I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

[Gearjoneser]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I've played strats as primary guitars for 17 years, and have had them either floating with bar, or anchored with no bar.

I can get used to either, but I like them anchored tightly to the wood, with no bar.
My whole style is more like Brad Paisley than Van Halen, and with all the chickenpickin and double stop bends I do, a floating bridge sounds too sour.....or fluttery.
I like the stiffer feel, especially using 11's in standard tuning.

Plus, I play Gibsons half the time, and those don't have whammies.

 

[Simon_F]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

Let's keep it respectful please - you know who you are!

 

[blueman335]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

Its how Leo meant it to sound.

Did Leo intend them to sound that way (not being a guitar player himself), or is that the way they sound after being designed to be inexpensive to produce?

 

[darnright]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

If you'll check Fender history, you'll find a number of hard-tail strats have been produced over the years. I have played some and they sounded very strat-like, in fact, if you didn't try to use a trem, you couldn't tell any difference. So I think it's more a matter of feel and taste as to having your trem float or mounted solid.

 

[Robert Delahunt]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

So that brings me back to the point of this thread. I just don't see why people do it.

In my opinion it really ruins the strat sound. Even if you don't use the bar, I think it still makes sense to float the bridge for several reasons.

Strats were not designed to be hardtails. Nothing wrong with a hardtail but a strat should be a strat.

The strat tone is not just from a 25.5" bolt on neck, alder body and low output single coils, but its also very much from the bridge and toneblock and the resounance they achieve. Its how Leo meant it to sound.

Additionally even though its very subtle, its what gives a strat that "shimmer". You lose that when you drop the bridge down flush and/or block the trem. That micro vibrato on the pick attack you just dont get with a hardtail.

On most strats I've seen/played/worked on, you also really mess up your break angle and have to set your saddles absurdly high keep a decent action if you but the bridge down flat. Even with the saddle screws extended as far as you can you might still have to low of action not to mention such a steep break angle. It depends on the neck pocket to some degree but on some guitars you can't even do it. or you have to compromise the rest of the setup just to make the bridge flush.

I've never found any difference in sustain either. A properly setup floating bridge sustains just fine to my ears.

Even more so, I've set mine up flush before and it sounded dead. Put it back up off the body and it came alive. Much better resounace and just a much move alive strat tone.

Blocking the bridge doesnt hurt much. I've but some little wood shims in before to do that though I persoanlly like little upbends on chords to give a cool little shimmer

That's cool and all, but I've never played a Strat with a floating bridge that sustained as long as a comparable Les Paul (mind you, build quality comparable, not price ). But like all things, I could be wrong, as my experience is limited.

But for what it's worth, I've never found a more sustain-loving combination than set neck and fixed bridge, for what it's worth....

 

[pinto79]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I'm a Strat trem flush to body guy too... if I need a trem, I bust out one of my 10 Floyded guitars to do the job.

I wish Fender would produce a nice MIM Hardtail...

 

[tone?]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I see what you mean man. there are alot of players out there as well as builders that think that the Fender trem wasnt meant to be mounted flush.

I like it flush on some guitars and on others i like it a bit floating. Not to pull up though. If the guitar already has a 'tight' feel to it, i set it up floating. Most of the time as someone else mentioned here i like keeping it flush on the body with three springs but not so tight. I like it to rest nicely and for it to barely pull up when i do a full step bend. For me , i set it up so it is not too tight and is not too spongy.

Every guitar is different. Eric Johnson has 5 springs on his and has it tightly sitting down. I think cause of the nature of the guitar ( has light wood and a rounder sound) it works great. For some of my guitars that are heavier cause i want a more rock sound it doesnt work good keeping it that tight. At least not for me.


I like some spongyness.

 

[Gr8Scott]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I guess it depends on the player and what he is looking for out of the strat. I think both approaches have merit, but I prefer my trem units to sit level and "floating". I use the trem quite a bit and even do slight up-bends with it. I don't wank on it like I do my floyd equipped guitar which receives MUCH abuse, but I do use it pretty often and primarily in the downward direction.

 

[tc]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I'm a Strat trem flush to body guy too... if I need a trem, I bust out one of my 10 Floyded guitars to do the job.

I wish Fender would produce a nice MIM Hardtail...

My Tom Delonge haha. I honestly think what the OP calls a dead tone flush I actually believe has more "body" to it. With vintage six screws i like the thing flat. I like to float em sometimes just a little bit. It's so low you couldn't tell unless you really took a good look on it...but right now my trem claw busted on me so I'm just gonna tighten the thing down...

One thing tho. The trem bar floating has a nicer feel than flush, but I still prefer flush when I'm not using the bar.

 

[david kornblatt]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

The skinny is this "the strat and its varients" is pretty much the most widely known and universally cheapest electric guitar a person will buy. So if a guy wants his axe flat agaist his plywood body or he wants it spongey going out of tune that his right personally i always say the tone is only as good as the player so there...i think you guys are both wrong.

 

[gunjabeans]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I'm a fan of a flush tremolo too. Tone was not my primary concern but rather how when you hold a note and bend another the held note drops slightly in pitch. That, and breaking a string forces you to stop playing on a floating trem because all the other strings go out of tune immediately. Its also a nightmare tuning up when you put on new strings with a floating trem. I never looked back really when I switched. The tone probably is more solid sounding, less jangly overtones I imagine. but I've never AB'd nor care to. I'm happy.

 

[LtKojak]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

It's necroposting season again?

 

[Van Noord]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

Something to realize OP, is that not all us Strat players are at home trying to cop Mark Knoplfers sound....

 

[ken361]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

Just a American Standard 2014 I had a MIM one and a Les Paul I first had it decked and after a lot of reading I decided to float it. Think it sounds better,warmer and less bright and stays in tune good. More people on Strat Talk.com float there bridges from what I read.

 

[Mincer]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

It's necroposting season again?

Apparently. But since this is here, I will say that lots of great music was made on instruments that were not used the way they were 'intended'.

 

[Artie]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

It's a good subject. No harm reviving it.

 

[Silence Kid]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

Feel somewhat silly responding, but it's relevant to me at this very moment so...

I have a float on my US/two point Strat, because I like using up-bend on the trem, enjoy coaxing trem flutter, and don't mind the sustain sponging this creates, as this is already a quite sustain-ful instrument. I have the springs set loose, because I enjoy a soft feel to the trem, and also because I can really hit the strings, and hear a vibrato characteristic just from doing that.

The springs are so loose on that guitar vibrato isn't as easy, because the trem "bends down" when you try to go up.

So on my cheap Strat copy, I have a flat-mount with the springs cranked fairly well, because I like to have one Strat where I can bend without a de-tune of the other strings; with a more solid, less resistant feel and vibrato is easier. I don't know how much actually shoving wood blocks in things etc. matters, but I find merit in both setups.

 

[baritone]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

9 years later, & I still do it the same way.

 

[Van Noord]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

I will say that if you do a non floating setup, DON'T screw that claw down super tight! Leave a bit of room. About a millimeter or two. Enough so that if you put firm pressure with one finger then you'll hear some faint tremelo. But not enough for your resting palm to do it.
If the bridge is too tight, the sound can be dull and lifeless. Leaving just a touch of space allows the guitar to bounce and breathe more.

 

[treyhaislip]

Re: I can't understand not floating a strat bridge

It's a good subject. No harm reviving it.

I've done some searches before and brought back a zombie thread–was berated the first time I did it when I first joined.

Sometimes a newbie will ask a question and someone will say "already discussed, use the search feature" but when someone brings up an old discussion some forum members don't like it...

I'll make jest of some, usually posting a zombie or something but I don't have a problem with it–sometimes it is a cool subject/worth discussing.