62burst Posted November 22, 2018 Share Posted November 22, 2018 The plastic bridge is probably the purest example of this system when examined closely. In essence, you could completely remove the plastic bridge shell, and you'd see the archtop-oriented system still functioning, save for a place for the strings to ramp through the top & rest the bridge pins. I believe you: 'Also believe what Nick is saying about it being an acquired taste. Or whether it's due to authenticity to an era (with fair measure of nostalgia), acoustic tone attention deficit (bored with the contemporary Gibson sound), the ear being more perceptive to a certain frequency, or some other reason, which is ____ (and feel free to fill in the blank). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted November 22, 2018 Share Posted November 22, 2018 Yes indeed, the saddle material makes a huge difference in tone. I've always preferred the punchy edge of the ceramic saddle. The plastic bridge was interesting, and could have a very satisfying result tonally. But structurally, it was inherently weak, and many have not survived unscathed. Resulting weak points would often create stress cracks in the top. One critical factor was to make sure the ball ends of the strings were always seated properly on the bridgeplate, so that it could absorb the maximum amount of stress. If not seated correctly, ball ends could pull directly on the spruce top, gaining no support whatsoever from the plastic bridge. Surprisingly, I have an example that has structurally survived since 1966, intact in it's fully original form. It's getting harder to find a clean one these days. Oh, and btw 62B, the example in your pic above is the non-adjustable version from an LG-0, in which case the tone does actually travel through the saddle & plastic bridge, and then to the top. Mounting screw points are the same, but otherwise it's a whole different ballgame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted November 22, 2018 Share Posted November 22, 2018 Oh, and btw 62B, the example in your pic above is the non-adjustable version from an LG-0, in which case the tone does actually travel through the saddle & plastic bridge, and then to the top. Mounting screw points are the same, but otherwise it's a whole different ballgame. Maybe a '68 LG-O, since it also has a screwed on pickguard. Screwed-together guitar bits. Not the high point of Gibson construction, but it saved some time (and a few bucks, probably). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
62burst Posted November 22, 2018 Share Posted November 22, 2018 Oh, and btw 62B, the example in your pic above is the non-adjustable version from an LG-0, in which case the tone does actually travel through the saddle & plastic bridge, and then to the top. Mounting screw points are the same, but otherwise it's a whole different ballgame. Hence the "this thread could use some pics or diagrams" :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 And Mr. E. . . sound going through a plastic bridge? The vibes obviously primarily goes through the saddle - and your pic is not the preferred version, which has open slot directly toward the top https://goo.gl/images/8bLWFA but yes, the sound is different, , , and you either like it or not. I'm in, but wouldn't choose it as my only acoustic. Does your inner ear recall the tuned down Yesterday, , , and else check vintage Wizz Jones. He still plays his original mid60's Epi Texan and seems to prefer capo - for the guitar without seek last song by 32:00. It was McTell who recommended him this particular slope back in the day. The story about it is on the web. Doesn't say anything about the fate of the spring though ;-) 2016 ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLVYzKd71-A Nick - the curve of the spring-plate makes sense, but mine have either been straight (maybe straightened out after all those years) or looking like a snake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
62burst Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 link to Wizz Jones video An enjoyable recording, especially Young Fashioned Ways, at t = 28:00. Capo, or no. Simeon Jones trying his best not to overwhelm the mix with the wind instrument(s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 An enjoyable recording, especially Young Fashioned Ways, at t = 28:00. Capo, or no. Simeon Jones trying his best not to overwhelm the mix with the wind instrument(s). Yea, , , not least there we get that hot swampy hog-voice. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 Thinking how, on this Thanksgiving night, it's good to see/hear from so many fellow members of the forum who have an interest in Gibson adj bridge flattops. State of the opinion(s) and theories hasn't much changed since the mid 1960's when I first got into active participation discussing this kind of stuff with luthiers and fellow musicians. Every damn thing from the saddle material of choice/the bolt function/utility of the metal insert/plastic vs rosewood bridge/to change the bridge or not/the best WAY to make such a change/reversing the change/bridge plate considerations - it's like a time warp. Which is comforting, in an odd way, at an age when visiting the other end of life most often amounts to recalling things that aren't really of much current interest to anyone. All of which reinforces my notion that the Gibson adj wasn't an altogether bad idea originally, and still isn't an altogether bad idea. Now, installing an adj on a nice, original Banner would amount to a huge bad idea.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 Thinking how, on this Thanksgiving night, it's good to see/hear from so many fellow members of the forum who have an interest in Gibson adj bridge flattops. State of the opinion(s) and theories hasn't much changed since the mid 1960's when I first got into active participation discussing this kind of stuff with luthiers and fellow musicians. Every damn thing from the saddle material of choice/the bolt function/utility of the metal insert/plastic vs rosewood bridge/to change the bridge or not/the best WAY to make such a change/reversing the change/bridge plate considerations - it's like a time warp. Which is comforting, in an odd way, at an age when visiting the other end of life most often amounts to recalling things that aren't really of much current interest to anyone. All of which reinforces my notion that the Gibson adj wasn't an altogether bad idea originally, and still isn't an altogether bad idea. Now, installing an adj on a nice, original Banner would amount to a huge bad idea.... The idea isn't bad, for sure. After all, archtops have adjustable bridges. The issue is really the impact the adjustable might have on the voice of the guitar. Bridge configuration and saddle material are pretty significant tone-producing or tone-limiting factors. It's just more food for discussion. Not that I need more food for anything, after Thanksgiving... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.