-
Yesterday, I looked at an L-5 Wes Montgomery for sale locally. The original owner had a Bigsby installed when he bought the guitar in 2002 by a professional luthier (He had the original tailpiece as well). I had asked esteemed forum member Deacon Mark for advice on this guitar and he warned me to check the top for top-sinking. Sure enough, the top on this guitar had sunk. There was 1/2 inch plus of bare post between the TOM and the bridge base. I passed on the purchase.
A L-5 WESMO has one less brace than a L-5 CES (along with one less pickup and set of controls). The luthier who installed the Bigsby probably did not know about the missing brace. Most luthiers are lacking knowledge about archtops in general. There are many archtops that can take a Bigsby just fine (if you like that sort of thing) and most of them are probably laminates.
I started this thread as a warning to those who would install a Bigsby on an archtop as well as those who might buy one. Beware. On some guitars, a Bigsby is not a good idea.
-
02-08-2022 05:22 PM
-
I have owned several archtops that had a Bigsby installed and not one of them had any problems with a sinking top, laminate or solid. I did see several
older Gibsons though without a B. were the top had sunken, on one ES-350 TD (early 60's) even severely so. Do you think that using the bar puts undue pressure on the top ?
That would certainly affect the top's vibration but the usual slight wobbling shouldn't put too much stress on it ? The weight of the unit does not actually touch the top and if so only at the outer perimeter where the wood is stiff and rather thick...
On the guitar you saw it could as well have been a faulty neck-angle that made it necessary to raise the bridge. Maybe ?
-
I would check to see if the sides of the f holes align and the overall arch before dismissing it.
I've seen many archtops w/unusually tall bridges that didn't have any top sink.
I found a friend a really nice blonde '53 ES-350 that had the tp swapped for a Bigsby. fortunately it came w/the orig gold trapeze and we reinstalled it. that guitar had a very tall bridge w/out a trace of top sink.
-
Well the interesting thing is that a fully carved spruce top would lead me to think it might crack or have some other stress rather than simply sinking. The sinking down in a laminate guitar I can see because it is not a solid top. However anytime the guitar like a Wes L5 has unusual stress that was it was not design to take then pretty much anything can happen. The spare post showing on the tunomatic certainly is not normal on an L5. Also on those particular guitars they generally were under pretty good quality control. They all show look approximately the same in set up. So that any given Wes L5 the differences in bridge/saddle height should be minimal.
In the case there could be a chance that nothing actually happens to the guitar if it is changed back to the real tailpiece. However I suggest putting the added stress and explaining to anyone in the future, into simply getting a WesMo L5 without this problem. I dare say the Wes L5 might be the most popular jazz guitar for real buying right now. The reason being they are going to players of all abilities and even a collector of sorts likes them, but many casual working jazz guitars like them, have them, or want one.
Finally to add one small point on Bigsby Tailpieces. Never put one on a carved top guitar of any kind. Not that they cannot handle them or that they will always be a problem, but it is just plain stupid! Get a guitar that was design for a bigsby at the outset and of course most jazz players hate them. Chet Atkins used one and I love his playing but it his playing and sound to me, had zero to do with his Bigsby. When he played a guitar without one he sounded the same and just as good if not better.
Stupid does what stupid does..........I put a Bigsby on my Wes L5
-
I cannot believe that a Hutch signed Custom shop guitar would leave the factory with a bridge as high as this one was. In addition, the pickguard no longer made good contact with the top near the bridge.
-
For a good attractive price like $2500 perhaps the L5WM in question could have a soundpost or two positioned under the top to push it back up to its proper arch. I know this sounds like anthema to the bunch of us but it serves the purpose of putting it back in service, averting more damage to the top, and it could actually sound rather good plugged in...like a Grestch! I have no issue with a nice spruce soundpost or two. Don't they consider the soundpost the anima, the spirit of the bowed instrument? I have always wanted to try a carbon fibre tube as guitar soundpost. It could be surprisingly pleasant.
I don't know why some put a Bigsby on an L5WM when they could have bought a Grestch Falcon instead but they are what make the world an interesting place.
-
This seller's main guitar is a Gretsch White Falcon (he is a rockabilly guy). I think the top is stable and the solution for this guitar is to ditch the Bigsby, fill and touch up the Bigsby holes and get a new thicker bridge base to cover the overly exposed posts. He was asking $5800. A no issue Sunburst WESMO is worth 7K today, so I am thinking the right price on this one is $4500-$4800 (If you are OK with the issues). At $2500, I'll take two please
Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
-
Maybe you should check it out 1 more time unless you're moving on, though doubt he'd come down that much Originally Posted by Stringswinger
This seller's main guitar is a Gretsch White Falcon (he is a rockabilly guy). I think the top is stable and the solution for this guitar is to ditch the Bigsby, fill and touch up the Bigsby holes and get a new thicker bridge base to cover the overly exposed posts. He was asking $5800. A no issue Sunburst WESMO is worth 7K today, so I am thinking the right price on this one is $4500-$4800 (If you are OK with the issues). At $2500, I'll take two please
Then again there's always another guitar
-
I noticed recently in perusing a 1956 Gibson catalog that the Bigsby was offered as an option. I have seen a 56 ES5 made that way and it seemed fine.
I never understood the desire for a Bigsby until I heard a really good local country player who made it sound awesome.
-
I don’t know about the one in question, but I’ve seen some Hutch signed archtops with no top issues and a high set bridge. One in particular, a LeGrand was one of the best playing archtops I’ve laid my hands on. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
-
After seeing John McGlaughlin with his Bigsby equipped Johnny Smith Gibson, I was sold! Have them on an Elferink Tonemaster Archtop, Gibson ES-339, and used to own a Benedetto Bambino with one as well! Love the ability to add subtle bends, etc.
And once you learn to change strings properly it isn’t hard at all!
-
Too many issues for me. Someone less picky than me will buy it. Try and find one these days. Originally Posted by wintermoon
-
Yes, but the ES5 was a plywood guitar (essentially a 3 PU 350 with square position markers). Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Sendt fra min SM-T810 med Tapatalk
-
I’ll just say that my #1 is a Byrdland with a Bigsby; it’s had the Bigsby for a gazillion years, and the top hasn’t suffered any deformation.
-
Excuse the naive question, but why would you put a Bigsby on a high-quality archtop in the first place? Just because you can? Or some other reason?
-
Listen to John McGlaughlin with his Free Spirits band on YouTube .
-
why wouldn’t you? Originally Posted by Phil59
-
Well, it was a serious question. Thank you for your helpful, informative answer. Originally Posted by customxke
-
Your Byrdland has a Brace to suupport the top near the bridge pickup and can take a Bigsby. On a WESMO, the missing brace makes it more of a risk. Originally Posted by customxke
-
Some players like the Bigsby effect and also like high quality archtops. Originally Posted by Phil59
-
Bigsby can be utilized for a certain smooth sounding vibrato (pitch) that can be manipulated by a musicians hand, as compared to vibrato on an amp or a pedal. That allows for a musician to utilize musical elements to create a musical end. There are only four areas of sound: pitch, amplitude, duration, and timbre. That is that basic elements that we get to work with. One of my “oh, I get it moments”, was when I realized that the type of study and practice that I had utilized in learning music, was really based on those four elements. If those elements are applied with intent then music happens. The instrument is really the least important element. How useful a bigsby is about a persons musical “voice”. I believe there are no real boundaries, but just norms. The cool thing with art is that the norms should be broken. The un-cool thing about art is that, when norms are broken there tends to be less immediate finical compensation. However, there is also the fact that, if no norms are broken, then art can become less captivating. Sometimes that limits the finical gains, sometimes that maximizes the finical rewards. Originally Posted by Phil59
Over all I find musicians to be the most conservative of all artist. Outside of political theory, I would find this very frustrating. I however I started to understand what was taking place, and because of that, was less frustrated.
(The political theory stuff still frustrates me. Real answers to real problems are not about ideology and come from many sources. Those sources are spread throughout the political spectrum and have weakness and strengths. In reality that is the way it works and the vast majority of us accept that. We just have a difficult time being honest with ourselves).
(Back to the topic), I realized that in art there are no real solutions, no real answers. For example, is fast better? In sports it often tends to be. In art not so much. What we are doing is subjective. We all feel the weight of that. The question, “is this good”, is almost impossible to answer. The question, “is this better then x”, is even more vague. I think that creates a certain attitude that can become ossified and insinlar. There are more issues that take place to create the mentioned problem with musicians, but I will leave those for another day.
-
I wouldn't put a Bigsby on an archtop. A Floyd Rose, maybe....
Just kidding
-
Twang bar goes boing
-
I'm on the fence with this one right now. My '61 Guild X-175 came stock with the "Guildsby" (B3 I think) and an aluminum bridge. The person who sold it to me converted it to period correct harp tailpiece, ebony bridge.
Very fine guitar. I love the Franz pickups. Neck alone is sweet, wonderful for jazz. Middle position takes it elsewhere. Having heard many similar Guilds - with the stock Guildsby setup - I can hear how wild and fine this guitar can be for louder, more out there stuff. Rockabilly, early rock, atmospheric stuff. For that, trem plus the middle position seem to be an essential part of the sound.
So I'm strongly tempted to convert it back to stock. Have a better (to my taste) Tru Arc brass compensated bridge in hand, plus the original Guildsby. So it wouldn't be hard. Still, I can't quite pull the trigger on it. It's as if I have to choose a personality for this guitar, as if it might lose that fine jazz sound with the trem and metal bridge.
Really cannot decide. Tough choice.
-
Bigsbys are never a good idea on any guitar
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos