Thoughts on Tailpieces...

[Vol. Knob]

I've always liked the look of the ebony tailpieces on some of the nicer Jazz guitars, like a Benedetto or something like that.  I've had an Epi Casino in the past that had a trapeze style tailpiece. 

I can't really tell if the tailpiece really had any impact on the tone, as I've not really done any blind tests or anything.  But I like the look.

Then therea are a few guitars in Warmoths Customer Gallery, like these two that strike my fancy, despite lacking the bridge pickup a rock player like myself tends to use most of the time.

I stumbled accross this tailpiece.  As I'm a big fan of Django Reinhardt, I could really dig it on a guitar merely for the "conversation piece" aspect.

http://www.lmii.com/CartTwo/thirdproducts.asp?CategoryName=Tailpieces&NameProdHeader=Selmer%2FMacCaferri+style+tailpiece

I wonder if I could make that tailpiece work on an LP, LPS or VIP?  Hmmm...  I wonder about how it would impact the tone?

Thoughts anyone?

 

[schellerjazz]

HI,

I am not sure if you ever attempted this project, any results?  I too looked into doing a VIP with a jazz tailpiece and floating bridge.  My concern is how a floating bridge works or does not work with the neck angle.  The VIP neck angle keeps the strings very close to the body.  A trem only lifts these up about a half inch over the body.  No floating bridge I know of is that thin.  A floating bridge lifts strings 1 to 1.5 inches off the body, which is much to high action with the way the body and neck are shaped.  This leads me to believe the VIP and most bolt on necks are not engineered for this approach. 

There are not many quality true small body jazz guitars.  The Eastman El Rey and the Carvin Holdsworth are two that are affordable that truly have the hollow jazz tone without going to a huge jazz feedback box.  I have used hollow G & L and Soloways which are great but these lack the jazz tailpiece and tend to have the heavier bridge metalic attack of a solid electric, requiring one to dial back the treble control.  There is something organic and woody sounding about a guitar with a wood floating bridge and tailpiece. 

 

[AutoBat]

You can order the body with the neck pocket angled for tune-o-matic style bridges, which would raise the area that you're concerned about.  You would need to make this be a call-in or phone option as it's not a common choice.

 

[DangerousR6]

Personally, this is one of my favorites... :icon_biggrin:

But I also quite like the Duesenberg Bigsby-esque one...

 

[alterbridgefan]

http://www.duesenbergusa.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&path=33&product_id=74
At that price you could have a custom one made... Looks nice, though.

 

[DangerousR6]

http://www.duesenbergusa.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&path=33&product_id=74
At that price you could have a custom one made... Looks nice, though.

Yip, I've looked at them before, but it's a bit pricey...

 

[DLD]

Not too much into that style of bridge. I can however tell you, the better contact with the body the more tone transfer...

The material does matter also, pot metal is crap to me. Brass is darker, Steel is brigher. So you can subdue a bright sounding piece of wood with your bridge choice. How it connects to the body and what material it is...

People have various opinions on this...
Some say that pickups are the only thing that matters. But I don't see anybody playing those graphite guitars much, that's bs to me... every things from wood, construction, body shape, bridge material, location, headstock shape, nut material etc. etc. does affect the tone. Sometimes one thing may drastically change a guitar's tone (because it just doesn't work with the other variants or completes those variants), sometimes it makes little audible difference...

 

[Cagey]

I think you're right about the solid connection to the body making a difference, but I'm not so sure about the brass darkening things up. I have a Tele here with a custom bridge that attaches tight to the body, but is machined from a brass billet. It's also a hollow Mahogany body, no F holes. But, you wanna talk about loud and jangly? Holy moley, Andy! Acoustically, it's the loudest, brightest guitar I have. Everyone who picks it up notices it immediately because it's so unusual.

So, if brass was dark, or Mahogany absorbed too much high end, or hollow bodies were resonant, how did that result come to be?

 

[Jeremiah]

I had a guitar with a trapeze tailpiece and I hated it - even with the strings between the bridge and tailpiece damped, the tailpiece itself resonated and made a horrible metallic "ping" when I hit a loud chord.

I'm not sure if it was having any effect on the amplified sound of the guitar, but I could hear it acoustically and it was driving me nuts. I eventually removed it and replaced it with a stoptail.

 

[DangerousR6]

I had a guitar with a trapeze tailpiece and I hated it - even with the strings between the bridge and tailpiece damped, the tailpiece itself resonated and made a horrible metallic "ping" when I hit a loud chord.

I'm not sure if it was having any effect on the amplified sound of the guitar, but I could hear it acoustically and it was driving me nuts. I eventually removed it and replaced it with a stoptail.

I have the Gretsch tailpiece on my custom Billy Bo, it's full hollow and I have no issues like that acoustically... :icon_biggrin:

 

[TBurst Std]

Personally, this is one of my favorites... :icon_biggrin:

But I also quite like the Duesenberg Bigsby-esque one...

I can attest that the Doozy trem works MUCH better than a Bigsby. Same warble as a Bigsby w/o out the restring issue (unless you mod the Bigsby).

I do not dive mine, but use it judiciously, and its always in tune.

I love my Doozy.

 

[DLD]

I think you're right about the solid connection to the body making a difference, but I'm not so sure about the brass darkening things up. I have a Tele here with a custom bridge that attaches tight to the body, but is machined from a brass billet. It's also a hollow Mahogany body, no F holes. But, you wanna talk about loud and jangly? Holy moley, Andy! Acoustically, it's the loudest, brightest guitar I have. Everyone who picks it up notices it immediately because it's so unusual.

So, if brass was dark, or Mahogany absorbed too much high end, or hollow bodies were resonant, how did that result come to be?

Any hard piece of wood will brighten things up. The saddles don't look brass.

You just proved the point that wood is different even with the same species. And although you can buy specific parts to hopefully get a desired result, results vary and it's luck of the draw. That's why famous guitaists get dozens or hundreds of guitars and always seem to record with only one...

 

[Cagey]

It's true that you can't predict exactly how a piece of wood will respond, and for that matter I'm not convinced that the body wood on an electric makes as large a contribution as some give it credit for as far as tonal character is concerned anyway, but you'd have to hear this thing to appreciate what I'm talking about. It's unusual to the point where I can't attribute it to the wood. I've owned and dealt with a lot of Mahogany bodies in my day, and none of them did anything like what you hear from this part. That's why I think it's the bridge. Between that being solid brass, the saddles being the TUSQ material, and the solid connection to the body that you don't get with post-mounted bridges such as a TOM, I want to give it credit for the way this thing sounds.

I have a very similar Tele here that's made out of even harder woods, has a flush body-mount bridge (Gotoh Tele-style) and TUSQ saddles, and it's nothing like the one pictured above. I mean, it's bright, but not like that one. That one makes you look at it when you hit a chord, wondering wtf?

 

[DangerousR6]

I think you are so right Cagey, brass is such a emphatically sonic material. I believe it's in the density of it that helps it resonate.. 

 

[LushTone]

It's unusual to the point where I can't attribute it to the wood. I've owned and dealt with a lot of Mahogany bodies in my day, and none of them did anything like what you hear from this part.

I think it is the chambers that are causing this effect for you. I notice a great deal of increased volume, dynamics, and even brightness from my chambered bodies.

That being said, yours is a almost fully hollow. I've noticed similar characteristics in archtop style guitars. This is something I believe to be a result of the resonating chamber, or chambers, and the solid, reflective top surface. I think the results are unique from acoustic guitars because the body projects certain frequencies much more than the others.

And that's probably as technical as I want to think about it.  :laughing7:

 

[Cagey]

My other Tele is also hollow, and it's not as loud/bright as this one.

Hollowing out Tele bodies is more of a weight reduction move than anything else. The top is much too thick to be a sound board, especially on carved tops like these. I'm not saying chambering or hollowing out bodies doesn't have any effect on the sound of the thing, but it's very subtle.

 

[LushTone]

Hmm that is interesting. I know the chambering affects the tone on my guitars more than subtly. So much, that I would never use a tone wood like pau ferro or ebony by choice again because the chambering increases definition and brightness so much that it would be overkill to my ears. But with your guitar I don't know.  :dontknow: But it seems like a really cool guitar!

 

[Dan025]

I think you are so right Cagey, brass is such a emphatically sonic material. I believe it's in the density of it that helps it resonate..

i totally believe the differences bridge material can make. bill lawrence says it has to do with the hardness/elasticity and density. remember elasticity is a measurment of a materials ability to be deformed and return to shape. so hardness and elasticity are not exclusive of each other infact harder materials are technically more elastic even if "common sense" associates elasticity with rubber like materials. drop a glass ball and a rubber one, the glass one bounces higher because it loses less energy. bounce testing is an accepted measurement of hardness for metals and logically could be applied to guitar parts because you are really measuring energy losses which is a key contributor to sustain and volume.

http://www.billlawrence.com/Pages/All_About_Tone.htm/TeleLovers.htm