Because this :
is already a body that´s barely bigger than a telecaster, and there still isn´t a floyd on it yet... and why destroy a perfectly good instrument when it´s obvious from the get go that at least 2 or 3 attempts have to fail critically before everything works right
The biggest problem is that if you have a floyd and don´t recess it, you´re going to have holes in the top pretty fast. So it makes more sense to recess it. BUT: that´s also where some of the most critical parts of the bracing come together. and obviously we can´t just let those run through the rout, because then we´d damage those on up pulls... so as a result the bracing system has to be at least partly redesigned.
Then there´s the not so obvious issue of spring tension adjustments. Slipping in through the sound hole with a screwdriver isn't really a smart way to do it when the strings are on, but setup without strings is just as dumb :laugh2: So we either have to replace /redesign the spring array to make it easier to maintain, or we have to somehow make it serviceable, but a large hole in the back is not preferable on an acoustic if at all avoidable. Another downside is that the springs would have a tendency to immensely increase the guitar´s tendency to feed back in live settings, no es bueno
And of course a floyd weighs a boatload more than an ebony or rosewood bridge, and something is gonna have to compensate for those few hundred grams. It could be reduced by hacking off most of the sustain block, but that´s neither tonally beneficial nor would it have a positive effect on trem response I fear... and even without the block and arm the assemblöy is a few ounces heavier than an acoustic bridge.
It´s a pickle I´ve been going over in my head for years, and I´ll make it happen... just still some large kinks to work out. None of the engineering challenges are by themself unsurmountable, but the combination is a doozy
