Hardtail bridge for 1 5/8" Nut

[jason]

Hi guys,

Long story:
I had a banged up 1960s gibson SG which was my one and only guitar since I was 15. I was never a serious guitar player, never specifically practiced.
I rarely picked up the guitar only when I felt like it, and then it was just fooling around and having fun. There were times that it wasn't being picked up for months and in one occasion was left unplayed for 2 years.
recently someone made a good offer and I naively accepted and sold the guitar thinking I would buy a les paul as I'm a big fan of the tone.
Quickly bough a les paul standard with the money just to realize strings are a tad bit far apart in the Nut and bridge. It was a tiny amount but amazing how our brains work, I had difficulty specially with the chords close to the nut. Sold it and started searching for a guitar with same string spacing and there was only the music mans. So I bought one, it was more or less close. But the tone was thin and strings were stiff, not that I was nut strong enough to bend them but because the force I used to apply to bend the string were different and this caused the bends to sound horrible when I played faster. And the tone was more strat like even though the pickups were humbuckers.
Once again I sold the guitar, feeling miserable missing my good old guitar. Until I found warmoth. short story follows:

Short story:
I'm trying to build a guitar with 24 3/4 scale and shooting for a les paul tone. Seems like the only 24 3/4 bodies offered are strat and tele shape. I like the shapes but is it possible to get close to a les paul like tone with them, and if it is, which one can get closer?
I'm getting a 1 5/8" nut but seems like the narrowest string spacing in bridges are 2 1/16", is that spacing enough? I'm worried that strings get too close to the edge of the fretboard in higher frets.
I could find the Schaller adjustable 475, which  can get 2" string spacing but the string angle seems shallow behind the saddle. Is the angle enough? To what extent does it affect the tone?

I have done some research and currently I'm shooting for this:
Warhead 24 3/4 neck. Rosewood neck with ebony fingerboard. For the feel of unfinished neck and beauty of ebony.
7/8 start body. Mahogany for les paul like warmth.
Schaller 475 flat mount bridge.
Duncan 59/custom bridge - 59 neck

Thanks for reading this, your suggestions and help is appreciated.

 

[Cagey]

I'm trying to build a guitar with 24 3/4 scale and shooting for a les paul tone. Seems like the only 24 3/4 bodies offered are strat and tele shape. I like the shapes but is it possible to get close to a les paul like tone with them, and if it is, which one can get closer?
I'm getting a 1 5/8" nut but seems like the narrowest string spacing in bridges are 2 1/16", is that spacing enough? I'm worried that strings get too close to the edge of the fretboard in higher frets.

With Warmoth parts, you can put a 24 3/4" scale neck on just about all their bodies, save a few. It's just a matter of buying a "conversion" neck. So, you're not limited to the Strat or Tele body styles. But, if I were to try and get a Les Paul tone out of one of those, it's more likely going to be the Tele.

The Les Paul gets its sound mainly from the great deal of inertia in its body, the short scale, the large, thick heel that starts at about the 13th fret, the neck wood, and the pickups. Nothing else is really built that way, which is what makes Pauls sound the way they do. Lotsa sustain, even though they don't generally use very dense woods that you'd expect to get a great deal of sustain out of.

A Tele can be a heavy body pretty easily so you can get your inertia there, and you can use a thicker short scale neck and the appropriate pickups, but the heel is nowhere near as thick nor does it start so early. It's more like the 15th fret, and it only grows about a half an inch. So, even though you may have a tighter joint than glue could provide, you have a neck that will flex more easily due to its longer playable shaft length. That means it'll absorb vibrations, which is a sustain killer. You can compensate with stiffer woods, but then the guitar brightens up a bit along with the sustain improvement. You can compensate for the brightness with different pickups, but then you lose definition. You see where this is going? You can get near it, but nothing sounds/plays quite like a Paul.

As for the bridge... it will affect string spacing on the neck to different degrees along its length, and the spacing at the bridge is not what the spacing on the neck is going to be even at the 22nd fret. The strings generally fan out from the nut to the bridge, so at the 22nd fret, the spacing is going to be wider than the nut, but narrower than the bridge. A 2 1/16" spacing at the bridge is probably only going to be about 1.9" - 2" at the 22nd fret, and most Fender-style neck heels (read: Warmoth) are 2 3/16" wide at that point. So, I wouldn't worry too much about strings falling off the neck.

 

[jason]

Great info, thanks. I looked through different bodies and the conversion neck. It is a bit confusing as looks like the pickups remain in the same distance to the bridge if I get a 25.5 body and a conversion neck. Then the pickups would be in different place compared to a body designed for 24 3/4. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I think I better stop chasing the les paul tone. As long as I get a thick tone which retains a little vintage feel to it, I'm fine with it.
From what you said about neck and sustain, I think I'd definitely go for more sustain. I'd rather a little added brightness to lack of sustain. Would the rosewood/ebony neck be good for that purpose? I've seen that both rosewood and ebony are very hard woods so I guess this would work.
Thanks for the info on the bridge spacing. I can go for a humbucker tele bridge or fender flat mount bridge now. It would still be great if someone could comment on the sustain and definition of Schaller 475.

 

[Cagey]

Great info, thanks. I looked through different bodies and the conversion neck. It is a bit confusing as looks like the pickups remain in the same distance to the bridge if I get a 25.5 body and a conversion neck. Then the pickups would be in different place compared to a body designed for 24 3/4. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

No, you're not wrong. But, the difference is minimal and usually just disregarded. Pickup placement does matter, due to the nodes of vibration of the strings, but those move all over the place anyway because you don't only play open strings. As soon as you fret a string, the nodes move. Where and how you pick the string, and with what will also affect things.

I think I better stop chasing the les paul tone. As long as I get a thick tone which retains a little vintage feel to it, I'm fine with it.
From what you said about neck and sustain, I think I'd definitely go for more sustain. I'd rather a little added brightness to lack of sustain. Would the rosewood/ebony neck be good for that purpose? I've seen that both rosewood and ebony are very hard woods so I guess this would work.

If it was me, I'd probably go for an Ebony over Pau Ferro. That is one super-sweet neck wood combo. Rosewood neck meat might be a tad too dark. You can always roll off highs with the guitar/amp/eq/etc. if you need to, but you can't emphasize them if they don't exist in the first place.

 

[Cagey]

As for the 475 bridge, it looks like a nice part. I've not used one yet, but it mounts solid to the body, which is a Good Thing if you're looking for sustain. Keeps everything nice and solid, as opposed to a unit that mounts on posts.

For the same reason, if you're going to build a Tele, I can recommend the Gotoh Tele bridge for humbuckers...

They're relatively inexpensive but mount solid. Add some Graphtech saddles and you'll be a happy camper. Or, Hipshot makes a nice part...

They don't need the saddles replaced, as they're stainless. Pretty hard stuff. Plus, the casting is made of machined brass. Very solid part.

In both cases, you might want to replace some of the saddle height adjustment screws, as they often stick up too high and will tear up your palm.

 

[jason]

I was a little worried about the Schaller 475 rollers soaking vibrations. Theoretically they would have a tiny space to vibrate around their shaft, it may be possible to fix them with superglue after adjustment but still. But I really liked the hipshot, it also looks better than the 475.
Pau ferro seems great. Thanks for the information Cagey.

 

[bagman67]

While you are technically correct that the roller has the potential to dampen some fraction of the guitar's vibration, as a practical matter the fraction is likely to be indiscernible.  Two reasons:  First, the vibration is happening along the free-sounding length of the string, not so much at the point where it bends over the roller; and second, those German machinists at Schaller know what the hell they're doing.  You will lose more string vibration to the fact that your fat little fingers are constantly moving on the fretboard than to any of the hardware on your axe.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

The vintage Strat flatmount is famous for the string spacing being too wide, and more prone to falling off the neck.  But...that isn't because of the nut width.

Any roller bridge might vibrate with no strings on it, but tuned to any useable pitch, the string tension makes it moot.

Consider too, the spacing of the pole pieces on the humbucker in relation to the bridge spacing.  I say that more for aesthetics than tonal differences.

 

[jason]

While you are technically correct that the roller has the potential to dampen some fraction of the guitar's vibration, as a practical matter the fraction is likely to be indiscernible.  Two reasons:  First, the vibration is happening along the free-sounding length of the string, not so much at the point where it bends over the roller; and second, those German machinists at Schaller know what the hell they're doing.  You will lose more string vibration to the fact that your fat little fingers are constantly moving on the fretboard than to any of the hardware on your axe.

I understand that the engineers at Schaller know what they are doing, and the 475 is definitely a fantastic bridge. I'm a bit pessimistic after the last two guitars I bought and had to sell. Both were great guitars, they just did not fit me.
So I thought I'd proceed carefully this time, as the parts have to be shipped to Australia and in the little town I live, selling what I'm making would be close to impossible. So I have to get it right this time.
Schaller 475 has adjustable rollers, which is a fantastic feature. I was thinking that this may be a trade-off, losing a fraction of some higher frequencies to movements of the roller and gaining ultra adjustment flexibility.
I didn't know though, asking from you guys I'm no longer concerned about that. May as well get the Schaller now, can't decide. Thanks for the reply Bagman.

The vintage Strat flatmount is famous for the string spacing being too wide, and more prone to falling off the neck.  But...that isn't because of the nut width.

Yea I realized vintage strats had 1 5/8" and a pretty wide bridge. 

Any roller bridge might vibrate with no strings on it, but tuned to any useable pitch, the string tension makes it moot.

Makes sense, what made me doubt it was the shallow break angle of the saddle, but seems that is no problem. The pressure should pretty much push the roller and shaft together and since these things seem to be precision made, it seems to be all good.
I'm happy to hear positives on Shaller, it is very adjustable. I saw the new version, 3D-6 in their site which also takes string from bottom of the bridge to have a sharper break angle. http://guitar-parts.biz/hp308304/Guitarbridge-3D-6-String-anchoring-from-underneath.htm


Now the funny thing is the guy who bought the old guitar called me asking if he can return it.  :blob7:
But I'm going to buy the warmoth anyway, can't pass on a new shiny(or natural) custom made guitar now.

 

[lelik]

Hello Jason
Just a different information after my experience with an ebony fretboard:
I love its feeling, and it's great even when I sweat a lot...
But consider that rosewood neck + ebony fretboard is probably a harmonic killer.
If you like harmonics, you should consider a slithly "brighter" wood such as pauferro.
Obviously not everything comes from the fretboard, but you're putting together a lot of warm woods.
Ebony has a nice and strong attack (and twang, like Tele/Strat guitars), but then it enhances mainly the fundamental tone.

Anyway, I'm convinced that most of the tone comes from the pickups (apart from the player and amp!) so maybe you could consider at the end to test different pickups (maybe even the cheaper ones from GFS or similar) and electronics (pot value, tone resistance and wiring). I have always found more differences after changing the pickup that anything else.

I'd like to use the same Schaller 475 in the future, as soon as I have the chance to build a Warmoth guitar (by the way, maybe with your same starting characteristics, 7/8 Tele shape, and 24-3/4 neck scale). The feedback in the web is positive, even if there are really few guitars with this Schaller model.
Ciao!

 

[Ace Flibble]

Right off the bat, I want to point out that you will not get 'the' Les Paul (or SG) tone from any kind of conversion neck bolt-on. They're simply too different. Even if you match all the same woods and electronics, the construction (especially of Warmoth's conversion necks) is too different to support the same sound. I know, because I've put together god-knows-how many 'Les-Paul-a-like' builds, both for myself and at the resquest of others, and not a day goes by when a Les Paul or Les Paul copy of some form doesn't pass through my hands. This last week alone, I've handled two real 1950s Les Pauls, one Gibson VOS reissue Les Paul, one Standard, three Studios, two Epiphone Les Pauls and one Tokai copy. When it comes to Les Pauls, I like to think I know what I'm talking about. I'm at the point now where even just changing from a stopbar to string-through makes enough of a difference for me to notice, blind.

If Les Paul tone is what you want, but with a thinner nut and narrower spacing at the bridge.. well, you're in for a rough time, because the string spacing of Les Pauls is already very narrow. At least, more narrow than any standard Fender-type deign (which all these parts builds are, ultimately, based off). The tune-o-matic and stopbar bridge is part of the Gibson tone and that pretty much only comes in the one spacing. You can, however, buy a fully adjustable Wilkinson roller bridge which allows you to set a narrow string spread, amoung other things. (Can't link diretcly to it because where you can buy it depends on what country you're in, but search for 'Wilkinson adjustable bridge' and you should find it easily enough.)

Flatmount bridges like the 475 can give you a narrow string spread, but they also sound very different. The break angle over the saddles, the size of the saddles and the lack of mass all contribute to a thinner, brighter tone. Up to you whether you think the difference in string spread is worth the difference in tone. There's also the difference in feel; the angle over the saddles means that flatmount bridges will have a much tighter feel when bending strings, compared to a tune-o-matic and stopbar set up.

There are guitars with a LP styling which have narrower features and a similar tone. Fender, for example, make a set neck, all-mahogany Telecaster in with a scale length of 24.75" and a flatmount bridge. It is a little lighter and brighter-sounding than an LP, but it's about on par with an SG and it does feel that bit narrower and slicker. They also make a semi-hollow Telecaster with a tune-o-matic bridge and P-90 pickups, and they now make Jaguars (24" scale) with tune-o-matics and double humbucker pickups.
Companies like Carvin, Feline and PRS all also make guitars which are rough approximations of the tone you're after and are able to be bought with thinner necks and string spacing (though in some cases only as an optional extra and not as standard). It would also be irresponsible of me to not mention Precision, who make custom, set-neck guitar kits to a very high specification. Their standard LP & SG kits will have standard-spaced nuts, but you could ask them if they could make a guitar with narrower spacing for you.

If you're set on making a parts guitar to fulfill your narrow-spaced, thick-toned needs, allow me to make a suggestion which will undoubtably be unpopular here amongst the Warmoth die-hards, but, in my now extensive experience with parts builds from many companies trying to get a thicker tone, is the right thing to do:

Buy a Warmoth body, whatever shape you like so long as it is chambered mahogany. The VIP and Regal shapes will give you the closest sound, as they have the most mass to their bodies. However, buy a 24.75" conversion neck not from Warmoth, but from USACG or Musikraft. The reason is, those companies make their conversions necks with regular truss rods and fretboard dimensions, while Warmoth only offers conversion necks with their 'pro' construction, which means a hefty double truss rod which significantly brightens the tone.
Warmoth does make great bodies. However, their conversion necks leave a lot to be desired if the true LP/SG feel and sound is what you're after. I understand why they only make them in the one construction style, but I do feel they would better serve the market who are interested in Gibson-scale necks if they would also offer a normal truss rod. I say this as someone with four 24.75" conversion necks in use right now, including a Warmoth one.

For the neck wood, mahogany and rosewood is a must. It's already going to be a brighter-toned neck from being a bolt-on, adding a dense wood like pau ferro on there is only going to unbalance the treble and bass further. If you want a thicker tone than bolt-ons usually have, mahogany and rosewood is the way to go. I've tried out having one-piece rosewood necks before myself, and not found it to offer any improvement in this regard, though it certainly does feel nicer in the hand.

Remember too that a lot of the SG/LP sound comes from the neck being medium to slightly thick. If you order a thinner neck you will be losing a lot of the 'body' of your tone. If you need a thinner neck in order to play at your best, obviously you should do so, but if you think you can handle a slightly thicker neck then it's wise to get one. If you are ordering a neck with an extra-thin nut then this could be critical to getting the sound you are after.

As a general rule, any bolt-on build, even if you use mahogany and rosewood, 24.75" scale and the same hardware and electronics as you'd find in your previous Gibsons, will have a slightly brighter sound at the bridge and a much brighter sound at the neck. So remember to choose your pickups to compensate; a slightly thicker bridge pickup and a much thicker-toned neck pickup. I'd also recommend you go with the same electronic set up that Gibson themselves use: 300k for volume and 500k for tone. The standard 500k for both will result in even more brightness coming through.


Lastly I feel I must mention that Gibson themselves have made two thinner-spaced SGs and LPs before, in the form of the Goddess (SG & LP) and Vixen (LP) series. The nuts are narrower and the bridge is an old-style single-piece wraparound, which typically has a slightly narrower string spread anyway but also can be easily replaced by various fully adjustable bridge types. The only reason I mention these last is that they are incredibly rare. They were only produced in limited numbers for two years and most of the people who have them do not want to let them go. In the last four years I've only seen two go for sale; both at around 50% more than they cost new. Both sold within 48 hours. But keep your eyes peeled, because if you do happen to find one they may be a very simple solution to your problem.

 

[jason]

Great information there. I didn't know warmoth has such a great community.  ccasion14:
Seems like getting a fat tone is not as easy as I thought it was. I don't mind a little bit of brightness, actually I dig it. Too dark of a tone sound muddy to me. That's why I was going for vintage sounding humbuckers. Some of the new hot ones sound a little muddy to my ear.
My ideal tone would be both fat and sparkly, I know that may not exist in reality. This tele comes close in character : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsxCHwVSkIc
A little fatter and with some wooooing humbucker in neck position.
I think I don't need anything below 2 1/16" in bridge. There are TOM and some other hardtails which give that spacing. What I'm wondering now is the difference between string through and top mount.
I wonder if it is possible/right to route the body for string through with this new 3d6 bridge : http://guitar-parts.biz/hp308304/Guitarbridge-3D-6-String-anchoring-from-underneath.htm
Of course if the difference in tone in negligible, I wouldn't want to bother. 
If stiffness of the string vary too much, ie. like the difference between 25.5 and 24.75 scaling. Then I'll have to retrain myself in bending. But if it is just in perception and not in the bending distance needed, it won't bother me.
Thanks for the info Ace, was a great read. Heaps of appreciation mate.