Bluemoon Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Ren, My understanding is that by screwing down the tailpiece you put more pressure on the strings, which can lead to more frequent breaks. Also, it puts more pressure on the bridge. I am not sure what means (shorter life span for the bridge?). So perhaps that is why Gibson doesn't tighten the tailpiece down. It did, though, make a noticeable difference on my guitar. Though, my tailpiece was pretty high (see photos, which were take before the adjustment). Hey Mike, can you chime in on this. Here are the photos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolff Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 That's about how high mine was too before I screwed in the lugs. It used to irritate me so much that regardless of any improvement in sound or not, I'm relived to look down and see the stopbar nice and anchored tight. I don't know if the top-wrapping or the screwed down bar made the difference, but no doubt my guitar sounds better with increased sustain. I can feel the vibrations on the guitars body when playing acoustically when before I could not. I guess there won't be any difinitive answer on this, but how much of a difference does it make if the strings touch the back of the bridge? That's pretty much my whole reason for doing the top-wrapping - so the strings won't make contact. Final thing - there must be a reason why some pro players top wrap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobv Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 If the tailpiece is loose, and if any string vibration is traveling past the saddle, the idea is that a loose tailpiece will eat up and waste some string energy. If you tie a jumprope to a handrail it will bounce back whatever energey you put into it - but have a person hold it and their shaking hand will dissipate energy. I don't think it's a matter of transferring energy to the top (which is important for the bridge) as it is for having a solid anchor point. However, consider that a vintage aluminum alloy lighweight stop tailpiece has a different tone than a heavier potmetal tailpiece (or at least that's part of the Historic Reissue formula). If the material makes a difference then the way it's attached makes a difference. Trapeze's wouldn't be the same as a stop tailpiece, Bigsby's aren't the same either. Ok the tailpiece can affect the tone or sustain. Now what to do about it. As for any slop in the tailpiece stud threads, you can address it several ways (1) tighten them down tight to the top and hope it doesn't pull the bridge out of shape (which used to happen with ABR-1 bridges, maybe not with Nashvilles), (2) use Faber studs that have a bushing so the tailpiece is really still tight to the top but raised up, or (3) put 5/16-24 set screws in the inserts below the tailpiece studs to act as inside-out lock nuts (the last idea is in Dan Erlewin'es Guitar Repair Guide as a cure for wobbly studs). I could've been reading more carefully, but I don't see anyone talking yet in this thread about the perceived difference in string bending with the tailpiece down tight as opposed to being up high. I have noticed (or convinced myself) that there's a difference. Generally the low/tight tailpiece takes more force to bend a string, but the string responds faster in changing pitch. In other words you have to push harder to slide the string sideways along the frets, say 3/8", but when you do you'll get a full step pitch change instead of just over a half step (these numbers are arbitrary I haven't measured it). On the other hand with the tailpiece up higher, you can bend more easily but the sacrifice is that you have to bend further to get the same pitch change. My guess is it has to do with breaking down the string tension (which hasn't changed along it's length) to a vector when you angle down beyond the saddles. One part of the force is along the string length, but now there's a perpendicular component of that same force. This affects the string's behavior when you increase the string length by bending/stretching. By changing that angle you change the down-force part of the vector. Now all of this is a really subtle difference and you have to be looking for it before you can convince yourself that you perceive it - but if it's true that the string's pitch changes a different amount when stretched, depending on how high the tailpiece is, then doesn't it stand to reason that there would be some difference in the amount of compensation needed for intonation? After all, compensation is meant to overcome the pitch change from stretching a string from open down to the fretboard. By the way, nice Classic Custom, Wolff. Dey ain't makin' 'em no more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolff Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 bobv, It's going to take me a while to digest all that. Thanks for the detailed answer. I just read it quickly and I don't think I saw anything in there about wether or not it maters if the strings touch the back of the bridge. I like your use of the term: "convince yourself" because that what it seems to come down to much of the time. About my guitar. That's not a Classic Custom although it is kind of set up the same way. My guitar is a regular LP ebony Standard that comes stock with the creme trim all-around. I modded it with SD sh6 pups, black trim/hardware, black speed knobs, amber toggle switch tip and removed pickguard. Still like it? LOL. Those Classic Customs come with gold hardware and to each their own, but I do not like gold hardware at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Those Classic Customs come with gold hardware and to each their own' date=' but I do not like gold hardware at all. [/quote'] + 1 --gold hardware looks horrible on an LP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VA_siCkBoy Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Just tried Joe Bonamassa's setup on my white SG Standard last night. I freakin' love it! I've never tried top-wrapping before except on a LP Jr. I think I'm gonna switch to this style on my Les Paul as well. Does this setup ever damage the tailpiece? Do strings break easier? Sorry if I sound ignorant on the subject but this is the first time I've tried this setup. I do notice that the sustain seems to be better after tightening the stopbar tailpiece studs down flush with the body. I also notice that the string tension seems to be a bit looser which I'm not sure I like. I use GHS Boomers 0.10-0.46 gauge. I may try going up to 0.11's to get the string tension back to what I'm used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwk Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 It does not have to be all top wrapped or regular. Has anyone tried mix and match? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted October 6, 2008 Author Share Posted October 6, 2008 Ren' date=' My understanding is that by screwing down the tailpiece you put more pressure on the strings, which can lead to more frequent breaks. Also, it puts more pressure on the bridge. I am not sure what means (shorter life span for the bridge?). So perhaps that is why Gibson doesn't tighten the tailpiece down. It did, though, make a noticeable difference on my guitar. Though, my tailpiece was pretty high (see photos, which were take before the adjustment). Hey Mike, can you chime in on this. Here are the photos This is exactly the way my LP Classic, ES 339 and Robot came from the factory too... OK, the Robot has to have the stop bar raised up because there is a wire that comes out of it that could get pinched if the stop bar was tightened down, but my Custom came with the stop bar all the way down too. I wish Gibson would comment on why they ship some up and some down... Seems too many people get their LP's with the stop bar up for it to be an oversight of QC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panrixx Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Ren' date=' My understanding is that by screwing down the tailpiece you put more pressure on the strings, which can lead to more frequent breaks. Also, it puts more pressure on the bridge. I am not sure what means (shorter life span for the bridge?). So perhaps that is why Gibson doesn't tighten the tailpiece down. It did, though, make a noticeable difference on my guitar. Though, my tailpiece was pretty high (see photos, which were take before the adjustment). Hey Mike, can you chime in on this. Here are the photos My Gibson DG-335 came with the tailpiece exactly the same, sloping down towards High E. This cannot be coincidense and Gibson must be doing this for good reason, only I don't know what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Stoddard Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 On my 335, one end of the stop bar was socked down tight while the other end the stopbar adjusting post was up a quarter turn from the bottom. Figuring it didn't matter, I socked down the post that was up a quarter turn (OCD). Now that I look closely, I see that the only string to touch the body of the ABR is the side that I had socked down! I don't think this is coincidence - RES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted November 9, 2008 Author Share Posted November 9, 2008 So what is the big deal if the stings touch the back of the TOM? Breakage? Tone? intonation? I tightened all my stop bars down with no ill affects so far... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobv Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 If the string touches the back of the bridge, it's coupling where it's not supposed to, and it could mean there's less downward pressure on the saddle, which would be bad for tone and sustain. If the string is barely touching you could get buzzing or wierd harmonics. On the other hand lots of people say theirs sounds better with the tailpiece tight - I'd just like to see some good explanation backed up with some science and testing. Aside from touching the bridge, overtightening the tailpiece might be the reason why vintage ABR-1 bridges tend to collapse resulting in a loss of the arch at the saddles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ES350 Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I have yet to see a collapsed TOM on a solidbody Gibson...after 40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 ive read in a set up book that the stop bar should be the height when the strings dont hit the bridge and not to high where it is not that much of an angle. a couple tweaks past where the strings wont hit the bridge anymore is what it should be i guess. this is in the set up and guitar repair guide. as far as sustain...... got me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitar_randy Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 http://forums.gibson.com/Default.aspx?g=posts&t=9012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynadude Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I believe the string angle from bridge saddle to the stop bar is the important issue. Too little, and you lose pressure on the saddles, which can cause the strings to slide, or jump out of their groove, and will kill some sustain and damage the saddles. Too much, and the strings get overly stressed when doing bends and changing tunings, causing breaks and killing string life, not to mention unnecessary wear on the saddles. I also cannot see any harm in the strings touching the back side of a TOM, as long as it helps to achieve the desired angle for the majority of the strings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.