Stop bar

[daveinspain]

I think this may have been discussed before but I'd like to know the pros and cons about stop bar position. I have seen guitars down as far as it can go on the body of the guitar while others have it raised way up... Whats the difference?

[ChanMan]

I think it was Cudamax that espoused the "G-spot" stop bar position. Something to do with better sustain and a better tone, I think. Sorry I don't remember much else.... just that he wrote a fairly long post about the benefits of adjusting the stop bar to acheive tonal nirvana.

[MikeRom]

If you notice from the pics I posted the other day that my stop bar is sky high. I put it that way so the strings would clear the back edge of the TOM without touching it. Having less of a break angle over the TOM also gives the strings a looser feel. Still doesn't seem to have effectd it's ability for sustain at all, she sings forever if I let her. But I think it depends a great deal on the neck and the angle it set at as to how far down the stop bar can be set to keep the strings off the back edge.

[Bluemoon]

Mine came from the factory set high. When I took a photo of it and posted it on the forum a lot of people remarked on the height and suggested lowering it. I took it to a really good tech in Chicago. He took one look at it and said it was not a problem. The more important thing, he said, was that the string don't touch the TOM.

 

I think someone said that having it too high would put pressure on the body and possibly damage the wood where the tail piece screws into the body. I have a tough time believing that since the posts are pretty thick.

[GavinGuitar]

I have mine set as low as I could go without touching the TOM. Almost same as it was from factory, just raised high E side a bit.

[Wolff]

Excellent question Dave. I have been wondering about this myself. Why are the lugs raised? I don't understand why Gibson doesn't design the guitar so the tailpiece is flush with the body? Am I losing sustain by having it that way? I guess the angle of the strings as it touches the bridge is the main thing? You don't want too sharp an angle? I've had my guitars professionally set-up but they always leave the tailpiece up like it was when it came from the factory. I just don't get it. Also, does anyone here wrap their strings all the way around the tailpiece?

[SRV-Zeppelin]

To answer your question, guitarest, I'm pretty sure that TOM stands for Tune-O-Matic, the bridge that Gibson installs on almost all of their guitars (the exception beign the Flying V.)

[NeoConMan]

Yes, Tune O Matic bridge.

 

 

I think someone said that having it too high would put pressure on the body and possibly damage the wood where the tail piece screws into the body. I have a tough time believing that since the posts are pretty thick.

It happened to me.

I sold the guitar.

The wood was crushing and allowing the tailpiece studs to lean toward the bridge, looked AWFUL!

I didn't really notice it when I bought it, for all I know the previous owner may have strung it 13's as well.

All I know is what the results look like, and running the tail down at that point saves nothing.

Still looks like sh!t.

 

Gibson ships 'em with the tailpiece all the way against the body - usually - and I'm told that the few that are raised is simply an anomoly in assembly. The design is for the tailpiece to be all the way down.

 

Good enough for me.

 

The "sharp angle" at the back of the bridge is nothing compared to what the string suffers at the tuning post.

I know alot of guys in the various forums swear by raising the tailpiece and can cite the input of their luthier.

I know some pretty sharp guitar guys myself, they agree that any difference it could make tonally is nil.

 

If we get realistic and simply admit we like it this way or that - just because - and give up the rationalizing, I think we can see that from an engineering or mechanical view it should be down.

 

Call me a Luddite if you want....

 

:-)

[Wolff]

Very interesting. I must have gotten all anomalies, because both my LP Standards, my '61 SG and my Faded Special DC all came with the tailpiece raised up quite a bit. So, I guess I should be safe and actually better off if I screw the lugs all the way down and then re-do the intonation? I always figured they were meant to be all the way down and that seems to be the way they are in most close up photos of artists' Les Pauls.

[geyser]

http://forums.gibson.com/Default.aspx?g=posts&t=6081

[ckledzepplin]

this is how i do it

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N75Vrs_AEjA

 

 

presented by mr. bonamassa

[Wolff]

Hmmmm....ya I've heard about the strings not making contact with the T-O-M. I'm really perplexed here. It seems if I lower the studs the strings do make contact and if I lower the T-O-M to compensate then I get buzzing. It really, really bothers me that none of my Gibsons came from the factory with the stopbar down tight. Does that mean there is a problem with the neck or something that forces the factory into that high adjustment? I must say I have been upset about this for a long time.

[saturn]

I remember Cudamax's rant about the G-Spot too.

 

I have heard that it's a lot of force pulling the bar forward. Some people used to install a washer down at the bottom to help support the post. Now the newer ones come with a washer like thing already on it. Mine has it.

 

I took my LP to a luthier back in the spring to have it set-up. He said he always lowers the tail piece on LP's. He said it improves sustain and resonance. I'm not sure how much the tail piece had to do with it, but I noticed a real improvement in the playability and tone when I got it back.

[Tom99SS]

Hmmmm....ya I've heard about the strings not making contact with the T-O-M. I'm really perplexed here. It seems if I lower the studs the strings do make contact and if I lower the T-O-M to compensate then I get buzzing. It really' date=' really bothers me that none of my Gibsons came from the factory with the stopbar down tight. Does that mean there is a problem with the neck or something that forces the factory into that high adjustment? I must say I have been upset about this for a long time. '](*,)

 

IMO - The main difference is the width of the bridge. The ABR-1 (like what is on Historics) is 11mm wide and the Nashville bridge (Gibson USA) is 14mm wide. The width of the Nashville bridge makes it difficult in lowering the TP studs and not letting the strings hit the back of the bridge.

 

If you have a Nashville Bridge and want the TP studs tight against the body more than likely you will need to topwrap your strings.

[Wolff]

I have whatever bridge it is that comes with a Gibson USA 2006 and 2007 Les Paul Standard so I guess that must be a Nashville. I never tried top wrapping the strings but I'm about to start. Also, on my '61 RI SG I asked for the tailpiece all the way down when it was setup. I just noticed both E strings touch the back of the bridge but the other 4 don't. Top wrapping on an SG works too?

[saturn]

 

IMO - The main difference is the width of the bridge. The ABR-1 (like what is on Historics) is 11mm wide and the Nashville bridge (Gibson USA) is 14mm wide. The width of the Nashville bridge makes it difficult in lowering the TP studs and not letting the strings hit the back of the bridge.

 

If you have a Nashville Bridge and want the TP studs tight against the body more than likely you will need to topwrap your strings.

 

I never even noticed before, but my strings (mainly skiiny E) do slightly touch the back of the bridge with my TP all the way down. However I don't see where this is a big problem as my intonation is still dead on and the tone/sustain is good.

[cwk]

I too would like to know if anyone wraps the string around the stop bar. Does this impact the sound?

 

I can lower the base side of the stop bar flush with the body but the treble side can't get anywhere near flush without a string touching the TOM. Is it OK to have the stop bar uneven height?

[ckledzepplin]

I too would like to know if anyone wraps the string around the stop bar. Does this impact the sound?

 

I can lower the base side of the stop bar flush with the body but the treble side can't get anywhere near flush without a string touching the TOM. Is it OK to have the stop bar uneven height?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N75Vrs_AEjA

[NeoConMan]

It seems if I lower the studs the strings do make contact and if I lower the T-O-M to compensate then I get buzzing.

The height of the tail and the bridge are two completely separate issues.

The bridge height is set for proper action in relation to the neck joint angle.

The tail is set at the body or jacked up where ever you might want it' date=' leaving the bridge height alone.

 

 

 

It really' date=' really bothers me that none of my Gibsons came from the factory with the stopbar down tight.[/quote']

Might not be Gibson. Where did you buy it?

There are some large chain retailers with the whole gamut of skill in their employees doing stupid sh!t to guitars they sell.

 

 

 

Does that mean there is a problem with the neck or something that forces the factory into that high adjustment?

The neck angle will vary ever so slightly among guitars, and the final bridge height is determined after the neck is set and stable. Truss rod adjustment is used to give the final neck profile/relief and then the bridge height is used on the other end to get the action finally set for playing preference.

[NeoConMan]

So' date=' I guess I should be safe and actually better off if I screw the lugs all the way down and then re-do the intonation? [/quote']

Intonation is not affected by the tailpiece, only the bridge saddles.

Any contact the strings make with the bridge is behind the saddles, so scale length is unaffected.

[MikeRom]

Very interesting. I must have gotten all anomalies' date=' because both my LP Standards, my '61 SG and my Faded Special DC all came with the tailpiece raised up quite a bit. So, I guess I should be safe and actually better off if I screw the lugs all the way down and then re-do the intonation? I always figured they were meant to be all the way down and that seems to be the way they are in most close up photos of artists' Les Pauls. [/quote']

 

It doesn't hurt anything to be raised and really doesn't affect sustain. Top wraping, which is also fine to do, is another way to get around it but personally, I don't like the way it feels on my pick hand.

[Wolff]

Thanks for all the advice guys! I finally have the lugs all the way down with the strings top wrapped and I'm thrilled at the way it looks and sounds. Of course the strings don't even come near to touching the back of the bridge. As pointed out, the intonation is not effected. I find it has a bit more sustain now and overall sounds better. woohoo! Now I have to go to the shop for more strings for my ebony LP and get that baby set-up.

 

BTW, it's a fairly large chain of music stores I get my guitars at and my guess is the tech left the lugs up so he wouldn't have to top wrap the strings. The one guitar (SG) that I requested the tailpiece to be screwed down on came back with both E strings touching the bridge. Dumb question, but I can top wrap on the SG too? Again, thanks so much for the detailed replies.

[surfpup]

I've tried the different possibilities after reading the posts the last few times this was discussed and FWIW I don't notice a difference in any of them. Currently I have one LP top wrapped and the stop bar cranked down. The other is cranked all the way down and not wrapped. The strings are touching the tune-o-matic on that guitar, and it doesn't seem to affect anything at all. Some say it will increase string breakage, but I never break 'em. (Of course they are 11s) Just comes down to preference I guess.

[Bluemoon]

I just came back from a setup and asked my guy to tighten down my stop bar, which was really high. Wow, the difference in sustain is really noticeable. I couldn't believe it. I figured I won't hear the difference. I was wrong.

[Ren]

This is an interesting point that's often had me thinking whenever I re-string.

 

On the one hand, logic seems to tell you that the firmer the contact between parts touching the string and the wood those parts are attached to, must increase the transfer of vibration more coherently, hence potential for more resonance. Therefore for most resonance, the stop bar should be locked down.

 

I can't believe that looser contact can increase sustain. However, I can believe that the difference might be neglible or noticeable on any particular LP depending on those particular slabs of wood.

 

I haven't tried it myself cos my enineering mind doesn't like the untidyness of the strings hitting the TOM, and I don't want to wrap the strings over. Maybe changing my guitar lead would make more difference!

 

What I don't understand is, if this is true, why don't Gibson make the guitars this way? I mean, they've had 50 years! Mind you, it's taken 50 years to fit a grub screw so the bridge and stop bar stay in place unstrung, and even then their using third-party components.

 

I've also wondered why the string-holes in the stop-bar aren't angled upwards a little (from back to front) so that the strings come cleanly out of them (on live side). Even with the stop bar in the position that they seem to come from the factory set at, the strings still hit the upper edge of the holes on their way to the bridge saddles.

 

I guess not changing these things is a lot to do with tradition. Part of the beauty of a Les Paul is its imperfections, but I guess this can be very subjective.

 

cheers, ren