Bridge of Dooooooom....

[DangerousR6]

At the request of B3guy and Cagey.....Lets build a better bridge.....GO!!!....... :headbang1:

 

[DangerousR6]

.....Nobody's got any ideas....paaaleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease... :doh:

 

[m4rk0]

I guess I missed something...
soo, will it float? will it dive?? will it lock??

 

[DangerousR6]

I guess I missed something...
soo, will it float? will it dive?? will it lock??

http://www.unofficialwarmoth.com/index.php?topic=2754.2220

"bout 3/4 the way down, Cagey's post right after mine with the ... :headbang:"

 

[Tipperman]

Honestly, I'd like something like the mastery bridge that could work for TOM inserts instead of replacing with Jazzmaster ones. Like, really.

 

[B3Guy]

I guess I missed something...
soo, will it float? will it dive?? will it lock??

I think locking/floating/diving can be specified by a tremol-no. It needs to fit in a strat style trem backroute, or use is pretty limited.

I think first up for the debate is how to do the fulcrum. I vote for at least trying a high precision hinge, possibly even with bearings, but it has to be done right. Then the leading edge can be tightened right down to the body. No play or wiggle, providing the hinge is sound. that's my 2c. Any reasoning against this? Any better ideas?

 

[DangerousR6]

I guess I missed something...
soo, will it float? will it dive?? will it lock??

I think locking/floating/diving can be specified by a tremol-no. It needs to fit in a strat style trem backroute, or use is pretty limited.

I think first up for the debate is how to do the fulcrum. I vote for at least trying a high precision hinge, possibly even with bearings, but it has to be done right. Then the leading edge can be tightened right down to the body. No play or wiggle, providing the hinge is sound. that's my 2c. Any reasoning against this? Any better ideas?

I'm working on a bearing type hinged design in Solid Works... It's loosely based off an OFR base plate, the "original" "original", with no fine tuners... :toothy12:

 

[Mor Paul]

I guess I missed something...
soo, will it float? will it dive?? will it lock??

Will it blend?

 

[SustainerPlayer]

Ok. I want it to be able to retune from standard to DADGAD, Open-G and so on without the need to being locked down or loosing the vibrato-effect. Preferably without any electronics involved because 89% of all guitarist will then call it MIDI - which is a guitarist-term for "evil-you-should-avoid-at-all-cost". These folks do not like electronics in their electric guitars - you see.

It should be able to be used as a normal whammy or a double-locking system by set-up. So fine-tuners at the bridge.

Normal strings should be used.

... now start engineering!  :headbang1: :icon_biggrin:

 

[Wana_make_a_guitar]

How about, it locks, it dives, IT DOESN'T FLOAT! Mix things up a bit.

Oh, and it's gotta looks like a 4x4 rise kit.  :laughing7:

 

[Damon]

Personally, I'm not a big trem user. I feel somewhat obligated to have one on a Strat or an EVH style Peavy/EB/etc, but otherwise I'm a fixed bridge guy. Need some vibrato? Just bend the neck a bit ... Anyway, what I'd really like to see is something that plays and feels like a Tune-O-Matic but has individually adjustable saddle heights for each string. And now I'm toying with designs in my head.... Should probably actually look and see if it's already been done and I just haven't come across it yet.

You know what? Build me something Bigsby-esque that turns a TOM style bridge into a vibrato but actually returns to pitch well and I'll be stoked. One of the roller saddle TOM-ish bridges is an acceptable requirement. I need it to feel like a TOM, not BE a TOM. Would also like an easily actuated locking system to make it behave like it's not a vibrato when you don't need it then with a quick flick you can warble to your heart's content. And have an integration option that allows it to mount using the existing tailpiece studs so I can retrofit it on my lesters without having to drill/route anything. I'll buy the first two and maybe snag the third for an upcoming project.

I know that's probably a different direction than you guys were thinking, but when the bridge of doom is finished and it comes time for the next offering from Dangerous Designs....

 

[Steve_Karl]

The first must have for me would be 2 screws per adjustable saddle and then lockable after adjust like a wilk vs-100.

 

[Jeremiah]

The first requirement for me is is not to have any kind of adjustment screws or anything else that stick up above the level of the saddles and dig into my hand when I rest it on the bridge  . This comes before being able to adjust the height or even intonation individually.

 

[swarfrat]

I had some ideas for a headless system - load your single ball strings backwards (requires a locking bridge type system like the floyd). The nut end has a straight pull tuner on a camming lever. Load your string, pull it finger tight, lever goes through toggle and sproioiing - you're in the ballpark for pitch.

 

[DangerousR6]

I had some ideas for a headless system - load your single ball strings backwards (requires a locking bridge type system like the floyd). The nut end has a straight pull tuner on a camming lever. Load your string, pull it finger tight, lever goes through toggle and sproioiing - you're in the ballpark for pitch.

Not that that's not a good idea, but I'm trying to keep it simple as possible, nothing overly complicated...  Working off of the K.I.S.S. ideology... Besides, I've never liked headless guitars, they just look wrong to me... :dontknow:

 

[SustainerPlayer]

Not that that's not a good idea, but I'm trying to keep it simple as possible, nothing overly complicated...  Working off of the K.I.S.S. ideology... Besides, I've never liked headless guitars, they just look wrong to me... :dontknow:

No head must be K.I.S.S. ... now make that no bridge to go with that no head ... and you got the ultimative K.I.S.S.  :toothy12: :icon_jokercolor:

 

[stubhead]

The only kinds of whammy worth whammying on is one where you can get the D,G,and B string to stay in some semblance of tune with each other down to about a whole step down. It would be intriguing to build one that kept the other strings in tune, with mere geometry rather than gimmickry. It seems that most whammys have very little effect on the highest string because the string is closest to the pivot point - so shouldn't the angle of the pivoting be changed?

 

[AutoBat]

The only kinds of whammy worth whammying on is one where you can get the D,G,and B string to stay in some semblance of tune with each other down to about a whole step down. It would be intriguing to build one that kept the other strings in tune, with mere geometry rather than gimmickry. It seems that most whammys have very little effect on the highest string because the string is closest to the pivot point - so shouldn't the angle of the pivoting be changed?

I think you just described the Steinberger Trans-Trem.

 

[DangerousR6]

Not that that's not a good idea, but I'm trying to keep it simple as possible, nothing overly complicated...  Working off of the K.I.S.S. ideology... Besides, I've never liked headless guitars, they just look wrong to me... :dontknow:

No head must be K.I.S.S. ... now make that no bridge to go with that no head ... and you got the ultimative K.I.S.S.  :toothy12: :icon_jokercolor:

possibly, but somewhere in the mix you still have to have tuners, and that makes the bridge crowded. Unless you use the BC Rich concept on their 10 string Bitch...

 

[pabloman]

I would love to see a simple elegant hardtail design. Something like the ABM single saddle bridge or a PRS/Mann type hardtail. Definitely a top loader.