Recessing a vintage 6-hole: Possible?

[B3Guy]

ok, is it possible to but a "pull up" enabling recess for a vintage 6-hole strat trem? (thinking of one of those really nice Callaham ones, if that makes any difference whatsoever.)

 

[DesmoDog]

Maybe i'm missing what you mean, but they are designed to be set up so they "float" so you can pull up with them too. Basically they don't have to lie flat on the top of the guitar.

 

[B3Guy]

ah, gotcha. thought they were supposed to go pretty darn close to flat, but mebe not?

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Is recessing done to pull up?  I thought it was to pull back.

 

[B3Guy]

ya, "up" away from the guitar body, "up" in pitch and tension. (same difference to what you maybe mean by "back", as in towards the butt of the guitar?)

 

[B3Guy]

nope. as far as I can tell, they get adjusted to sit right about level with the body, so basically only "push down" (down in pitch) is possible to any serious extent. No bending up 3 steps with one of those puppies . . . unless you could recess route it, and maybe put some special screws in place of the 6-screws  :laughing7:

 

[swarfrat]

I always thought this was a case of "If you have to ask, you're using the wrong trem"

 

[B3Guy]

hey, it never hurts to ask. stupid Wilkies only come is satin finish with those fugly black hex screws plopped in the middle of the saddles, and it's killing my vintage vibe.  :icon_jokercolor:

 

[dNA]

hey, it never hurts to ask. stupid Wilkies only come is satin finish with those fugly black hex screws plopped in the middle of the saddles, and it's killing my vintage vibe.  :icon_jokercolor:

but a recessed trem wouldn't kill your vintage vibe? *Cagey grin*

 

[B3Guy]

nope. I'm a looks only guy, and recesses are minimally visible, and not distinctly "un-vintage"-looking to my eyes. sure, there's a different route on your guitar, but it isn't satin-finish hardware  :tard:

but back to the original q: is it workable?

 

[Cagey]

I agree that appearance is important, but it comes after tone, utility, maintainability, and repeatability. The most beautiful guitar in the world isn't worth a tinker's damn if you haven't got those issues resolved first. That's why I don't use vintage hardware. All those old designs have been improved for good reasons, and in many cases their appearance has been improved as well. I've never heard a good reason to use vintage hardware; it's always emotional and it almost always causes some amount of hardship.

 

[Cagey]

...back to the original q: is it workable?

It can be done, but it's just not practical. You'd have to rout the top, thereby wrecking your "vintage vibe" and possibly the finish as well. Then, in order to take advantage of the increased travel the recess would make available, you'd have to substantially open up the sustain block opening, requiring more routing from the rear. Otherwise, you wouldn't get any increased range of motion anyway. Finally, the pivots on a vintage Strat vibrato bridge aren't designed for that range of motion, so you'd have repeatability problems. That is, the bridge may not return to neutral reliably, and the pivot points may wear prematurely. 

So, I'd strongly recommend against the whole idea. You won't really gain anything, and you're liable to lose a lot, this on top of already using a less-than-ideal design bridge in the first place.

Besides, listen to some old Deep Purple, such as "Highway Star". Ritchie Blackmore is playing a "vintage" Strat back 100 years ago before it was considered "vintage" - it was a new Strat. But, it had the crummy 6 point limited travel trem, yet you'll hear some really wild vibrato going on. Thing is, a lot of that was in his left hand. Guy could wank on a guitar neck. Still, he beat the hell out of that bridge as well, torturing out some real stretchy stuff. Jimi Hendrix, from the same era, was doing the same thing the same way using the same gear. Mssrs. Floyd and Rose were but twinkles in their daddy's eyes back then, so Ritchie and Jimi had to get most of their vibrato the old fashioned way: they played it left hand. The wang bar was mostly just for special effects diving.

 

[Cagey]

You might also argue that you don't want to "destroy all monsters" like Ritchie and Jimi seemed determined to do. You might just want to play pretty. So, look at SRV -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF1p8sawWJ0

Here again, we have a vintage Strat whose vibrato isn't holding him back, and he's being very tasteful. When he wants to get wild, he actually does the majority of that vibrato work with his left hand, not the wang bar.

So, the moral of the story is: learn to play. 'Tis a poor workman who blames his tools <grin>

 

[Disco Scottie]

You might want to check out this bridge

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWKupVdhRzA[/youtube]

 

[B3Guy]

not gonna lie, that's a pretty smart idea . . . and it's a polished finnish  :icon_thumright:

anyone tried on of these?

1. could I put Callaham Saddles on it?

2. Is that blade gonna break in 5 years?

 

[Superlizard]

not gonna lie, that's a pretty smart idea . . . and it's a polished finnish  :icon_thumright:

anyone tried on of these?

1. could I put Callaham Saddles on it?

2. Is that blade gonna break in 5 years?

FWIW, Callaham does sell vintage stamped saddles that (drop-in) fit a Fender Am Std Strat 2-point whammy.  I have this setup
on one of my strats... great tone.

 

[Firebird211]

I would have to say don't recess the vintage bridge as well, there is a reason that better trem systems came to be instead of the modification to the vintage.  It really wasn't meant for a frequent and full range of motion.  I am in with you on the vintage boat, my new build sports a vintage 6 hole as well.  I am not much of a user of the trem, so in past builds the bridge was left very flush with the body, and only capable of lowering the strings.  My use of the vintage trem was almost as if it were a fixed bridge, but I had the capability if I cared to use it.  If you wan't a little more play in the other direction I could suggest having the bridge floating like I have seen on my friend's Fender Strat.  Too much float isn't a good thing either, but his guitar is very stable, and he can rest his hand on the bridge and get at least a half step up in tone with more hand pressure.  I personally would want much less float that he had, but he uses that feature well on his strat.  I have never seen him use a bar, and he doesn't use his trem much, but he uses it way more than I do.

 

[B3Guy]

Well, I mostly asked in the first place, because I'm a tinkerer and like to ponder these things. I'm not really one to think about actually executing anything like recessing a 6-hole.  :icon_jokercolor:

I'm actually quite taken with their larger trem, the Super-Vee. Only problem is it is meant to be double-locking (lock at the nut as well), and I'm not a big fan of exess crap at the nut. would it work fine with an LSR roller nut and locking tuners?

 

[Disco Scottie]

Well, I mostly asked in the first place, because I'm a tinkerer and like to ponder these things. I'm not really one to think about actually executing anything like recessing a 6-hole.  :icon_jokercolor:

I'm actually quite taken with their larger trem, the Super-Vee. Only problem is it is meant to be double-locking (lock at the nut as well), and I'm not a big fan of exess crap at the nut. would it work fine with an LSR roller nut and locking tuners?

You could do that, but if you're not locking down at the nut, why not just go with the BladeRunner? They both use the same tech.

 

[Firebird211]

I would say that would work on the nut.  I have made a perfectly el-cheapo guitar with a vintage bridge, graphtech nut, and locking tuners, and that baby was never far out of tune.  I don't like all that crap on the nut and frankly don't like my bridge to have a big chunk of metal on it either.  Its not a bad thing to have that stuff for it's function over it's looks, but I don't really need that function.  Do what you gotta do.