Wood bridge vs Tune-o-Matic on Artcore

[Kojo27]

Hey,

The "higher-end" Artcore guitars (is that a contradiction?) ship with both tune-o-matic bridges, and with old-fashioned ebony "slant" bridges.

If any of you has experience with these, or if you'd just like to speculate ...

Question: since these are laminate-topped (a la ES-175), how much extra ACOUSTIC volume does the wooden bridge create? How does it affect the plugged-in tone?


(I bought an AF-95 new, unplayed, but from a pawn shop. Still had the Styrofoam beneath the tune-o-matic bridge, no pickguard swipes, nuttin. But the wooden bridge was missing. I like wooden bridges and would replace the metal-saddled one if I thought it would improve the tone.

Comments?

kj

[mambosun]

Originally Posted by Kojo27

Hey,

The "higher-end" Artcore guitars (is that a contradiction?) ship with both tune-o-matic bridges, and with old-fashioned ebony "slant" bridges.

If any of you has experience with these, or if you'd just like to speculate ...

Question: since these are laminate-topped (a la ES-175), how much extra ACOUSTIC volume does the wooden bridge create? How does it affect the plugged-in tone?


(I bought an AF-95 new, unplayed, but from a pawn shop. Still had the Styrofoam beneath the tune-o-matic bridge, no pickguard swipes, nuttin. But the wooden bridge was missing. I like wooden bridges and would replace the metal-saddled one if I thought it would improve the tone.

Comments?

kj

This question about TOM vs Wood bridge has already been extensively debated in this forum.
I'm not expert but recently converted my archtop intially equiped with a TOM to a rosewood bridge and I 'm very happy since.
But the basic need for me was to tame the ringing "zing" emitted by the portion of strings between tailpiece and bridge and to get a more woody, darker tone, not necessarily more acoustic. Like I said, I'm really happy to have made the conversion but you may have different findings with your jazzbox. And don't forget, getting the intonation right with a wood bridge is trickier than with a TOM.

[jorgemg1984]

I think Benedetto once made a blindfold test and heard no significant differences... I am not sure if it was about bridges or tailpieces. To me the great advantage about wood bridges and tailpieces is mainly about the looks of the guitar - its really prettier with wood pieces. I don't think you will hear a major difference in amplified tone, maybe in acoustic playing.

Intonation is indeed harder in wooden bridges but nothing a good luthier won't perform easily.

[rpguitar]

Excessively debated is right, and not to be resolved, for 'tis a matter of personal preference. Buy and try!

The metal provides a stiff, solid endpoint, which results in more sustain but maybe a bit less top transfer. However, the extra sustain lets the strings interact longer with the entire guitar. The wood is a bit duller and maybe has more top transfer, but also less sustain. So there is a difference in sound AND feel, and you need to try both for yourself. Opinions are divided.

[Kojo27]

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

Intonation is indeed harder in wooden bridges but nothing a good luthier won't perform easily.

This is hijacking my own thread, but what the heck - the bridge thing is too much debated anyway, aye?

I have a solid-wood acoustic F-hole jazz box, very sweet guitar, and with a "modern" compensated wooden (ebony) bridge. I can set it so the two E's are spot on, and the A string will be spot on, the B as well, the G just a hair flat, but the D string? Wa-a-a--a-a-a-ay flat!!! I mean, "out of tune" flat. If "A" were to equal 440, and the open D were in tune with that, the same fretted "A" on the D string would equal about 437. It's that badly out. It's out equally along the whole length of the string.

What do I do -- what *DO* I do? If I restrain from playing the open D string, I can simply tune it sharp, and thus it plays in tune when fretted. Not the best fix, though.

There is no "luthier" close-by. Only an idiot who will take your money and ruin your instrument.

I've thought, What if I could get a tiny chip of ebony and glue it to the "neck side" of the bridge, flat against D-string's saddle point? This would effectively make the saddle thicker where the D string crosses, would make the string shorter, and would make it play less flat when fretted -- anybody ever done this?

kj

[jorgemg1984]

I have changed strings type, gauge and brand a lot these last years - my luthier always takes or adds little parts of ebony to the bridge to set the intonation right... He can make my archtop exceptionally well intonated, he even surprises himself! He told me its' the best wooden bridge intonation he has ever made - all the other archtops he works with never get this perfect.

Can´t help you much more than this... I am really lucky, my luthier is great, leaves at 15 minutes car distance and makes me great prices. I am sure other people in the forum can help you with that.

[Kojo27]

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

I have changed strings type, gauge and brand a lot these last years - my luthier always takes or adds little parts of ebony to the bridge to set the intonation right... He can make my archtop exceptionally well intonated, he even surprises himself! He told me its' the best wooden bridge intonation he has ever made - all the other archtops he works with never get this perfect.

Can´t help you much more than this... I am really lucky, my luthier is great, leaves at 15 minutes car distance and makes me great prices. I am sure other people in the forum can help you with that.

AH COOL!!! So this idea that came to me as a gift is one that works? I bet your luthier uses superglue - StewMac sells about a tanker truck a month of the stuff. Heh.

Heck, if I could find some chips of ebony, I'd glue one right on there. Maybe stick it with Scotch tape first, to test...

Thanks

kj

[burchyk]

intonation off the same amount across the entire string is probably a bad nut grove

[cjm]

Originally Posted by burchyk

...probably a bad nut grove

Wrangler jeans are known for causing that, too.

[Retroman1969]

I tried both the TOM and Rosewood bridges on my ES-175 and there was a fairly significant difference. The TOM, as you might guess, had a harder more electric tone, but the Rosewood gave a darker more acoustic tone, which was my preference. The Rosewood bridge also reduced buzzing and eliminated tailpiece-ring (resonance).
I like to use the Gibson style compensated wood bridge as opposed to the simpler slanted bridge. It brings the intonation in to nearly dead-on with little fuss.

[jorgemg1984]

Originally Posted by Retroman1969

I tried both the TOM and Rosewood bridges on my ES-175 and there was a fairly significant difference.

Plugged or unplugged?

[jayx123]

I changed the TOM to a rosewood bridge on my hamer jazz 5 and it made a difference got a warmer dark tone.

[Retroman1969]

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

Plugged or unplugged?

Played through the amp.

[SamBooka]

Went from TOM on a 165 to Ebony. Much warmer tone for sure but what drove me nuts about the TOM was the sympathetic resonance of the strings between the bridge and TP was much more noticable with a TOM.

I went back to a TOM for about an hour once just for curiosity but much prefered the Ebony.

[jorgemg1984]

Originally Posted by jayx123

I changed the TOM to a rosewood bridge on my hamer jazz 5 and it made a difference got a warmer dark tone.

Same question: Plugged or unplugged? Or both?

[jorgemg1984]

Originally Posted by Retroman1969

Played through the amp.

Interesting - some people say it sounds almost the same. Never did an A / B myself - have both but it different guitars.

[oldane]

Originally Posted by SamBooka

.... what drove me nuts about the TOM was the sympathetic resonance of the strings between the bridge and TP was much more noticable with a TOM.

That's easy to solve. Just weave a leather string, a shoe lace, a hankerchief or anything else between the strings past the bridge. Myself, I sandwich the strimgs between a piece of of male and female velcro.

[Dark Star]

I don't know about ebony vs. a tune-0-matic, but I can tell you that the TOM-style bridge that came on my buddy's Ibanez Artcore AG85 was such a piece of junk that a replacement TOM from an Epiphone(!) was a significant improvement.
Just for kicks I'd like to try an ebony bridge on my CS-336.

[Retroman1969]

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

Interesting - some people say it sounds almost the same. Never did an A / B myself - have both but it different guitars.

I know, it doesn't seem like it would make much of a difference, but the plugged-in tone was just much warmer and more mellow with the wood. The TOM gave almost a Strat-like edge to its tone that I didn't really care for.

[AlohaJoe]

Wood sounds woodier, metal sounds more, like... metallic.

[oldskoolchop]

i have an artcore and the stopbar is just an ugly piece of junk,and am going to change it. I have considered changing the TOM to wood, but the TOM is fixed and mounted into the guitar, does the holes not have any affect on the new bridge and its ability to adjust? what do I need to consider when finding a wooden replacement, measurements, heights, or will they be all relatively, the same. Also what other adjustments would someone recommend i make in setting up this semi hollow to mainly play jazz?

[oldskoolchop]

whatabout tuneamatics with a rosewood base?

[mambosun]

Originally Posted by oldskoolchop

whatabout tuneamatics with a rosewood base?

The one I had was TOM with wood base, which is the standard TOM design for archtop. For me, full wood bridge tone is quite different to TOM+wood, either guitar plugged or unplugged.
I guess the tone difference should'nt be that obvious in solid body or semi hollow with stop bar tailpieces.

[Philco]

That metal retainer on my TOM is rattling and driving me insane!
I can touch it with the plectrum and it stops for a while.
Then it waits for a quiet passage and returns. I loath that sound.

But at least the guitar is in tune.
Unlike my GB10 that would never tune up.
However from reading these posts it seems that it would have been fixable if I had found a luthier familiar with these bridges.

It kind of scared me off anything other than a TOM.
Time to reconsider.

[Kojo27]

Originally Posted by Philco

That metal retainer on my TOM is rattling and driving me insane!
I can touch it with the plectrum and it stops for a while.
Then it waits for a quiet passage and returns. I loath that sound.

But at least the guitar is in tune.
Unlike my GB10 that would never tune up.
However from reading these posts it seems that it would have been fixable if I had found a luthier familiar with these bridges.

It kind of scared me off anything other than a TOM.
Time to reconsider.

I love wooden bridges, Philco. They obviously need tweaking sometimes, but then again, I have a little acoustic archtop, a 1940 Martin R-18, a 14" beast, that plays spot on, on every string. I suppose it's the guitar AND the bridge - the nut comes into play, too, as a previous poster kindly pointed out. And believe it or not, the Martin has an old-fashioned "straight-slant" bridge. The top is not "staggered" a la Gibson, and others. So sometimes, maybe, less is more. (I can't imagine putting a TOM on this antique! The guitar police would shoot me dead.)

[morroben]

The shop I do tech work at sells Artcores. Most have TOMs but a couple have wood bridges. I haven't researched the previous arguments on this, but I'm surprised that people say you can't hear the difference. I can't hear the difference between maple and rosewood fingerboard, or solid-body and thinline teles (all other things being equal), but I can hear the difference between a TOM and a wood bridge on a hollowbody.
I wouldn't say there's much volume difference, but a TOM makes a hollowbody lean toward semi-hollow tone more so than a wood bridge. Depends on the sound you're going for, but I definitely hear a difference on this one.

[hallpass]

I have a wooden bridge on my Ibanez AK105SM. It came with two wood bridges but no TOM bridge. I agree with the above poster about hearing tonal difference with a wooden bridge vs TOM. I can't hear a difference between fretboard wood. I could between body tops though (say maple top vs all mahogany on a les paul). So for jazz, I think I orefr the wooden bridge. But the TOM obviously gives you better, or more control of, intonation.

There's an Ibanez parts website. You might be able to other parts from them if you can't find one.

[Kojo27]

Originally Posted by martinopass

I have a wooden bridge on my Ibanez AK105SM. It came with two wood bridges but no TOM bridge. I agree with the above poster about hearing tonal difference with a wooden bridge vs TOM. I can't hear a difference between fretboard wood. I could between body tops though (say maple top vs all mahogany on a les paul). So for jazz, I think I orefr the wooden bridge. But the TOM obviously gives you better, or more control of, intonation.

There's an Ibanez parts website. You might be able to other parts from them if you can't find one.

Thanks! I'll try to locate this website...is it part of Ibanez's main site? I play my AF95 unplugged 95% of the time, so I'm gonna go to a wooden bridge/saddle.

While we're talking about Artcores, dig this AF125 top-of-le-line killer deal (2 days left, $265 of this writing) -- a beauty, w/both bridges included: IBANEZ ARTCORE HOLLOW-BODY ELECTRIC JAZZ BLUES GUITAR AF125 CUSTODIAN NATURAL | eBay

[oldane]

I hear a very audible difference in tone.

The wood bridge sounds darker with less high frequencies. The sustain is often shorter than with a TOM bridge. Traditionally, the ebony bridges is said to be somewhat clearer and tighter in sound than the softer rosewood bridges. That is the general tendency, but in my experience individual wood bridges vary quite a lot depending on the particular piece of wood, the weigth of the bridge, the shape etc. I have one rosewood bridge which has more clarity, tightness and brightness in the tone than all of my ebony bridges. I have tried several wood bridges and even made a few myself through the years, and not two sound the same, despite being made of the same material.

The TOM has a greater clarity in the tones, each string stands out clearer. The all metal TOM bridges have a common trait - a tendency to a "bump" in the frequency spectrum around 2kHz, which is heard as a bit of shrillness or coldness and a little weakness of the low notes and it puts off people who wants a woody and more "acoustic" tone even when amplifed.

Graphtech makes the Resomax NV2 TOM bridge which is made of an aluminium alloy and is much lighter than the traditional TOM brass and steel bridges (like Gibson, Gotoh etc.). The saddles of the Resomax is made of the Graphtech "string saver" material (not metal) which is likely the same as their "Black Tusc" nut material. Reports from internet fora and reviews say that the Resomax NV2 maintains the clarity of a metal TOM but doesn't have the 2kHz bump, and as such it should have a sound between the metal TOM and the wood bridge.

Despite the 2 kHz bump, I have tended to prefer the sound of a TOM for electric playing - and of course I appreciate the precise intonation, but I will give the Resomax NV2 bridge a try in the near future. For acoustic playing, I use wood saddles despite their tuning compromizes.

A small, but not unimportant, practical detail: I don't know why, but many luthiers make bridges with a post spacing different from the standard Gibson spacing (which is 2 29/32") - often 3". If one ever has a bridge made (or a whole guitar), I suggest insisting on the standard Gibson post spacing. I have done that with two guitars I have had made in the last couple of years. That way, one can keep the (hopefully) well fitted bridge base and easily swap the saddle part of the bridge - there is a lot available with that standard post spacing.

[jayx123]

Originally Posted by jorgemg1984

Same question: Plugged or unplugged? Or both?

plugged it sounded warmer and darker, unplugged couldn't hear much difference