Epiphone ES-175 - any disadvantage in pinning the bridge?

[g-gulliver]

The Tune-O-Matic is pinned on the base but the base is not, or did I miss something ?

The bridge of my ES125T moved when it was stringed with 10's (when I bought it)
Now that I put 11's on it (D"Addario or La Bella) I never had problem of bridge move anymore

The TOM is attached to the rosewood bridge with the usual TOM posts.
I suspect the rosewood bridge has short and thin studs which locate it on, but not fix it to, the guitar top. (That's what I've seen on others, as original and luthier modified.)

And, as I've probably mentioned earlier, I appreciate that the additional tension of heavier strings should securely locate it.

[g-gulliver]

You won't get more feedback. About positioning the base, if you permanently attach it in the position that allows some leeway in both directions on the saddles with the strings you currently use, you'll be able to intonate a variety of strings. I never had an issue using 10s, 11s, 12s, 13s or 14s on an ES150D with a fixed bridge.

Thanks. Apppreciated. :-)

This might be a good point for me to bow-out of this thread.
Having started it, I'm keen to be polite and answer responses, but among the many helpful responses has been stuff which unsettles me, and I've no desire to get into arguments or insults with anyone.

I'm well aware of the view of 'archtops are jazz guitars, and should have a floating wooden bridge and thick strings'. But I'm not a jazz player and, having had a 175 come into my possession, am sufficiently intrigued by it to want to experiment with non-jazz styles and with thinner strings which better suit my preference.

[Greentone]

+1 never had a bridge move on ANY archtop. It's a string gauge issue.

[g-gulliver]

+1 never had a bridge move on ANY archtop. It's a string gauge issue.

Jeez, I wish people would just constructively answer the asked question - or, if they can't/won't, then stay out of it unless they've something relevant and helpful.

I can't stop anyone posting whatever they want - all I can do is decide how I react to it... which is usually to politely respond to and thank those who've made the effort to contribute, whilst trying to re-emphasize perspective. Maybe I should just selectively reply and ignore some responses.

I didn't ask 'Why does my bridge move?'
The question is regarding the advantages/disadvantages of aftermarket pinning as is OEM on some models.

For the nth time... although you mightn't have had movement, others have.

And yes, I know that with sufficient string tension the bridge should remain in place, but not everyone wants fat strings and with lighter gauge the bridge can be unintentionally moved.

Sure it's not purist and unlike how they were originally constructed - a lot of things have changed since the 30s. And it's practical... not just for light gauge use, but those times when all strings need to be off.

I suspect these two reasons are likely why some manufacturers (including Gretsch and Epiphone) sometimes pin bridges.

The succinct takeway for anyone else who may be wondering about the question asked seems to be... 'Although with sufficiently fat strings (and only uneducated oiks would play such an instrument with lights) you shouldn't need to pin it, if you do it sensibly it should be ok but may reduce the value because it's no longer original.'

So, goodnight and god-bless. Thanks.

Anyway, enough - please. We've all better to do.
:-)

[Jabberwocky]

Back when I was but a wee laddie, I waxed the wooden base of the bridge with beeswax and wondered thereafter why it was slip sliding all over the guitar!

[SuperFour00]

Thanks. Apppreciated. :-)

This might be a good point for me to bow-out of this thread.
Having started it, I'm keen to be polite and answer responses, but among the many helpful responses has been stuff which unsettles me, and I've no desire to get into arguments or insults with anyone.

I'm well aware of the view of 'archtops are jazz guitars, and should have a floating wooden bridge and thick strings'. But I'm not a jazz player and, having had a 175 come into my possession, am sufficiently intrigued by it to want to experiment with non-jazz styles and with thinner strings which better suit my preference.

The Gibson ES-175 has seen a lot of use in R&B and Blues. I had one in the 80s with 10s on it for blues use and, though my current 335 has 12s, it came to me with 9s and it has a fixed bridge. I hardly had to move the saddles at all to intonate it for 12s. I can't think of a down side to permanently attaching the bridge. I'd maybe make sure the base really fits the arch of the body well before pinning it down. It probably already does. Good luck with that, I think it'll turn out good.

[g-gulliver]

The Gibson ES-175 has seen a lot of use in R&B and Blues. I had one in the 80s with 10s on it for blues use and, though my current 335 has 12s, it came to me with 9s and it has a fixed bridge. I hardly had to move the saddles at all to intonate it for 12s. I can't think of a down side to permanently attaching the bridge. I'd maybe make sure the base really fits the arch of the body well before pinning it down. It probably already does. Good luck with that, I think it'll turn out good.

Thanks. Appreciated. :-)

[cc_mac]

From a practical standpoint the answer to the original question is arguably no depending on the method of pinning. I've not examined a factory pinned bridge but have seen those done post production. In those cases, what can be described as two small nail heads protrude from the bottom of the bridge which pierce the top of the body and eliminate movement of the bridge. The depth of the piercing does not exceed the thickness of the top. If this is done carefully with some allowable range of adjustment for a TOM then it's possible that it could accommodate a usable range of string gauges/tensions and still allow for optimal intonation for the guitar. If the pinning is done as described above and there came a need to move the bridge beyond that range it could simply be repositioned and the top pierced again in the needed location. It's likely that the amount of movement for repositioning would be less than half the width of the bridge base and therefore not expose the original pinning holes in the top.

[g-gulliver]

From a practical standpoint the answer to the original question is arguably no depending on the method of pinning. I've not examined a factory pinned bridge but have seen those done post production. In those cases, what can be described as two small nail heads protrude from the bottom of the bridge which pierce the top of the body and eliminate movement of the bridge. The depth of the piercing does not exceed the thickness of the top. If this is done carefully with some allowable range of adjustment for a TOM then it's possible that it could accommodate a usable range of string gauges/tensions and still allow for optimal intonation for the guitar. If the pinning is done as described above and there came a need to move the bridge beyond that range it could simply be repositioned and the top pierced again in the needed location. It's likely that the amount of movement for repositioning would be less than half the width of the bridge base and therefore not expose the original pinning holes in the top.

Thanks, Big 'hooray!' from me and a virtual cigar to you for suggesting what I thought/hoped to be so (and I didn't post just to get answers agreeing with me).

You didn't mention 'might devalue the guitar, because no longer original' as a potential disadvantage, but I'll not deduct points. (It might also add to the value because it's increased usability.)

[edh]

"(It might also add to the value because it's increased usability.)"

...doubt that.

[SuperFour00]

"(It might also add to the value because it's increased usability.)"

...doubt that.

Did I read the OP correctly, this is an Epiphone 175? What are they going for used, three or four hundred dollars? I wouldn't let the status of that guitar's resale value influence my decisions at that price point, it's an entry level guitar. Who cares if it's worth a few bucks less?

[Finn]

The bridge is pinned by the height adjustment screws so the holes are quite large, if you want to see actual pics check the thread Epihone ES-175 Premium the guy has posted pics of it.

[cc_mac]

There is a very good picture of the current EPI ES175 Premium with its method of bridge pinning here https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/attac...m-img_2051.jpg
Photo credit to the OP of that thread.

It's a robust pinning and repositioning that bridge base if it became necessary could be done but would best be accomplished by filling the holes and drilling new holes. That would require a lot of careful work but it could be done. Alternately one could replace the base or base and bridge with a non pinned version of their liking. It appears the diameter of holes in the top is less than 1/3 the width of the bridge so the range of placement for a new bridge base would most likely cover the existing factory holes. If bridge movement were a concern of the owner at that point than it could secured using one of the methods mentioned above.

All of this is of course speculative based on a real need to move the bridge from its factory assigned position which may never need to be done.

g-gulliver, the OP, did note that I deftly skirted the part of the post relating to 'might devalue the guitar, because no longer original.' Since I was called out I'll sum up my position on the monetary value of guitars new, used, modified or otherwise, henceforth