Out with the Adj Bridge on the '59 J50

[zeebee]

After talkin to my luthier and reading all the negative comments regarding the tone robbing effect of the adj bridge, I decided to have it removed and a rosewood blank installed in the remaining gap. A new block of matching rosewood will then be inserted and a new slot cut to accept a fresh vintage bone saddle. The process can be reversed down the road if so chosen.

I know many of you have similarly decided to surgicaly remove the adj bridge..any regrets....any advice????

[zombywoof]

I have seen more J-45 ADJ's without the adjutable bridge than with. When I finally got to play a stock '59 ADJ, I did not find that bridge nearly as offensive as the hype would have it. Maybe the biggest difference I heard was that the note decay was a bit quicker than models which had had the bridge rolled.

[ksdaddy]

I think if a guitar is going to suck, it's going to suck whether it has a ceramic insert and a couple screws or not.

 

To pick up a J45 ADJ and not like it and then blame the fact that it has an adjustable saddle is kinda silly. That's like raving about how GOOD a guitar is and giving all the credit to a thin pickguard. There's a lot more going on.

[rar]

When I finally got to play a stock '59 ADJ' date=' I did not find that bridge nearly as offensive as the hype would have it.[/quote']

 

I had a similar experience. (I think I told this story already, but us old guys like to tell the same stories over and over, so what the heck.) About a month ago, I was at Elderly and got to compare three J-50 ADJs, including a still-adjustable '64 and a no-longer-adjustable '64. The still-adjustable '64 sounded much better to me. Since I didn't entirely trust my own opinion, what with all the anti-ADJ propaganda, I asked for Anne's. She agreed, the one that hadn't been converted was much superior. Maybe it would have sounded better yet after a conversion, but, if it were my guitar, I wouldn't mess with it.

 

On the other hand, there can't be much harm in giving an easily reversible change a try. Just don't expect it to change a sow's ear into a silk purse.

 

-- Bob R

[Space Pup]

Zebee, I had always heard the same thing that adjuatable bridges kill the tone so I never bothered with them. Over the past few years I have had the chance to play a few and some have sounded pretty good and others not so good. Maybe on some microscopic level an adjustable bridge may dampen the tone compared to a fixed bridge but If I found one I liked that wouldn't stop me from buying it.

[zeebee]

Thats the issue................it is by far the best sounding geet I've ever heard despite the saddle. That said it is presumed in all the critical reviews by the "luthier elite" that it will only improve. Are there cases out there where the sound actually suffered post conversion?

Intuitively I also believe that the 65 grams of additional weight must compromise the sound . I just acknowledge that geets can be tempermental and any change can be an excursion into the unknown. Damn these things (the saddle and intuition........lol).

[Space Pup]

Following the laws of average, I would have to say yes, but that could be due to certain factors as well, bad workmanship, bad matterials, bad care, or just the luck of the draw. With those things being a posability, why risk it if you don't have to.

[pschaafs]

I replaced the adj bridge on my '69 J-50 and I think it made a big difference in the sound.

[ksdaddy]

pschaafs, I wouldn't doubt you for a second, I just think it would be dangerous to paint them all with the same brush. The next one in line might not see that much change.

[gearbasher]

zeebee, my philosophy is: If the process can be reversed and you're willing to spend the bucks to have it done (then reversed if you don't care for the result) , go for it.