Re: What's the tonal impact of smaller gauge strings?
Just out of curiosity, what didn't you not like about the Fender version?
There are two parts to this, and I'll be the first to admit that the first part might seem a bit silly. When I was comparing these two bridges, I assumed they were about the same. But the Fender version doesn't hide the balls. They just look ugly sticking out of the rear. Both bridges already extend the rear back farther than stock, so the balls were almost hanging over the edge. In the Hipshot, they're recessed. (But that presented its own problems, which I'll get to.) Second, was not about anything wrong with the Fender, but what the Hipshot offered. I like the idea of the saddles being both adjustable left-to-right, but also replaceable. The instructions even show all the dimensions so that you can make your own. My luthier friend suggested that I might want to try some bone inserts down the road. So that's really all there was to that.
Now, about the Hipshot. It still isn't perfect. Since the balls
and the intonation screws are recessed, the balls actually interfere with the screwdriver. The OM says to use a #2 Phillips. We thought that two of the screws were frozen. In fact, it was just locked against the balls. Took us awhile, and a lot of frustration, to figure out what the heck was going on. We finally got it, but it was unnecessary aggravation where a little better engineering would have been nice.
Bottom line . . . I'm loving this thing now, with the Hipshot, and everything set up. After I've messed with it awhile, my friend is going to do a new nut and level a few frets. They aren't bad, just could be better.
Artie
P.S. I don't think I've ever used the word "balls" so many times in one thread.
P.S. 2: I know the intonation looks weird on the "G" string, but that's just how it came out. We aren't sure what's accounting for that. The Fender bridge wasn't like that.
