squeal and howl. What the energy transfer will do is change the harmonics of the string. The pickups are reading the string and responsible for the volume and tembre, but many factors will decide how the string will harmonically vibrate. I have read alot about this debate. I just restrung up my 2 Les Pauls, 2001 LP Classic with ABR-1, and a 2006 LP Standard with a Nashville Bridge. Same strings, same pickups, same tuners.
Yes, there are a lot of variables. The pots are both 500Ks. I believe the caps are the same also. I made a point of making them both the same for comparison, then I realized I had 2 guitars that sounded identical, so some change is in order soon. Well after doing numerous tests, it seems the ABR-1 guitar has slightly more treble and or less bass, it is hard to tell exactly. Sustain seems the same. The Nashville guitar seems to sound fuller (more bass, less treble?). Volume with both gives the same 110db reading when I hit the same muted E chord. Well at least I know the differences between my 2 LPs so when I change pickups I can plan according to the way they inherently sound with the same pick ups I have now, they are 500Ts and 496Rs. Playing both guitars unplugged, I found the Nashville guitar vibrated more in my hands than the ABR-1. They both sound similiar unplugged though, with the Nashville sounding again fuller because of either more bass and or less treble.
VP

PS The difference in the ABR and Nashville attaching posts are obvious, one has a thread right in the maple and the other has thread in a bushing. If the Nashville were to be the "weaker sounding" of the 2 it would be because there may be some slop in the bushing design where energy can be lost through vibrations in the metal, otherwise it seems like a very substantial and solid design.

Well theres the problem...I think the 496's sound like crap
Guitars:
94 Gibson SG Special Ebony
72 Tele Custom maple neck-'79 Strat Hybrid
2007 ESP MH-250
2011 ESP EC-1000
Carlos 12 string acoustic
Fender Precision Bass

Pedals:
Fredric Effects Klon buffer
Fulltone Clyde Deluxe
Fulltone Deja Vibe 2
TC Electronics Polytune mini
Fulltone Fulldrive 2
Fuchs Plush Cream
Vintage Ross flanger
Hardwire DL-8 Delay


Amps
Marshall 4X12 1960a cab stereo
1994 Marshall 1987 50 watt head
Bugera 212BK 2X12 cab Stereo
Marshall Master Lead Combo
Laney HCM60R

#10 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:41 AM

View Postnasticanasta, on 12 November 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

Well theres the problem...I think the 496's sound like crap


Sounds like a personal problem.

#11 User is offline   pippy 

  • Newbie
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9736
  • Joined: 21-July 08
  • LocationLondon, U.K.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:47 AM

View Postnasticanasta, on 12 November 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

Well theres the problem...I think the 496's sound like crap

Well, that doesn't help us much, does it?

In what way, exactly, do they sound 'like crap' to your ears? Can you be more specific?
Is it just the 496Rs you don't like? Do you, contrarywise, like the 500Ts?
I notice the only Gibson you have listed in your sig would normally have been equipped with P-90s - and it isn't even a Les Paul.
How many years/months/weeks/days/hours/minutes/seconds/not at all experience have you had with a ceramic-shod Lester? Under what circumstances?

Just so we know how valid your opinion might be gauged to be worth, you understand?

[smile]

Thanking you in advance.

P.

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users