Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Guitar Discussion' started by Bob the builder, Jul 6, 2019.
My 65 and my 83 JV Squier has a factory shim.
No top wrap for me, and bar is down on the body.
Pigtail Bridge assembly.
Also the width of the TOM can vary. Mine is narrow. I've seen some the size of a bus! LOL
My PRS single cut is topped wrapped but that is the only option for that bridge.
My gibsons I string normal and haven't really put alot of thought into the advantages of top wrapping.
Not at the moment, but I did on my SG (now gone) and it felt springyer. So I raised the stop bar on my LP and got the same effect. I can't say it's not just psychological though cause that's what I expected.
I do. I think it looks cool. Sort of like the guitar has a trapeze. Epi LP. Actually, I’d love to find a trapeze that would cover the tailpiece holes.
Back to topic though, I don’t find that it makes any difference.
If you find one, let me know! I'd be very interested in something like that.
Dick Sherman is a friend of mine. Great songwriter.
Does having the strings touch the back of the bridge really cause the bridge to collapse ?
Also, that lp custom you have there should be used while wearing a tux.
It's pretty beat up. It's my Fogerty guitar. Looks good with flannel.
Re: Bridge collapse...
Dan nor I never implied anything like that.
It's simply a method that can be used if you want the stop bar right down but a high bridge precludes it by fouling the back of the bridge.
Top wrap has been standard practice for me since 2004. I find that with the stop tailpiece tightened down to the body, and with wrapover strings, I can perform much easier whole bends within the first 5 frets.
That, and because Jimmy Page did the same
Using the stop bar adjustment is the way they were designed.
Mine like yours requires the stop bar higher for the optimum set up.
I personally prefer the bar down on the body and without a sharp angle fouling the back of the bridge so I top wrap.
That video posted earlier was pretty instructive actually.
Re bridge collapse, there are a few examples in Dan Erlewines book and how he rectifies it. Top wrapping being one.
This short piece explains sag/collapse.
That's why in a following post....I said just that.
Substitute some for many...and I wouldn't have said a thing.
And judging by the responses here....its just some, not many.
Nope. I have tried it though, and I didn't like it. Felt too slinky to me, even with 11s.
No, having the strings touch the back of the bridge causes weird vibrations and potentially cuts the string, the back edge of a tune-o-matic is a metal 90 degree angle and potentially sharp.
Bridge collapse is from the bridge not being strong enough for the tension. On a Gibson scale guitar with 11s and standard tuning, you'll find close to 17 lbs tension per string--between the nut and saddle--and the same amount of tension between the saddle and the stop. So about 102 lbs for the whole guitar. If you have zero break angle you have zero downward tension on the nut (and an unplayable guitar because the string will bounce off the saddle) and if you had 180 degrees of break angle, you'd have 204 lbs downward tension on the nut--and nothing that looks like a guitar, unless it's one folded in half. The angle controls the tension on the saddle & bridge. My guess uninformed by physics or even Google verification is that a 90 degree angle (splitting the difference) would split the difference and put 102 lbs downforce on the bridge.
The real issue with bridge collapse is: how much tension can the saddle handle? It depends on the material, the strength of the shape, and the thickness. If the tension on the bridge exceeds its strength, it's going to collapse. But you'd need trial and error, or engineering calculations, to determine how much tension a particular bridge can handle. And all your good intentions and testing are out the window if the metal composition changes, which is a major issue for pot metal manufacturing.