Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

To Wrap or Not To Wrap- Your Tailpiece???


JayinLA

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have been playing with this for years and own the Les Paul Handbook by Paul Balmer, have read it extensively and it never addresses whether you should wrap your strings around (top wrap) the tailpiece, as it was initially intended for as a replacement to the trapeze, or run the strings straight through.

 

My guitar tech (Who in his heyday was Jimmy Page's guitar tech,) Bill Richardson, says that you should always top-wrap, however, when I look at Jimmy's guitars they are not top-wrapped. Billy Gibbons, always has his top wrapped, and claims it sends the resonance straight into the woods, and you can slam the tune-o-matic for lower action.

 

So I am confused. Do I top-wrap, or not?

 

I would love to hear from LP guys and get some more info on why they wrap or not.

Posted

There are dozens of threads on this point, and they all end without a definitive answer.

 

Fact is that the stop-bar tailpieces were neither designed nor intended for top-wrapping. Boreholes and recesses are clearly made for pulling the strings straight through. When under tension, the height of the posts is of very little importance. Even the breaking angle across the bridge saddles is widely overrated.

 

The best thing for sustain is when most string vibration is reflected back into them. A steel-string acoustic guitar may achieve 99.5%, a Strat 99.6%, a Les Paul 99.7% reflection, and most of the small rest is lost through air friction, the lighter the string gauge, the more.

 

Radiated sound of an acoustic guitar consumes less energy than dissipation in air. The less dense nylon strings are the losers here - a classical guitar will yield perhaps 99.2% reflection. Anyway, typical drums are around 95%, thus their little sustain... [biggrin]

 

No top-wrapping here, and as I use TP-6 finetuning tailpieces wherever applicable, there's anyway not even the temptation left to do so. ;)

Posted
Fact is that the stop-bar tailpieces were neither designed nor intended for top-wrapping.

 

I totally understand why there is no answer. 'Cause I have spent the better part of 15 years on this subject.

 

On page 22 of the Gibson Les Paul Handbook it makes reference to the tailpiece and says.....

 

"The disastrous trapeze bridge of '52 would finally, in 1954, evolve into the solution found on the 'Custom Les Paul'-The combination of a solid anchor stop tail and the newly patented Gibson Tune-O-Matic bridge. The dipicted 'part solution' arrived on the Goldtop in 1953, the 'wrap over' giving the strings the stability required to complement the maple top's inherent sustain and allowing the player to use palm muting. The bridge has some crude adjustment for string length.

 

 

***However*** Every new LP I have purchased from the factory in USA always comes with the strings strung staight through. Now when you 'Top Wrap" there is work that needs to be done with intonation for perfect 12th fret octave due to string lenth change. So I have my LPs set up for top-wrapping by Bill Richardson himself, and insodoing, string my LP's with top-wrap. I have no idea if there is real advantage, and if I was using 11's and drop tunings, it wouldn't work at all as the action is far too low. [confused]

Posted

...

***However*** Every new LP I have purchased from the factory in USA always comes with the strings strung staight through. Now when you 'Top Wrap" there is work that needs to be done with intonation for perfect 12th fret octave due to string lenth change. So I have my LPs set up for top-wrapping by Bill Richardson himself, and insodoing, string my LP's with top-wrap. I have no idea if there is real advantage, and if I was using 11's and drop tunings, it wouldn't work at all as the action is far too low. [confused]

The length that counts for intonation adjustment is that between saddle and nut, i. e. the scale length; furthermore there are the effects of neck relief on string length and fretting on string tension. That's it. Even the breaking angle across the bridge has next to no effect, let alone string suspension. The latter will have a very little effect on tension though, with the emphasis on very little, and just the other way round than most people think. A string suspended at a wraparound bridge/tailpiece combination will need some two or three percent less (LESS!) tension than one held by a tailpiece close to the lower bout of a jazzbox for the same pitch.

Posted

Top-wrapping is one of those questions for which there will never be an absolute, incontrovertible, 100% accurate, universally accepted answer. Probably...

Hereabouts there is probably a 'new' top-wrapping thread started half-a-dozen times each year or there about. Various experts have written explanations backed up by equations which go to show that it does - or doesn't - make a difference. If these 'experts' can't agree then what chance does a bunch of mere guitarists have?

 

...Billy Gibbons, always has his top wrapped, and claims it sends the resonance straight into the woods, and you can slam the tune-o-matic for lower action...

Well you can tell the big Rev. that I, pippy, don't top-wrap and STILL manage to slam the tune-o-matic to the deck without encountering any problems so he can put that in his pipe and smoke it!.......lol!

I have tried T-W out for myself and couldn't notice the slightest difference but that's just my experience. Others, to state the bloody obvious, have come to a different conclusion.

 

I've seen pictures of BFG with his guitars not top-wrapped (including one of Pearly) but perhaps he decided on top-wrapping after some of the shots were taken?

 

The only thing to do is to try it out for yourself.

If you try it and imagine discover think that perhaps it might have made the strings 'silkier' and you prefer it like that then that's fine.

If you try it and..........blah-de-blah........no difference then that's fine, too.

...and if you DO decide to try it out make sure you compare like with like; ie. brand new strings for each 'test' as once strings are strung/removed/re-strung they might change in character slightly.

 

Whatever you decide there's one thing you must do; do NOT try to tell anyone that their way of doing it is wrong..........lol!

 

Pip.

Posted

 

On page 22 of the Gibson Les Paul Handbook it makes reference to the tailpiece and says.....

 

"The disastrous trapeze bridge of '52 would finally, in 1954, evolve into the solution found on the 'Custom Les Paul'-The combination of a solid anchor stop tail and the newly patented Gibson Tune-O-Matic bridge. The dipicted 'part solution' arrived on the Goldtop in 1953, the 'wrap over' giving the strings the stability required to complement the maple top's inherent sustain and allowing the player to use palm muting. The bridge has some crude adjustment for string length.

 

 

* [confused]

I think the one piece bridges work best when top-wrapped. But the trapeze used on the early LP's only work well when wrapped through the bottom.

 

I believe this wholeheartedly, and absolutely stand by it and will argue this is the BEST way to do it, regardless of what others think.

Guest Farnsbarns
Posted

I totally understand why there is no answer. 'Cause I have spent the better part of 15 years on this subject.

 

On page 22 of the Gibson Les Paul Handbook it makes reference to the tailpiece and says.....

 

"The disastrous trapeze bridge of '52 would finally, in 1954, evolve into the solution found on the 'Custom Les Paul'-The combination of a solid anchor stop tail and the newly patented Gibson Tune-O-Matic bridge. The dipicted 'part solution' arrived on the Goldtop in 1953, the 'wrap over' giving the strings the stability required to complement the maple top's inherent sustain and allowing the player to use palm muting. The bridge has some crude adjustment for string length.

 

 

***However*** Every new LP I have purchased from the factory in USA always comes with the strings strung staight through. Now when you 'Top Wrap" there is work that needs to be done with intonation for perfect 12th fret octave due to string lenth change. So I have my LPs set up for top-wrapping by Bill Richardson himself, and insodoing, string my LP's with top-wrap. I have no idea if there is real advantage, and if I was using 11's and drop tunings, it wouldn't work at all as the action is far too low. [confused]

 

You have competely misunderstood the passage. The wrap over design of 53 they talk about was a change to the trapeze design. The original run of 52 les Paul had a dreadful wrap under trapeze, this was simply revised, yet still a trapeze. The solid stop tail anchor discussed in the sentence before was clearly designed to have the strings pulled through from the back.

 

The debate about top wrapping goes on. I've recently tried it for myself and I'm still not sure about my own findings.

Posted

 

So I am confused. Do I top-wrap, or not?

 

It's just a preference thing. I tried the top wrap after one of these threads (about 27 top wrap threads ago likely). I liked it, so I kept doing it.

 

The debate often centers around string tension and sustain. I guess until someone figures out a way to measure that stuff we will continue to debate it.

 

As for intonation, top wrapping will not change that since the string is still breaking over the bridge.

Posted

I think the one piece bridges work best when top-wrapped. But the trapeze used on the early LP's only work well when wrapped through the bottom.

 

I believe this wholeheartedly, and absolutely stand by it and will argue this is the BEST way to do it, regardless of what others think.

 

 

download%203_zpsd00rfbyg.jpg

Well OK then...since we are on the subject:

 

If you had a choice of top wrapping a '52 LP or not top wrapping a stoptail, what would YOU pick?

 

You know...no viable option.

 

I'm just glad that as an American, I have a choice, to top wrap, or not to top wrap. And for the TOM bridge.

Posted

3332EB18-8301-4706-8470-FA00BA523589_zpsmbbe99mr.jpg

 

As others have said already; Too Funny ! ! !

 

BTW and FWIW.........call me shallow but I really want the guitar pictured bottom-left, please...................

 

Pip.

Posted

I don't and won't.

 

The main thing is you get a shallower break angle across the bridge.

Posted

As others have said already; Too Funny ! ! !

 

BTW and FWIW.........call me shallow but I really want the guitar pictured bottom-left, please...................

 

Pip.

Now that's completely understood. [thumbup]

Posted

There are dozens of threads on this point, and they all end without a definitive answer.

 

Fact is that the stop-bar tailpieces were neither designed nor intended for top-wrapping. Boreholes and recesses are clearly made for pulling the strings straight through. When under tension, the height of the posts is of very little importance. Even the breaking angle across the bridge saddles is widely overrated.

 

The best thing for sustain is when most string vibration is reflected back into them. A steel-string acoustic guitar may achieve 99.5%, a Strat 99.6%, a Les Paul 99.7% reflection, and most of the small rest is lost through air friction, the lighter the string gauge, the more.

 

Radiated sound of an acoustic guitar consumes less energy than dissipation in air. The less dense nylon strings are the losers here - a classical guitar will yield perhaps 99.2% reflection. Anyway, typical drums are around 95%, thus their little sustain... [biggrin]

 

No top-wrapping here, and as I use TP-6 finetuning tailpieces wherever applicable, there's anyway not even the temptation left to do so. ;)

 

I think I've learned more on these forums than I've done in 5 years prior. Especially from Cap.

I was keen to tryout TW at one point, but its mostly idle curiosity about string tension. I recall there had been some claim about that.

Sustain? I've got enough. No point being greedy.

Posted

Top wrapping is stupid. Dont top wrap.

 

 

Now you've been told. 😁

 

 

Haha. I love it when someone takes time to make sure that their point is clearly understood. If you can do it in 4 words, even better. That's what I have felt in my heart of hearts, but I have been swayed to do otherwise for so long, to change might alter my entire reality at this point. I'm scared. [scared]

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...