American Standard block string holes depth

[GerryBlue]

Looking for help here please, someone who owns an original American Standard can tell me how deep the string hole goes? Here's the thing: I've had a a MIM Player series for the last year, love it, but always felt the strings are a little stiffer than my American models with vintage bridge, researching I found that the block has the holes drilled deeper, supposedly for better tuning stability, but this has been shown to create the tightness effect, I found a temporary fix shown in the pics below, but I'm looking to get another block, or trem, most likely an American Standard series with the block saddles, thanks.

PD: A guitar player that is not obsessive is a bass player

PS 2: So besides everyone telling me I'm nuts, can anyone actually help and provide the measurement I asked for? Thanks in advance

 

[Ramblin'man]

Looking for a solution to a problem that does not exists? Good Luck...

I insert a toothpick from the top if a string end gets stuck. It rarely ever happens if using good strings or if there are no burrs in the hole.

 

[Ramblin'man]

If there is a bur take a drill bit the same size as the hole and put it in and turn it without putting downward pressure on the bit. You just want to remove the burr and not deepen the hole.

 

[ptb1]

American Standard block is a 2-point trem, and will not fit.
But I actually don’t understand the «problem». Tighter strings?

 

[Wulfrik]

Shallower string holes in the block are for resonance and ensuring that the end of the wind was well away from where the break angle occurs, as far as I knew.

I don’t see how it can make a difference to string tension, but I could be wrong. I would have thought, if anything, more distance = ‘tighter’.

 

[GerryBlue]

Looking for a solution to a problem that does not exists? Good Luck...

I insert a toothpick from the top if a string end gets stuck. It rarely ever happens if using good strings or if there are no burrs in the hole.

Oh, but it does exist, here's another example in another forum, maybe I should have asked there

Stiff bending on an Eric Johnson Strat..is it something to do with the 1/4 sawn neck?

:huh I remember my last one was really stiff and I think I was running Ernie Ball Slinkys on it. I just bought another one and wondering if there is something about the neck that makes bending and a good warbling vibrato more difficult?

www.thegearpage.net

 

[GerryBlue]

Shallower string holes in the block are for resonance and ensuring that the end of the wind was well away from where the break angle occurs, as far as I knew.

I don’t see how it can make a difference to string tension, but I could be wrong. I would have thought, if anything, more distance = ‘tighter’.

That's what one would assume but in this thread they say just the opposite is true:

Stiff bending on an Eric Johnson Strat..is it something to do with the 1/4 sawn neck?

:huh I remember my last one was really stiff and I think I was running Ernie Ball Slinkys on it. I just bought another one and wondering if there is something about the neck that makes bending and a good warbling vibrato more difficult?

www.thegearpage.net

 

[GerryBlue]

American Standard block is a 2-point trem, and will not fit.
But I actually don’t understand the «problem». Tighter strings?

I'd buy the whole asssembly and it would fit, as Player Strat has the two point trem with the posts at the same distance, what changes is the block

 

[StratUp]

Over in the Les Paul world, there are those that suggest that "top wrapping" the strings around the stop tailpiece makes strings easier to bend. The theory seems to revolve around the amount of string after the break point (saddle) and how that stretches when you bend.

Does it matter? Well, I've seen some strong application of physics to try to prove or disprove it. I've seen some significant subjective stands on the issue both ways. Certainly with a roller bridge I could see it happening. Whether it does with a fixed saddle, I can't say. I've seen no scientific tests of string tension back to back.

But, assuming for a moment that it is true, then what you've done and experimented with is the same thing. You've added more string past the saddle. So, bends would be easier if you buy into the theory above.

But the other thing I would throw out is that I have two nearly identical guitars with nearly identical setup. One is "softer" to fret. I can't figure out why. Maybe is is that .002 difference at the nut. Or some angle difference in the neck I don't see. But whatever it is, it's elusive - so far anyway. But I would look very closely for some minor difference that could also be the cause. Nut, saddles, trem springs, blocking or decking, etc. There might be another reason besides string length. Look around and experiment a bit if the block change doesn't do it.

FWIW - As OCD as I am, if I used the setup you have, I would find some small, solid pipe to use there instead of four ferrules. With some luck (no need to have parts machined), you might be able to find some "sleeves" that would tap in there a fill the deep holes to the depth you prefer. Perhaps "spring pins/roller pins' come in a size that works. You might have to cut them to length, file, perhaps drill the block to allow reasonable insertion.

 

[GerryBlue]

Over in the Les Paul world, there are those that suggest that "top wrapping" the strings around the stop tailpiece makes strings easier to bend. The theory seems to revolve around the amount of string after the break point (saddle) and how that stretches when you bend.

Does it matter? Well, I've seen some strong application of physics to try to prove or disprove it. I've seen some significant subjective stands on the issue both ways. Certainly with a roller bridge I could see it happening. Whether it does with a fixed saddle, I can't say. I've seen no scientific tests of string tension back to back.

But, assuming for a moment that it is true, then what you've done and experimented with is the same thing. You've added more string past the saddle. So, bends would be easier if you buy into the theory above.

But the other thing I would throw out is that I have two nearly identical guitars with nearly identical setup. One is "softer" to fret. I can't figure out why. Maybe is is that .002 difference at the nut. Or some angle difference in the neck I don't see. But whatever it is, it's elusive - so far anyway. But I would look very closely for some minor difference that could also be the cause. Nut, saddles, trem springs, blocking or decking, etc. There might be another reason besides string length. Look around and experiment a bit if the block change doesn't do it.

FWIW - As OCD as I am, if I used the setup you have, I would find some small, solid pipe to use there instead of four ferrules. With some luck (no need to have parts machined), you might be able to find some "sleeves" that would tap in there a fill the deep holes to the depth you prefer. Perhaps "spring pins/roller pins come in a size that works. You might have to cut them to length, file, perhaps drill the block to allow reasonable insertion.

Thanks for the great answer, nice idea about the "tubing", but that's why I am asking around about the American Standard bridge, maybe there is a definitive solution. Cheers

 

[PCollen]

Looking for help here please, someone who owns an original American Standard can tell me how deep the string hole goes? Here's the thing: I've had a a MIM Player series for the last year, love it, but always felt the strings are a little stiffer than my American models with vintage bridge, researching I found that the block has the holes drilled deeper, supposedly for better tuning stability, but this has been shown to create the tightness effect, I found a temporary fix shown in the pics below, but I'm looking to get another block, or trem, most likely an American Standard series with the block saddles, thanks.

PD: A guitar player that is not obsessive is a bass player

".... but this has been shown to create the tightness effect..." It has ? Who has this been shown by ?

 

[AlexJCRandall]

The only reason for holes causing issue is where the string wraps start to interfere with the block or trem plate somehow.
Strings are immobile in the block, with many fulcrum points that are identical no matter where the ball is located. It is laughable to suggest that it affects feel.
If you have a fulcrum point that the string moves across like the nut, then exposed string behind the scale length will have some bearing on the elasticity of the string feel.
Otherwise setup is the critical aspect here. Almost no 2 guitars will play the same way anyhow due to the way the neck wood reacts to tension. So searching for other reasons seems like deliberately looking in the wrong place first.

 

[dirocyn]

Swap the necks, and see if the "tightness effect" follows the neck, not the trem block.

Maybe it won't, and you're on the verge of a scientific discovery that will rewrite the physics textbook. But you will have to figure out how to measure it, objectively and repeatably.

 

[Wulfrik]

That's what one would assume but in this thread they say just the opposite is true:

Stiff bending on an Eric Johnson Strat..is it something to do with the 1/4 sawn neck?

:huh I remember my last one was really stiff and I think I was running Ernie Ball Slinkys on it. I just bought another one and wondering if there is something about the neck that makes bending and a good warbling vibrato more difficult?

www.thegearpage.net

Umm, the problem with the linked thread is that different posters have different/opposite ideas of what 'far down in the block' means... to some it's closer to the trem plate, to others it's closer to the backplate screwholes. Both sets of people come up with reasons why their strats seem slinkier.

I'm sorry, but I think any difference made by where the strings sit in the block would be so, so minimal you'd be imagining it.

Changing string gauge would serve you better AND is proven, the differences being based in physics and designed with playing tension in mind..

 

[GerryBlue]

".... but this has been shown to create the tightness effect..." It has ? Who has this been shown by ?

Anecdotal evidence and experience, but I guess if this was Eric Johnson saying he can hear difference between brands of batteries in pedals, or this same actual thing, where he has his trem block with shallower string holes, nobody would question it. I know what I feel when I play.

 

[dirocyn]

Over in the Les Paul world, there are those that suggest that "top wrapping" the strings around the stop tailpiece makes strings easier to bend. The theory seems to revolve around the amount of string after the break point (saddle) and how that stretches when you bend.

Some of those arguments also get into the breakover angle at the bridge, which would influence how much friction must be overcome for the string to slide past the saddle--I would argue changing that angle by 15 or 20 degrees probably makes a bigger difference than changing the length of the string behind the saddle by 10 or 12mm, at least on a non-roller saddle.

In any case, there's a straightforward "test" for the top-wrapping argument: use two of the same string on the same guitar--one top-wrapped, the other not. Do the test with tuners that are parallel with each other on the headstock, to eliminate any difference from extra string on the headstock side. Tune the two strings to the same note, adjust the intonation on the two strings to be the same, and try them out side-by-side. This eliminates most variables, but there's still hand position (ergonomics) and the nut slot. So you switch which string is top-wrapped and repeat the test. This is sufficient to prove for yourself one way or the other; if you want to actually prove scientifically you'll need 4 guitars (1 with both strings top-wrapped, one with both strings bottom, and two with one of each), 100 blindfolded guitarists, and a bit of statistical analysis.

Does it matter? Well, I've seen some strong application of physics to try to prove or disprove it. I've seen some significant subjective stands on the issue both ways. Certainly with a roller bridge I could see it happening. Whether it does with a fixed saddle, I can't say. I've seen no scientific tests of string tension back to back.

It's awkward to measure string tension on an actual guitar; you'd have to have a scale inserted in between the string and a solid fixed point on the guitar (the tuner or bridge, perhaps) and then expect arguments about how inserting the measuring tool there invalidates the measurement. And in any case, the actual tension isn't what you'd want to measure. The thing people want to know is how "loose" or "tight" or "slinky" the string feels when you bend it. You could measure how much force it takes to deflect the string by 1cm at the 12th fret, using a simple ruler and fishing scale. Or you could measure how much force it takes to bend up a set amount (a whole step)--but that would require a much more complicated test jig, and it introduces additional variables--like friction across the fret.

 

[StratUp]

Some of those arguments also get into the breakover angle at the bridge, which would influence how much friction must be overcome for the string to slide past the saddle--I would argue changing that angle by 15 or 20 degrees probably makes a bigger difference than changing the length of the string behind the saddle by 10 or 12mm, at least on a non-roller saddle.

In any case, there's a straightforward "test" for the top-wrapping argument: use two of the same string on the same guitar--one top-wrapped, the other not. Do the test with tuners that are parallel with each other on the headstock, to eliminate any difference from extra string on the headstock side. Tune the two strings to the same note, adjust the intonation on the two strings to be the same, and try them out side-by-side. This eliminates most variables, but there's still hand position (ergonomics) and the nut slot. So you switch which string is top-wrapped and repeat the test. This is sufficient to prove for yourself one way or the other; if you want to actually prove scientifically you'll need 4 guitars (1 with both strings top-wrapped, one with both strings bottom, and two with one of each), 100 blindfolded guitarists, and a bit of statistical analysis.




It's awkward to measure string tension on an actual guitar; you'd have to have a scale inserted in between the string and a solid fixed point on the guitar (the tuner or bridge, perhaps) and then expect arguments about how inserting the measuring tool there invalidates the measurement. And in any case, the actual tension isn't what you'd want to measure. The thing people want to know is how "loose" or "tight" or "slinky" the string feels when you bend it. You could measure how much force it takes to deflect the string by 1cm at the 12th fret, using a simple ruler and fishing scale. Or you could measure how much force it takes to bend up a set amount (a whole step)--but that would require a much more complicated test jig, and it introduces additional variables--like friction across the fret.

No argument. And I don't take a stand on any of it except that top-wrapping will definitely put marks on your bridge, so don't do it on your vintage tailpiece.

As for the angle being the issue, if that's true then you could just raise your stop-piece to change the break angle and get a different feel. Sounds like an interesting experiment. For those that say you have to lock down the tailpiece for proper sustain, you can put solid washers under the stop-piece and tighten down onto those.

On a Strat, you could add some neck angle and raise the saddles for more break. Or the opposite. Each should result in a different feel.

And as a side note: There's also a contingent that insists a solid wrap-around stop/bridge combo has the best sustain (LP Jr, etc). But you can't tighten those down because it's also the bridge height adjustment. Probably some of the same people who insist that the TOM tailpiece has to be tightened down for good sustain, LOL. (Again, I take no stand).

I suppose it's possible that the "slinky improvement" claimed to be felt could be tested by looking at both tension (fish meter) and how far you have to bend to get to a specified note. If there's no change in either then it can't be having any actual effect.

--
That brings us back around to the OP... he could do those bend/tension tests. Or, he can just go with it if he likes the feel. Whatever works for you is what's right.

On a Strat, I think the one biggest difference is in blocking the tailpiece so that it doesn't let the bridge move forward (down trem). That lets me bend with ease to notes of joy. But, some would say the slinky feel is when it can move forward. YMMV.

 

[StratUp]

OP: Try swapping the trem springs and matching the claw location, neck angle, relief and saddle height to the guitar you like. See if that gets you the feel you want without buying any parts. Just the springs and claw adjustment might be enough to force the change.

 

[dirocyn]

As for the angle being the issue, if that's true then you could just raise your stop-piece to change the break angle and get a different feel. Sounds like an interesting experiment.

Raising and lowering the stop bar changes the length behind the string and the saddle angle at the same time (good old Pythagorus) so I can't say for sure if it's the angle or the length. Still, I recommend everyone who owns a stop-tail guitar experiment with it. It's adjustable, so find the adjustment you like best. It seems to me that raising the stop-bar makes the strings feel slinkier and tuning stability after bends may be improved--but if you go too high it introduces rattles and may rob sustain. Lowering the stop bar seems to make the body vibrate more.

 

[StratUp]

...but if you go too high it introduces rattles and may rob sustain. ...

Don't run an ABR-1