This may be the wrong place to ask but here goes. Why does everyone rave about aluminum bridges and tailpieces on les pauls. Even steel or titanium gets raves over brass. In the floyd or strat tremelo world, everyone swears by large brass tremelo blocks. I have large brass blocks on my Floyds and am one to swear by them. I can actually feel the vibrations. I have been researching bridges for my les paul with a nashville and have wondered this. There are a few brass bridges and tailpieces available but only by abm mueller or guitar fetish. I have yet to find a retailer for the abm muellers in the US. Just curious on the forums thoughts. Thanks.
les paul bridge material
- Thread starter lkr
- Start date
jafo
Member
Re: les paul bridge material
It's all about tone matching and balancing. Brass is darker and warmer -- just what you want on something like a Floyd, which robs warmth from a guitar. Also great on a Tele. Not such a good idea on a guitar which is already warm. You want balance, not an overload of a good thing.
It's all about tone matching and balancing. Brass is darker and warmer -- just what you want on something like a Floyd, which robs warmth from a guitar. Also great on a Tele. Not such a good idea on a guitar which is already warm. You want balance, not an overload of a good thing.
Ashurbanipal
Well-known member
Re: les paul bridge material
Aluminium is a rather transparent material tonally, because of its composition. It creates less inertia between the string and body vibrations. This why it may seem brighter, more airy sounding. Other metals, like steel and brass, which are denser, add their own qualities to the mix.
The original ABR-1 was cast pot metal with brass saddles, tumbwheels, and steel pins; the tailpiece was aluminium with steel inserts and studs. Callaham makes an all steel ABR replacement.
The Nashville bridge on modern Gibsons is zamak (pot metal/zinc alloy), as is the tailpiece. On Historics/VOS guitars, the bridge/tailpiece are more period correct.
A lot of it is cork-sniffery and oranges vs. apples. Some guitars will benefit from a mod, others won't; know of instances where people dumped the brass blocks in their Floyds because the particular guitar lost attack and cut.
I think though, on a fixed bridge guitar, having a lighter/transparent sounding bridge is more of an advantage; with trem equipped guitars, you need to compensate for the wood lost and the fact that your bridge just rests on screws (if it's floating, of course).
Aluminium is a rather transparent material tonally, because of its composition. It creates less inertia between the string and body vibrations. This why it may seem brighter, more airy sounding. Other metals, like steel and brass, which are denser, add their own qualities to the mix.
The original ABR-1 was cast pot metal with brass saddles, tumbwheels, and steel pins; the tailpiece was aluminium with steel inserts and studs. Callaham makes an all steel ABR replacement.
The Nashville bridge on modern Gibsons is zamak (pot metal/zinc alloy), as is the tailpiece. On Historics/VOS guitars, the bridge/tailpiece are more period correct.
A lot of it is cork-sniffery and oranges vs. apples. Some guitars will benefit from a mod, others won't; know of instances where people dumped the brass blocks in their Floyds because the particular guitar lost attack and cut.
I think though, on a fixed bridge guitar, having a lighter/transparent sounding bridge is more of an advantage; with trem equipped guitars, you need to compensate for the wood lost and the fact that your bridge just rests on screws (if it's floating, of course).
Re: les paul bridge material
Strats suffer from loss of vibration through the trem, and supposedly the big block helps with that (maybe less vibration is then passed to the springs, which would of course dampen most string energy passed into them)
The LP, as said, will most likely allow for more string energy to pass to and from between body/strings with less inertia. Changing tuners from heavy Grovers to lighter Klusons also makes a change for the same reasons.
Strats suffer from loss of vibration through the trem, and supposedly the big block helps with that (maybe less vibration is then passed to the springs, which would of course dampen most string energy passed into them)
The LP, as said, will most likely allow for more string energy to pass to and from between body/strings with less inertia. Changing tuners from heavy Grovers to lighter Klusons also makes a change for the same reasons.
Ashurbanipal
Well-known member
Re: les paul bridge material
^^ Yep. On a guitar like a Stratocaster, the steel block of a vintage trem is an important part of the tone, though many deck the bridge and add 5 springs; it adds brilliance/sparkle, a quality seen as desirable. One example is Clapton's Strats (sigs and his vintage ones) - he could've gone for a hardtail as he never uses the whammy, but has opted for a decked/blocked trem because of these qualities.
I'd imagine putting lighter tuners on a guitar like a Firebird would also make quite a difference, aside from alleviating some of that neck dive!
The other important thing about a tune-o-matic type bridge is, because there are multiple separate parts (saddles, intonation screws, threaded pins, thumb-wheels), the coupling between them, e.g. how tightly does the saddle rest against the bridge body when under string tension, and how tight is the coupling between the pins, thumb-wheels and bridge body. Same deal with the tailpiece/studs. Tone Pros have sought to tackle this with their locking hardware.
Some info about the original materials: http://www.tdpri.com/forum/tele-home-depot/194271-1959-les-paul-build-102.html; http://www.tdpri.com/forum/tele-home-depot/194271-1959-les-paul-build-115.html.
Imo, neck stiffness, the joint thereof, and the bridge are the most important parts of an electric guitar. These parts affect string vibration; pups (though important too) are filters for this vibration, translating it into what we hear.
^^ Yep. On a guitar like a Stratocaster, the steel block of a vintage trem is an important part of the tone, though many deck the bridge and add 5 springs; it adds brilliance/sparkle, a quality seen as desirable. One example is Clapton's Strats (sigs and his vintage ones) - he could've gone for a hardtail as he never uses the whammy, but has opted for a decked/blocked trem because of these qualities.
I'd imagine putting lighter tuners on a guitar like a Firebird would also make quite a difference, aside from alleviating some of that neck dive!
The other important thing about a tune-o-matic type bridge is, because there are multiple separate parts (saddles, intonation screws, threaded pins, thumb-wheels), the coupling between them, e.g. how tightly does the saddle rest against the bridge body when under string tension, and how tight is the coupling between the pins, thumb-wheels and bridge body. Same deal with the tailpiece/studs. Tone Pros have sought to tackle this with their locking hardware.
Some info about the original materials: http://www.tdpri.com/forum/tele-home-depot/194271-1959-les-paul-build-102.html; http://www.tdpri.com/forum/tele-home-depot/194271-1959-les-paul-build-115.html.
Imo, neck stiffness, the joint thereof, and the bridge are the most important parts of an electric guitar. These parts affect string vibration; pups (though important too) are filters for this vibration, translating it into what we hear.
jmh151
Active member
Re: les paul bridge material
It's all about find tuning your tone to your preference. On Floyds, I've added a big brass block on original Floyds- and the added mass made the guitar sound like a hardtail, giving bottom end,, more resonance, and a scooped tone.
On My Les Paul, I installed an aluminum tailpiece. Acoustically, you can hear a drastic difference, it's a lot louder. Plugged in, it has more clarity
On my PRS Stoptail, I replaced the brass tailpiece studs with locking steel studs, which made it brighter with more clarity
It's all about find tuning your tone to your preference. On Floyds, I've added a big brass block on original Floyds- and the added mass made the guitar sound like a hardtail, giving bottom end,, more resonance, and a scooped tone.
On My Les Paul, I installed an aluminum tailpiece. Acoustically, you can hear a drastic difference, it's a lot louder. Plugged in, it has more clarity
On my PRS Stoptail, I replaced the brass tailpiece studs with locking steel studs, which made it brighter with more clarity
Tune-O-Matic
New member
Re: les paul bridge material
Allparts is the only distributor of ABM Mueller in the US. http://www.allparts.com/abm
If your looking to replace your nashville bridge, look into Faber's options:
http://www.cvgshop.com/Faber-Parts/c4/index.html
As mentioned previously, I too agree that coupling is a huge factor for tone. It really all boils down to how well all of the parts work and fit together. I have installed both the Tonepros and Faber locking nashville bridges with aluminum tailpieces on the same guitar and I much prefer the Faber.
I replaced the all the Schaller hardware that was installed and experienced the following:
I installed the Tonepros set first thought I would get more from it, but it is essentially just a standard Gotoh bridge (Gotoh owns the Tonepros Brand) with small locking hex screws but 3 times the price. It just seemed like the locking screws just held the bridge and tailpiece in place rather than really increase the coupling. The guitar did get a slightly brighter and had a small increase in clarity both acoustically and plugged in which I attribute to the aluminum tailpiece.
With the Faber, I installed the whole Tone Lock bridge and tailpiece kit with their steel bridge studs. Huge increase in the acoustic volume, resonance and clarity. I could instantly not only hear a change, but I could also feel it. I could really feel the vibrations of the strings throughout the whole guitar which was something that was lacking with the previous two sets of hardware. With the way the Faber stuff is engineered, all of the pieces actually lock together extremely well increasing coupling dramatically. Another plus side to the Faber is that their tailpiece inserts allow you to raise it up off the guitar to avoid the strings hitting the back edge of the bridge yet still have it firmly locked down. Overall I just feel is a very well made system with some great innovations.
Sorry for the glowing review, but it's rare to have something work so well and and really make such an impact tonally.
Allparts is the only distributor of ABM Mueller in the US. http://www.allparts.com/abm
If your looking to replace your nashville bridge, look into Faber's options:
http://www.cvgshop.com/Faber-Parts/c4/index.html
As mentioned previously, I too agree that coupling is a huge factor for tone. It really all boils down to how well all of the parts work and fit together. I have installed both the Tonepros and Faber locking nashville bridges with aluminum tailpieces on the same guitar and I much prefer the Faber.
I replaced the all the Schaller hardware that was installed and experienced the following:
I installed the Tonepros set first thought I would get more from it, but it is essentially just a standard Gotoh bridge (Gotoh owns the Tonepros Brand) with small locking hex screws but 3 times the price. It just seemed like the locking screws just held the bridge and tailpiece in place rather than really increase the coupling. The guitar did get a slightly brighter and had a small increase in clarity both acoustically and plugged in which I attribute to the aluminum tailpiece.
With the Faber, I installed the whole Tone Lock bridge and tailpiece kit with their steel bridge studs. Huge increase in the acoustic volume, resonance and clarity. I could instantly not only hear a change, but I could also feel it. I could really feel the vibrations of the strings throughout the whole guitar which was something that was lacking with the previous two sets of hardware. With the way the Faber stuff is engineered, all of the pieces actually lock together extremely well increasing coupling dramatically. Another plus side to the Faber is that their tailpiece inserts allow you to raise it up off the guitar to avoid the strings hitting the back edge of the bridge yet still have it firmly locked down. Overall I just feel is a very well made system with some great innovations.
Sorry for the glowing review, but it's rare to have something work so well and and really make such an impact tonally.
Re: les paul bridge material
Ive been researching the three options between mueller, faber and callaham. Mueller, specifically the 2504, allparts does not have. It is solid brass though. My 2012 traditional pro is very bright and the bb3 didnt help. I have a rio bbq in it now and it is still just a hint too bright on the high strings. Having never owned a paul until now I am suprised at all the variations in bridges for les pauls. I was sold on the fabers although I have heard they may increase high end which I dont want. I have also heard that same statement about all the aftermarket bridges. I thought it was odd that brass would be so sought after on a tremelo guitar and not for a les paul. Thanks for the input.
Ive been researching the three options between mueller, faber and callaham. Mueller, specifically the 2504, allparts does not have. It is solid brass though. My 2012 traditional pro is very bright and the bb3 didnt help. I have a rio bbq in it now and it is still just a hint too bright on the high strings. Having never owned a paul until now I am suprised at all the variations in bridges for les pauls. I was sold on the fabers although I have heard they may increase high end which I dont want. I have also heard that same statement about all the aftermarket bridges. I thought it was odd that brass would be so sought after on a tremelo guitar and not for a les paul. Thanks for the input.
Ashurbanipal
Well-known member
Re: les paul bridge material
^^ Might be worth it to go with brass then if the guitar is too bright.
Good review.
The other important thing in a Gibson type axe is neck angle, and how this affects the bridge/tailpiece height. It's pretty much always going to sound stronger with the tailpiece cranked right down against the body; on guitars with a Nashville bridge and a pronounced neck angle (SGs and Vs seem to be the main culprits) it's impossible to do without the strings hitting the rear edge of the bridge (though top-wrapping over the tailpiece may help on some instruments), which impacts on tone.
jmh151, you're right about the studs making a difference, and it's also important for them to have contact with the body (not just the insert) when they're screwed all the way down. The threaded pins of ABR-1 also have an effect - there was a thread on one of the LP forums a while back about people experimenting with steel philips head screws and the positive effect this had on tone.
Vintage steel stud on top, modern brass one bottom (from Gil Yaron's insanely awesome LP build thread on tdpri). See how much beefier the old one is; the Faber ones look close to the old one in spec.
^^ Might be worth it to go with brass then if the guitar is too bright.
Good review.
The other important thing in a Gibson type axe is neck angle, and how this affects the bridge/tailpiece height. It's pretty much always going to sound stronger with the tailpiece cranked right down against the body; on guitars with a Nashville bridge and a pronounced neck angle (SGs and Vs seem to be the main culprits) it's impossible to do without the strings hitting the rear edge of the bridge (though top-wrapping over the tailpiece may help on some instruments), which impacts on tone.
jmh151, you're right about the studs making a difference, and it's also important for them to have contact with the body (not just the insert) when they're screwed all the way down. The threaded pins of ABR-1 also have an effect - there was a thread on one of the LP forums a while back about people experimenting with steel philips head screws and the positive effect this had on tone.
Vintage steel stud on top, modern brass one bottom (from Gil Yaron's insanely awesome LP build thread on tdpri). See how much beefier the old one is; the Faber ones look close to the old one in spec.
Re: les paul bridge material
The Faber isn't too bad for tonal change....on mine it has added clarity and sustain. edit - I installed the nashville/abr conversion where you tap the threads of the Nashville holes and screw in a solid bit of metal that has abr posts on it.
The tonepros bridges are darker if you want tonal improvement with no added treble content. The locking ones are very good.
The more contact the strings have with the body, the easier the energy is transferred and then reflected back without loss. This is one of the reasons why ABR style LP bridges are generally better for sustain and natural tone. Hopefully the 'natural tone' is what you want to hear.
The Faber isn't too bad for tonal change....on mine it has added clarity and sustain. edit - I installed the nashville/abr conversion where you tap the threads of the Nashville holes and screw in a solid bit of metal that has abr posts on it.
The tonepros bridges are darker if you want tonal improvement with no added treble content. The locking ones are very good.
The more contact the strings have with the body, the easier the energy is transferred and then reflected back without loss. This is one of the reasons why ABR style LP bridges are generally better for sustain and natural tone. Hopefully the 'natural tone' is what you want to hear.
Last edited:
speed2dirt
Butterball
Re: les paul bridge material
Bump for a good topic.
Any more real world experience between materials specifically for Tuneomatic bridges?
Bump for a good topic.
Any more real world experience between materials specifically for Tuneomatic bridges?
j9fd3s
New member
Re: les paul bridge material
i recently updated my Epiphone les paul, and i looked at the options and ended up with an aluminum one, as i was going for a more authentic vibe. i achieved the vibe and sound i was looking for, however that does mean a couple of things.
aluminum vs the stock pot metal, i actually lost some sustain, and while it is "airier", this also means where there is air, there used to be guitar sound. i didn't try the callahan part, but i think his description is exactly right.
so like the floyd rose block, the material for the bridge changes the sound, and we can say in what ways, but if its good or bad is up to you
i recently updated my Epiphone les paul, and i looked at the options and ended up with an aluminum one, as i was going for a more authentic vibe. i achieved the vibe and sound i was looking for, however that does mean a couple of things.
aluminum vs the stock pot metal, i actually lost some sustain, and while it is "airier", this also means where there is air, there used to be guitar sound. i didn't try the callahan part, but i think his description is exactly right.
so like the floyd rose block, the material for the bridge changes the sound, and we can say in what ways, but if its good or bad is up to you
uOpt
Something Cool
Re: les paul bridge material
"Everybody"? I don't see that. The only common thing is a lightweight tailpiece.
Which I ended up not liking because it made the guitar brighter but less Les Paul-ish.
I highly doubt that ABR-1s made out of aluminium are very popular. That won't last. Link?
"Everybody"? I don't see that. The only common thing is a lightweight tailpiece.
Which I ended up not liking because it made the guitar brighter but less Les Paul-ish.
I highly doubt that ABR-1s made out of aluminium are very popular. That won't last. Link?
Re: les paul bridge material
Im at work, so couldnt read all the responses, so if Im copying another entry, pls forgive. I wanted to add one point and ask a question..
Point I wanted to mention is to keep in mind strings dont contact big block on a trem. Yeah, they add sustain, but really wont change tone much cuz they dont contact strings. If you are aware of this, then disregard.. : )
Second, Ive never changed the bridge on any lps. I often read discussions as to what is better. Do the stock Gibby ones work ok, or is there a better bridge? I have one that is stock and one that came stock with a tonepros bridge and tailpiece.
thanks
Im at work, so couldnt read all the responses, so if Im copying another entry, pls forgive. I wanted to add one point and ask a question..
Point I wanted to mention is to keep in mind strings dont contact big block on a trem. Yeah, they add sustain, but really wont change tone much cuz they dont contact strings. If you are aware of this, then disregard.. : )
Second, Ive never changed the bridge on any lps. I often read discussions as to what is better. Do the stock Gibby ones work ok, or is there a better bridge? I have one that is stock and one that came stock with a tonepros bridge and tailpiece.
thanks
stupendous silly
New member
Re: les paul bridge material
Gentlemen I didn't read through every minute detail written on this tread because my situation is more specific than what many are considering here. I am also not well-educated in some technicalities discussed (yet), and many brands discussed are not available at my location. I have this 'high-performance' Les Paul, that comes with titanium nut and saddles, which probably gives - for my taste - the unpleasant 'zing' to the sound, to use an expression one of the forum members used for it recently. In my own terms I want to warm up the instrument, hopefully not darken it too much, get rid of the piercing highs, and probably this is fundamental, change the 'tinny' sound I hear when I play it unplugged for a fuller tone. I began researching for the saddles leaving the nut for later, and ended up considering changing the whole bridge since I cant locate any saddles on their own that I have easy access to. The stuff at Thomann.de is readily available for me. I am considering brass Nashville bridges with brass saddles, maybe also an aluminum tailpice to open up the sound a bit. Check this one out for instance: https://www.thomann.de/intl/tr/abm_2504c_bridge.htm
I am open to all suggestions though, for materials, brands (but better stick to what Thomann offers). I have no prior experience with Les Pauls at all. Thanks in advance
Gentlemen I didn't read through every minute detail written on this tread because my situation is more specific than what many are considering here. I am also not well-educated in some technicalities discussed (yet), and many brands discussed are not available at my location. I have this 'high-performance' Les Paul, that comes with titanium nut and saddles, which probably gives - for my taste - the unpleasant 'zing' to the sound, to use an expression one of the forum members used for it recently. In my own terms I want to warm up the instrument, hopefully not darken it too much, get rid of the piercing highs, and probably this is fundamental, change the 'tinny' sound I hear when I play it unplugged for a fuller tone. I began researching for the saddles leaving the nut for later, and ended up considering changing the whole bridge since I cant locate any saddles on their own that I have easy access to. The stuff at Thomann.de is readily available for me. I am considering brass Nashville bridges with brass saddles, maybe also an aluminum tailpice to open up the sound a bit. Check this one out for instance: https://www.thomann.de/intl/tr/abm_2504c_bridge.htm
I am open to all suggestions though, for materials, brands (but better stick to what Thomann offers). I have no prior experience with Les Pauls at all. Thanks in advance
Re: les paul bridge material
On MLP there was a bridge shootout with a couple of different brands....the original Gibson ABR, tonepros, Faber and I think Callaham too. Of reference to your situation the tonepros was the darkest of those tested. Of course it was not overly scientific.
Saddles are quite specific to the bridge - not all saddle fit into all bridges of the same general type. It is for that reason I would recommend just getting a new bridge (as you have also thought to do). Tonepros do a wide variety of bridge types to suit almost any Gibson.
If the nut is that newer type that is zero fret and nut in one.....that will probably be harder to find. They actually swapped from brass as that was wearing too quickly.
Try the bridge first. The Al tailpiece will most likely make the guitar more tinny, as you lose the mids and the tone gets a bit more 'airy'. Great for vintage tone which is more biting, but not so good for a guitar already with plenty of top-end.
On MLP there was a bridge shootout with a couple of different brands....the original Gibson ABR, tonepros, Faber and I think Callaham too. Of reference to your situation the tonepros was the darkest of those tested. Of course it was not overly scientific.
Saddles are quite specific to the bridge - not all saddle fit into all bridges of the same general type. It is for that reason I would recommend just getting a new bridge (as you have also thought to do). Tonepros do a wide variety of bridge types to suit almost any Gibson.
If the nut is that newer type that is zero fret and nut in one.....that will probably be harder to find. They actually swapped from brass as that was wearing too quickly.
Try the bridge first. The Al tailpiece will most likely make the guitar more tinny, as you lose the mids and the tone gets a bit more 'airy'. Great for vintage tone which is more biting, but not so good for a guitar already with plenty of top-end.
stupendous silly
New member
Re: les paul bridge material
Great answer thanks a lot... so in general, Brass is the right direction you think? I may just keep the Zamak tailpiece for now. And I can get a bone nut tailored and fixed to it locally, because the neck is wider than regular LPs.
Great answer thanks a lot... so in general, Brass is the right direction you think? I may just keep the Zamak tailpiece for now. And I can get a bone nut tailored and fixed to it locally, because the neck is wider than regular LPs.
Last edited:
Lewguitar
New member
Re: les paul bridge material
Regarding Les Paul style stop tailpieces and zinc (pot metal) vs. aluminum, my ears and other senses tell me that aluminum gives a guitar a slightly more spacious, acoustic-like quality.
It's also lighter in weight.
As for what sounds best, that's 100% personal taste.
The two do make a guitar sound different though.
I only have one guitar with a tuno-o-matic and stop tailpiece: my 2000 Gibson ES-335.
I like its sound as is and I did not change to aluminum. Why fix it if it's not broken?
However, I did not love my Les Paul (sold it eventually) and I did change to aluminum on it to see if I could get it to sound more resonant. And it did take on a slightly more "airy" or "acoustic" quality.
As for brass, I don't usually go in for it. I did try it in the 1970's when it was all the rage and put six brass saddles on my '63 Strat.
I didn't like the effect for the most part and felt that it dulled the tone.
Regarding Les Paul style stop tailpieces and zinc (pot metal) vs. aluminum, my ears and other senses tell me that aluminum gives a guitar a slightly more spacious, acoustic-like quality.
It's also lighter in weight.
As for what sounds best, that's 100% personal taste.
The two do make a guitar sound different though.
I only have one guitar with a tuno-o-matic and stop tailpiece: my 2000 Gibson ES-335.
I like its sound as is and I did not change to aluminum. Why fix it if it's not broken?
However, I did not love my Les Paul (sold it eventually) and I did change to aluminum on it to see if I could get it to sound more resonant. And it did take on a slightly more "airy" or "acoustic" quality.
As for brass, I don't usually go in for it. I did try it in the 1970's when it was all the rage and put six brass saddles on my '63 Strat.
I didn't like the effect for the most part and felt that it dulled the tone.
Last edited:
beaubrummels
Well-known member
Re: les paul bridge material
I thought nylon was in the originals? That's what I would use to warn it up and make it more like a vintage Gibson anyway.
I thought nylon was in the originals? That's what I would use to warn it up and make it more like a vintage Gibson anyway.
Similar threads
