-
Raised the stop tailpiece on my Fender JA-90 'Tele' a quarter turn on each end. Feels less stiff and more responsive to subltle bending techniques with no discernable loss of sustain or intonation accuracy. Just sayin'!
-
07-26-2014 08:58 AM
-
That's pretty normal. It's also the main reason some people top wrap a TOM type bridge on a Les Paul. Many people prefered the '53, '54 and '55 Les Paul gold top because of the wrap tail piece with no TOM brodge. Some of the players who don't want to top wrap the bridge . . will raise the tail piece screw/studs. Accomplishes pretty much the same thing as what you did . . reduces to break angle.
Originally Posted by Tom Karol
-
The impetus for my mod was that the 6th string was being pulled down by the tailpiece so much that it was subtly rattling against the back edge of the TOM bridge. So, I first raised that side just enough to alleviate that. Then I did a bit of Web research, and since the guitar seemed to feel stiffer than others with the same configuration and strings, I raised the whole thing a bit more as an experiment. I may be imagining a difference in feel, but I'm convinced I like it.
-
Another reason for raising a stop TP could be to reduce the chance of deforming a TOM bridge over a decade or 3..
-
[QUOTE=PTChristopher2;446006]Hiya Gents,
>>> Just sayin'!
Indeed, lots of fun to tweak a guitar and enjoy the result.
As I guess is pretty well known, the stop tailpiece configuration is a somewhat accidental re-purposing of the older-than-me LP bridge hardware design.
In my opinion and measurement (both subject to error certainly), it is really hard to get a actual difference based on stop tailpiece height, never mind a humanly discernible one.
Reducing the break angle would have to reduce the friction of the string in the saddle to the point where the string freely slides through the saddle when making modest bends. AND, this would have to result in the stretch and shrink of the very short length of string between the bridge and stop tail making any measurable difference.
I have tried going from fully cranked down, to raised to the point of break angle inadequacy on a few strings. I could never get a measurable side deflection difference in the sort of ranges we would use for fretting or making moderate bends.
And as we have plowed through too many times here: For extreme bends aiming for a given pitch change (like a full step bend or something), the stretch of the string past the bridge has no impact of the actual force required to make the full step pitch change - you just need to push the string a bit farther.
But this all pales vs. any extra enjoyment from a guitar based on some hand tweaking. Whatever works, as they say.
I can see where your disagreement makes sense. But, what then would you attribute the difference in feel and tone when playing a '54 gold top with a wrap around TP . . . and a '56 gold top with a TOM? I've had both . . and have played a number of others, which I didn't own. To me, there was a definite difference of tone and feel. I didn't interpret the tonal difference as attributable to typical nuances in different guitars of a similar model. Psychosomatic? Or maybe just plain ol' . . . psycho???>>> It's also the main reason some people top wrap a TOM type bridge on a Les Paul.
Uh-huh. Maybe a pic of Duane with a tailpiece thus wrapped inspired more players than Isaac Newton - who had his own Allman Tribute Band at Trinity College, Cambridge but would not have concluded that top-wrapping makes a practical difference.
But still, if a player makes a change in the configuration and likes the result, surely that counts for more than some needless analysis.
Chris
-
I've tried raising and lowering the stop tailpiece on a 335 style guitar to see if it changed the sustain or made bends any easier, but every height felt and sounded the same.
-
At the very least, I did get rid of that rattle caused by the the 6th string being pulled down too sharply by the tailpiece so that it touched the back of the TOM bridge housing, with - if not positive ancillary effects - at least no ill effects that I can discern.
-
This is interesting, and a little weird. On the one hand, my shrinking brain can just about follow the maths ( or 'math') set out by PTC- and even intuitively, I have never bought the ''original 17% break angle" gibson headstock business anyway, can't feel any difference in that at all. Or, raised vs not raised ST's
And yet….like many of us, I have played very similar models, in my case 175-types, where the string tension and "feel" apparently vary a lot, even with exact same string sets, very similar action & nut settings, even same 0149 frets. I have a L4 currently which ''feels'' very stiff with 12s, and another L4 and 175 which both "feel" significantly looser and slicker. Ebony fretboard? hardly seems likely….Neck profile?? they are all different…Hmmmm. Brain shrinkage? yeah, could well be...
So, PTC, if we leave out the break angle business at both head and bridge, what else might affect things, apart from string tension or decaying brain phenomena, to give these powerful playing action "feel '' differences, in very similar instruments?
-
Ah, the 'maths/ math' thing. Well I have never thought about it until just now; but, I don't know how it was for you, but we had several different math classes and sub-classes; pure, applied, and then the trig and algebra and all the rest of it,
so I suppose subliminally it became 'maths', a collective noun signifying fear and loathing. To me, anyway.
The sports/ sport thing, got no answer to that. English, the language of studied ambiguities...
This Gibson B stock idea I suspect is a forum fantasy; true, I have had a couple of dodgy truss rods and a gooey nitro item, but just put it down to my share of less-than-perfect luck.
But - and I don't want to bore you to distraction- take these 3 175/L4 guitars in question; all the same dimensions apart from neck shape, all with really good nut action ( I have the files to prove it) all hardly any relief, but just enough, same strings, held the same way ( I think). And yet, feeling so different to play. As you say, it could be so many small variables.
I take a secret pleasure in the fact that, for me, the Norlin tank 175 with all the 'wrong' features, "wrong" head angle and the weird thin-to-fat maple neck is the easiest of them all to play. Nicely ironic.
-
On my used Epiphone Sheraton II when I did its major overhaul, I swapped the buzzing ABR-1 knock off bridge for a heavier Guitar Fetish Nashville style (no retention wire). The Nashville with its screws facing the tailpiece (as opposed to the ABR-1 facing the neck) is wider than an ABR-1. As a result of the wider bridge some of the strings were now touching the side of the bridge even before getting on the saddles which is not a good thing. So I had to raise the Tailpiece a bit to clear; regarding tone I can't really tell much difference though. So in my case playing with TP height was critical in a mechanical way!
-
I screw down the TP on my Les Paul and top wrap the strings. I get the solid anchor of a screwed TP and softer feel plus the strings don't hit the back of my ABR. YMMV.
-
I screw down the TP on my Les Paul and top wrap the strings. I get the solid anchor of a screwed TP and softer feel plus the strings don't hit the back of my ABR. YMMV.
-
Odd that a calm thread poking into some corners of a question seems to fly under the radar of wide forum interest. Maybe if it was titled "Gibson Hates Britons"
You do seem to like stirring things up.
I've not noticed a difference on my "GIBSON" ES339 tonally or playability by raising or lowering the tailpiece.Last edited by Finn; 07-27-2014 at 12:48 PM.
-
It's a scientific fact that a given string tuned to a given pitch can have one and only one tension.
And now, running for shelter....... :-)
-
You're not understanding something about the mechanics of the string traveling over the bridge saddle. To illustrate, imagine a rope tied to a tree and pulled taught by barely wrapping it around another tree. To pull it taught (say it takes 100 lbs of tension to do so), you only need to deflect it at the second tree at a shallow angle. If a helper tries to yank the rope, it'll move, and it will bend like a giant guitar string, even if you maintain 100 lbs tension. The rope will travel against the second tree, also.
Now, pull the rope back around the second tree at an acute angle. The rope will still stretch to some degree, but it'll be much harder to pull it across the second tree, because the "break angle" over the second tree is less shallow. The tension doesn't change, only the ease with which the rope will move around the second tree.
When you fret a guitar string, (or bend a string), two things happen. 1. The string stretches a little. 2. The string moves a little over the nut and the bridge saddle. It's just a little, but the harder it is to pull the string over the bridge saddle, the stiffer the string will feel, regardless of the tension to which it's tuned. The sharper the break angle at the bridge, the harder it is to move that string over the bridge saddle. Tension/ tuning aren't the issue.
By the way, whenever you bend a string or even fret a string, you are changing the tension slightly.
-
I believe I do understand that. But.... Originally Posted by SuperFour00
First: The distance between the bridge and the stop tailpiece is so short as compared to the length of string between the nut and the tailpiece that the difference is insignificant.
Second: The strings doesn't glide that much over a normal bridge that it would make a significant difference. Of couse that doesn't apply to roller or rocker bridges.
Third: To raise the pitch say one step you will have to bend a longer distance to reach the target pitch with a lesser break angle if your proposed mechanism actually worked - because, again, there's one and only one tension which will make a given string at a given length play at a given pitch.
Now, back to my shelter....Last edited by oldane; 07-27-2014 at 03:44 PM.
-
"The distance between the bridge and the stop tailpiece is so short as compared to the length of string between the nut and the tailpiece that the difference is insignificant." Originally Posted by oldane
How have you determined that? My experience is that it is significant. Do you have a cite to a scientific test of some sort that supports your opinion?
"The strings doesn't glide that much over a normal bridge that it would make a significant difference. Of couse that doesn't apply to roller or rocker bridges."
It doesn't take much to influence the feel of a guitar's action. A fraction of a Millimeter will affect the feel of fretting and bending strings, IMO. I'm not taking you statement as fact.
"To raise the pitch say one step you will have to bend a longer distance to reach the target pitch with a lesser break angle if your proposed mechanism actually worked - because, again, there's one and only one tension which will make a given string at a given length play at a given pitch."
Are you implying that bending a string slightly farther tends to make for a stiffer feel to a guitar's action? I think you're wrong ... ease of bending isn't thwarted by having to easily bend just a bit farther. You're not presenting facts, you're presenting opinions. I'll even call my own observations "opinion" for the purposes of this discussion, since it would require technical instruments and engineering know-how to positively prove my position through experimentation.
You keep repeating that a given pitch (presumably for a given string gauge/alloy at a given scale length) requires a given tension. None of my observations involve tension. The friction over the bridge saddle, and the deflection of the string (steel strings are somewhat stiff: they are less apt to move easily over the bridge saddle if the angle of deflection is more acute) are the only things limiting the movement of the string, and affecting the feel of the strings in terms of bendability or fretting.
-
I remember PTChris actually quoting measurements to support some of my opinions in another thread about a year ago. Maybe (or maybe not) he'll chime in a some point.
-
If Chris is a Mechanical Engineer, I hope he posts his experimental data in a way that allows us to see how he measured the ductility of the wire, the deflection resistance of the wire based on it's flexibility, and the friction quotients of the bearing surfaces. Besides micrometers and force scales, he'll need some measuring lasers and the computer programs to decipher the measurements. Or, we can agree to disagree, whatever ... I know what top-wrapping feels like, and what raising a stop-tail bridge feels like, and so do thousands of other experienced players. Originally Posted by oldane
-
Like in anything, if it appears to be working for someone no one can come up and say it is impossible; it would be like saying what you experience has no validity; it is just in your mind.
Well sometimes what is in one's mind is enough to make him feel happy: like when a musician is listening with his wallet and eyes and is convinced it is better because it HAS to be: that is like self suggested placebo effect.
A lot of snake oil and other BS is being spread on the net but in any case it makes for very entertaining discussions.
-
Well, oldane can certainly claim that the tension required to bring an individual string up to a pitch at a certain scale length is set in stone, and that altering the break angle of a string over a bridge saddle doesn't alter the tension without altering the pitch. What he hasn't proven, and I don't think he or his friend can prove, is that the feel of a string, at a given tension, isn't affected by variances in friction and resistance based on the angle of the string bending over the bridge saddle. Originally Posted by vinlander
-
Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Well Chris, here's a link to the tool you'll need to get that rough estimate. If you won't share the measurements you've already taken, maybe you'll at least tell us which style force gauge you used to make your measurements.
http://shop.yourtoolingstore.com/For...Gauges_c43.htm
I worked for a Scientific testing lab for a while years ago, part time. They had some marvelous instruments. We attached some gauges to the underside of a parking structure floor and measured the deflection of the concrete under a load (big swimming pool of water) to the micrometer. Measuring an immense steel reinforced floor was scary ... you're standing under the load-bearing floor with tons of water over your head. I guess measuring a tiny steel string is more exacting. I've never done that, so I'm fascinated to know the methods you used.
My point earlier is that claims of lower string tension with a raised bridge are clearly erroneous ... and I gather your measurements showed that, but a change in feel is quite another matter. I still don't know if your experiments prove that.
-
Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Great analysis, thanks for the input. Here's my take on it: I submit that a spring scale is not sensitive enough to measure minor variances in string dynamics. There are several forces at work here.
Here's a simple experiment anyone can do, just to get a feel for the subject: take a plain steel string and tie it to a substantial weight (attach the weight to the "ball end"). Find a metal table (or rest a piece of angle iron over the edge of a wood table if you like). Now, lift the weight by the string (it's really a wire, right?) Next, lean the wire on the edge of the table at say, a 30 degree angle ... lift the weight again. Finally, bend the wire to 45 or 50 degrees or more over the edge of the table and raise the weight. You'll find the sharper the angle of the wire, more resistance to moving the weight, even just a little. That's because of two things, friction and rigidity. There is friction between the wire and the smooth table, and also, the wire is rigid to a degree. You can role a guitar string into a loop, but putting a right angle bend in one, that takes considerably more force. As a bend is created at the break angle of a bridge saddle, (which is far more sudden than the gentle curve of the metal table ... try pulling the string over a steel straight-edge!) ... that bend exerts force against the rigidity of the string.
You can Google this part, or I will later after the gig, but Human fingers are capable of incredible sensitivity. We are able, usually, to detect incredibly small variations in surfaces. I submit we are also able to detect tiny variations in dynamic forces. I think you did a rough measurement of static resistance that didn't address the dynamic forces involved in playing a guitar, versus just moving a string in one direction.
At any rate, I have always felt a difference in string feel based on the break angle at the bridge, especially when it comes to bluesy bends. I'd love for a real engineer (not that you aren't) to do some tests with highly sensitive instruments, because I think our hands are sensitive to subtle variations, and that explains the phenomenon to me at least.
-
[QUOTE=PTChristopher2;446291]Hi oldane,
Actually I deleted my earlier posts , sensing the coming drift off the cliff.
Actually while there are indeed factors such as the properties of the steel itself and the actual friction over the bearing surfaces, all you need to measure is the force required to move a given string from its resting position to some carefully controlled distance that is remotely similar to the sort of deflections we encounter when playing.
As we move the tailpiece height up and down the steel properties remain constant, and the friction over the bearing surfaces does not need to be quantified to measure whether or not there is actual movement over them.
I guess there are two methods to avoid the actual situation here. One is to go with "I feel it, so it must be there." Another is to blow faux complexity and technicality at the situation implying that there are deeper factors that somehow make the remarkably unlikely important - despite simple measurements of the actual effects at work.
Between snake oil and faux complexity it will be quite a chore to get anywhere with this.
Far better to go with "whatever floats your boat is just fine" and forget the sense if it. That is my plan. Well not in real life where it has significant downsides, just in Webville.
Good luck with this.
Wuss!!!
O&O,
Chris
-
I knew that "over & out stuff wasn't you. Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos