Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

devellis

Members
  • Posts

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by devellis

  1. I think I'm with Big Kahune on this one. I was almost completely turned off to the idea of buying a Gibson after seeing examples in Sam Ash and GC that had been sitting around for ages. I saw the same sort of loose-fitting saddle the OP described. I also saw saddles that had been sanded down to practically nothing in order to get acceptable action. I was encouraged by people who strongly urged me to think about those as issues originating with the dealerships and not the manufacturer. I finally went with a solid dealer (long distance) and got a guitar that didn't have the issues I'd seen at the big boxes. Not enough data to sort out all the facts but it fits the idea that some dealers may monkey around with instruments that have sat a long time unsold and have developed issues of various types as a result of shop wear, poor storage, or what have you. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a new instrument with high action but a misfitting saddle just doesn't make much sense as an error that originated at the factory. On the other hand, it seems not terribly unlikely if a less-than-stellar store tech wanted to replace a factory saddle for some reason.
  2. Old truss rods can be trouble because the nut can rust or otherwise get stuck. Exerting too much force to loosen it can bust the rod or strip the nut. Appropriate lubrication can help free it, of course. On a newer guitar, adjusting the truss rod isn't particularly daunting as long as you have some idea what you're doing. Tightening the rod (a clockwise motion on the nut from the headstock end) will remove some concavity; a counter-clockwise motion loosens then nut and allows the strings to induce more concavity. This really shouldn't be done in place of other adjustments but it definitely has its place. The three adjustments that influence action are nut slot depth, saddle height, and (indirectly) neck relief (which is what the truss rod is all about). If the action is really off, a truss rod adjustment isn't necessarily (or even likely) the right remedy. If the neck is pitched forward, the saddle is the wrong height, or the nut slots are too shallow, making the fingerboard less concave might help a bit at the middle of the board, but it's really not a cure. Regarding Guild's double truss rods, a lot of people seem to lament their passing. Not me. The new Guild 12-strings have slimmer necks with a single truss rod straddled by carbon fiber bars. It's a very rigid and more manageable assembly and some of the horrors of incorrectly adjusted adjusted dual rods (like neck twisting) are obviated by the single rod. Guilds of old are known for resisting the need for a neck reset more than most other 12-strings, but remember -- neck resets aren't necessitated by neck bowing but by changes in the body of the guitar around the neck block that change the angle of the neck, not its curvature. Think of the guitar body as becoming slightly bean-shaped with the neck block and tail block both moving up and toward the sound hole a small amount. Guilds did better than some competitors because they were built like tanks (in a good way). Only time will tell, but the new Traditional Series Guild 12's look like they'll do just fine under full tension. In the meantime, they're great sounding and great playing guitars (although a wider nut wouldn't hurt).
  3. I've been Jonesing for an SJ-200 lately and when I came across a picture of one with that pickguard, I almost barfed. These things are a matter of personal taste, I realize. Many people consider the standard SJ-200 pickguard to be hideous. But I love the standard and really dislike the Elvis. As I understand it, the design was Elvis' idea. Must've been around the time he was trying to get Richard Nixon to make him a special FBI drug enforcement agent.
  4. I agree. Plastic seems like a really poor choice for any surface having to take the force of metal guitar strings tuned to pitch. I also agree with Oldguy that for tuning pegs, I'm perfectly happy with ebony and it's less obvious to me how the pins alter the tone. For nut and saddle, I prefer bone not only for its tone but its durability. I think all the bits and pieces of a guitar work together. Something like a bone saddle may add brightness but that can be offset by things like the choice of strings and pick. But bone just strikes me as the "right" material for nut and saddle. It's affordable, attractive, and durable. I consider bone as a reference standard. If a guitar needs a somewhat sweeter tone, I'd rather change something else to make that happen than sacrifice a bone saddle (or not choose that particular guitar to begin with). Even on my least expensive guitar (a Seagull), I have swapped out the original saddle for a Colossi bone replacement, to good effect. I'm also very picky about saddle fit in the bridge slot and have fitted new saddles to other instruments either to alter the string height or, in at least one case, to improve saddle fit. To me, this sort of upgrade just seems like an easy way to improve my level of satisfaction with an instrument. I've never sprung for FWI or elephant ivory as an upgrade. they're too expensive and I haven't had enough experience with them to be confident I'd prefer the tone. I have mandolins with ivory saddles (on fixed bridge vintage instruments) and it seems to work fine but given its scarcity, expense, and protected status (in the case of elephant ivory), I have no inclination to go that route on any of my guitars. Bone is king, in my book and many guitar builders seem to agree.
  5. I would think the determining factor would be the tightness of the case seal rather than the material it's made of. Hard to imagine, as others said, how styrofoam could dehydrate a guitar.
×
×
  • Create New...