rdclmn7 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Templating the mounting points for both bridge and tailpiece will give you the basis for a solid, suspended tremolo that won't reach the guitar finish. The roughly squared hollowed-out floating platform will with the use of pinions accomodate a floating trem platform inside with generic bridge saddles that are lower than the height of a tune-o-matic bridge, which means that so far the trem is viable. The bottom of the trem includes holes that hold generic trem springs to the primary platform, the springs extend to the rear where they attach to a suspended spring bracket that is held in place by two bolts that extend to the rear, making it possible to adjust spring tension. The advantages; It drops straight in without any modification or contact with the guitars' finish. It makes use of generic bridge saddles that are individually height adjustable. It makes use of generic trem springs. It also makes use of generic trem bars. The overall thickness of the platforms, including spring thickness are within the 5mm minimum height set for the bridge screws. You don't have to adapt it for archtops, semi-hollowbodies or solidbodies. Newbie onboard, any of you guys able to tell me how to post a drawing? Its a giveaway, no money to patent, develop or produce, you guys can outdo this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil325 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 is this something you are developing or just a blueprint idea for a tremolo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callen3615 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil325 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 i think it was just an FYI type post? i dunno either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxx Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 My primary platforms thickness is 6mm. But it still drops in just behind the suspended spring bracket, so I think I'm set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elantric Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Sounds like you cut & paste ad copy for the Stetsbar www.stetsbar.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 is this something you are developing or just a blueprint idea for a tremolo ...sounds like the stetsbar to me... http://stetsbar.com/stop.tail.html Currently GASsing prety hard for one... (please consider a couple of things... I dont really use trems that much, I dont really like trems, and I am in the process of Peter Green modding my favorite guitar... but those stetbars look so damn right! GAS GAS GAS) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdclmn7 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 I just looked at the stetsbar site. This is different. They adapt the tune-o-matic. This design makes use of Strat-type saddles, springs, and trem bar. This means that you can now adjust individual string height. You don't even have to remove the bridge or tailpiece studs. The machining, part types and simplified design is cheaper and faster to produce. They are into their second generation version, and striving to have the perfect trem doesn't come cheap. Most people don't care that much about things that can only cost them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I just looked at the stetsbar site.This is different. They adapt the tune-o-matic. This design makes use of Strat-type saddles' date=' springs, and trem bar. This means that you can now adjust individual string height. You don't even have to remove the bridge or tailpiece studs. The machining, part types and simplified design is cheaper and faster to produce. They are into their second generation version, and striving to have the perfect trem doesn't come cheap. Most people don't care that much about things that can only cost them.[/quote'] So, are you developing this or just found it? Do they have a webpage? I would like to check that out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffster Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Maybe the drawing you are talking about would give us a better idea. If the drawing is a .jpg format simply create an account and upload it to photobucket.com (or any other site like that) then click on the image icon (just above) and copy and paste the photobucket link for the image in between the brackets that will appear after you click on the image icon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffster Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 By the way, another drop-in tremolo , sort of, more like an adapter to avoid modification when installing a bigsby is this: http://www.zzguitarworks.com/servlet/the-Gibson-EZ-dsh-Mounts/Categories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeladdie Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Another take on the subject, from Stew-Mac.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 ...hm... the "Les Trem" I cant say they are any good. Not at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
voodoo Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I tried the les Trem on my LP DC Special, but pulled off. The action of the device was acceptable, however, the bottom of the spring was touching the pickup selection switch plate and not seating on the guitar correctly. I also did not like the round rod handle because I'm used to Bigsby handles. Also, the rod handle was too long. The solution for the LP DC was the correct Bigsby. 8) The solution for the les Trem was the removal of approximately 2 inches of length from the rear of the rod and the addition of a Gibson maestro plastic tip. 8) I am awaiting my newest toy (Tokai (Japan) Love Rock) to try the les Trem on. l8r 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdclmn7 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 I'm looking into the latest posts, I'll get back with you. I was thinking about it after I saw a lestrim last week. I was sure that I could do better and conceptually merged three different parameter requirements; It had to float 5mm off the guitar's face. It had to accomodate the dimensions needed for a conventional trem of up to 7 inches. It had to make use of the 4 studs that hold up the bridge and stop tailpiece. If you pivot the bridge platform at the front of the base plate, a strat bridge will easily fit into the now empty space. The rest of the bridge will only have to extend to the rear with the springs mounted from below the forward edge of the base plate which then are attached to a spring bracket suspended from two bolts extending from the end of the bridge plate to the rear. If the tremolo bar is set at its usual place beside the bridge, the action will be the same experienced by strat players. I'll get you guys some decent drawings with actual dimensions for the actual parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Cool! But, if this is your idea, you should patent it before posting anything, you cannever know who is lurking in the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil325 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 So' date=' are you developing this or just found it? Do they have a webpage? I would like to check that out![/quote'] see i knew he was up to something and not specifically the stetsbar...it's like those diabolical inventors who mutter to themselves while thinking of calculations and stuff haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdclmn7 Posted January 29, 2009 Author Share Posted January 29, 2009 Here's a rough drawing of the baseplate, the installed bridge platform, and the spring bracket. I'll get you some cross-sectional views soon. Mad scientist? I got called wiley coyote at Ft Riley, not necessarily a bad thing. I'm more like the guy who doesn't like what's on the market and sooner or later ends up doing one better. So far there are three items: -the Les Paul Trem. -the adjustable single-coil blade pickup.(its here under pickups, I'll get drawings soon). -the trem shim that lets you have your forward action without locking it all the way back,and without it being so stiff. (I'll get that posted soon). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I'm always interested in new thinking regarding a trem + Les Paul. But using Fender saddles will give too wide string spacing for Gibsons. I don't think you'd have the space to use a standard Fender arm with this design. I believe there is already a design which uses a flat spring plate (Parker) which is very compact, so you could lose the conventional springs. Thanks for sharing your ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdclmn7 Posted January 30, 2009 Author Share Posted January 30, 2009 I can't seem to find any images or diagrams for that Parker design. It would be good to find a link. The string width; Gibson @ 51mm Fender @ 53mm I'd use it, otherwise making the saddle width slightly narrow is not a big deal. The idea of using shorter springs, no big deal, it would make the assembly shorter. The bottom line is comparing the cost of using generic parts vs the cost of re-enginered parts. One way or the other, it works and I would buy it, no matter who makes it. So far I haven't seen anything to suggest the idea being used by anyone else, so, its my idea, I really don't care about chasing patents as I have already been burned by one corporation that ripped me off. Its a freebie, have at it, send me a release, I'll sign, I'll buy it and install it on my '85 Studio, and if I ever get an SG, I'll buy one for it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Here is a google page with links to Parker accessories and a downloadable Parker manual showing the layout of the trem mech / spring. Looking at how it works, I don't think it could be adapted to a surface mount trem. (Although a different kind of flat spring could work... ) http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4RNWN_enGB268GB268&q=parker+trem+spring (will have to cut and paste text) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolidGuitar Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 It kinda reminds me of the rare retro-fitting Floyd Rose bridge from the 80s that mounted to Les Pauls with the original holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdclmn7 Posted January 30, 2009 Author Share Posted January 30, 2009 Absolutely beautiful picture of the floyd rose. Too bad that there is nothing to suggest anything other than a conventional spring layout. You guys beat me to the idea of using a flat spring, I was already thinking about that before seeing the search results on Google. The only reason that I can see for not having a totally functional tremolo is by function a matter of not mounting the bridge itself as a floating platform. I suppose they wanted to avoid patent infringement as Fender would have the only floating bridge design. So far the only Gibson I have ever seen with a tremolo was in 1988, in Ktown, Germany, it was a '61 Les Paul/SG that sounded terrible, but after doing a Reforger deployment with 70,000 other troops, I was happy to twang anything with strings. About a month before I would buy my 85 LP Studio... Designwise, there is no reason at the present to not explore the use of springs, flexable metal plates, torsion bar or adapt bowflex technology. So far, the use of springs whether generic or cut to a shorter length, is what makes a drop-in viable. The use of a flat metal plate, it doesn't look too promising if you take into account that the string load is taken by the tailpiece studs. Torsion bar technology takes up too much space, a quick look at your forward suspension in your car will show that a u-shaped bar will work but at the same time take up too much space. Bowflex technology looks like some of the frictionless bearings available since the early '70s; -you have two shafts in cross-sectional view, one above the other, with flexable material that follows the geometry of the shafts,- that of an S-shape that contains and limits the movement between both shafts. It might work, but takes too much space. The best technology is already with us, the springs are a proven technology, and the use of pinions are the best use of limited space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 What about Kahler trems? Gibson used them for a while for some models... and they are still available (not as popular as the floyd rose or even the bigsby; never knew why). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdclmn7 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Kahlers require routing. That leaves us with normal springs, stock saddles and generic trem arm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.