JohnPlayer
New member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3
Hi, new member, first post.
I got my first electric in the 70s and since then I've kept a few to cover my needs. (I play them andmaintain them, I don't collect them for any other purpose.)
If anyone has insight in Gibson manufacturing, maybe you can help me out with a question that has bugged me for some time regarding bridge alignment and string spacing:
Many ES 335 with ABR-1 got proportional string spacing at the bridge. LP's with ABR-1 almost always come with equal spacing. -Why??
Nashville bridge saddles are always factory slotted at the center of the saddle, meaning that any guitar with the Nashville system always has equal spacing. It also means that the Nashville bridge post bushings must be positioned with precision to ensure proper string alignment.
In contrast, ABR-1 saddles come un-slotted and slots may all end up off-center, as long as the string to fretboard alignment is right. If the customer wants proportional string spacing, the slots are off-center anyway and less attention to side-to-side alignment of an ABR-1 bridge would be required.
The ABR-1 system wasn't always pre-notched at the factory. For a period of time, Gibson shipped to the dealers, that did the set up including saddle slotting to meet individual customer requirements. (I know, because I've bought more than one new Gibson that came un-notched to the store that did the saddle slotting as part of the customer set-up)
Some people prefer the ABR-1 system because it enables proportional string spacing as well as a wider string spacing. LP guys seem more concerned with the strings lining up over the pole pieces. For a long time Gibson used the same pickup spec for neck and bridge position, meaning that the strings could never line up over the bridge pole pieces. Bridge pole piece alignment is possible only when the guitar has a modern dedicated bridge PU spec and therefore doesn't apply to historic specs.
Anyway, I have a 335 with an ABR-1 that is currently proportionally slotted. It's due for new saddles. I'm thinking about making an equal spacing, but in order to have the slots centered (for aesthetic reasons only. -There may be better saddle-to-bridge contact having the slots off-center?) that would require the bridge posts to be adjusted about 1 mm in order to get the fretboard alignment right. I could bend the posts a little, or reset the posts at a small angle. Or I could keep the proportional spacing and it would continue to be my only guitar with this feature...
Dan Erlewine and Stewmac advocate proportional spacing, but I have no idea when, where and why this trend started. All my other guitars including my acoustics got equal spacing.
-Your thoughts?
I got my first electric in the 70s and since then I've kept a few to cover my needs. (I play them andmaintain them, I don't collect them for any other purpose.)
If anyone has insight in Gibson manufacturing, maybe you can help me out with a question that has bugged me for some time regarding bridge alignment and string spacing:
Many ES 335 with ABR-1 got proportional string spacing at the bridge. LP's with ABR-1 almost always come with equal spacing. -Why??
Nashville bridge saddles are always factory slotted at the center of the saddle, meaning that any guitar with the Nashville system always has equal spacing. It also means that the Nashville bridge post bushings must be positioned with precision to ensure proper string alignment.
In contrast, ABR-1 saddles come un-slotted and slots may all end up off-center, as long as the string to fretboard alignment is right. If the customer wants proportional string spacing, the slots are off-center anyway and less attention to side-to-side alignment of an ABR-1 bridge would be required.
The ABR-1 system wasn't always pre-notched at the factory. For a period of time, Gibson shipped to the dealers, that did the set up including saddle slotting to meet individual customer requirements. (I know, because I've bought more than one new Gibson that came un-notched to the store that did the saddle slotting as part of the customer set-up)
Some people prefer the ABR-1 system because it enables proportional string spacing as well as a wider string spacing. LP guys seem more concerned with the strings lining up over the pole pieces. For a long time Gibson used the same pickup spec for neck and bridge position, meaning that the strings could never line up over the bridge pole pieces. Bridge pole piece alignment is possible only when the guitar has a modern dedicated bridge PU spec and therefore doesn't apply to historic specs.
Anyway, I have a 335 with an ABR-1 that is currently proportionally slotted. It's due for new saddles. I'm thinking about making an equal spacing, but in order to have the slots centered (for aesthetic reasons only. -There may be better saddle-to-bridge contact having the slots off-center?) that would require the bridge posts to be adjusted about 1 mm in order to get the fretboard alignment right. I could bend the posts a little, or reset the posts at a small angle. Or I could keep the proportional spacing and it would continue to be my only guitar with this feature...
Dan Erlewine and Stewmac advocate proportional spacing, but I have no idea when, where and why this trend started. All my other guitars including my acoustics got equal spacing.
-Your thoughts?