Old ABR-1s DO sound different...

[Ed A]

... In my guitar anyway. I recently picked up an original ABR-1 and there is a noticeable difference in tone. Now I dont know if every historic ABR-1 sounds different from one another, I dont have any others to try, but there's a difference in the old one. I only compared them once quickly, I should try it again, but the obvious difference is in pick attack. With the old bridge there is much more of that 'squeak' especially on the higher strings. I dont know how to describe it other than that warm squeak at the moment you pick the note, not a harmonic. You hear it all over the Beano album, very cool.

 

[toni]

:bug

I thought i was crazy when i swapped the ABR1's from my 1999 Historic in my 2001 Historic and i "heard" ...:fatty a difference, the 2001's ABR1 was "warmer", man...
do you think it comes from the alloy, the saddles...?

 

[Ed A]

I dont know. Dont the historics have the same brass saddles like the old ones? Maybe my '99 bridge doesnt have brass saddles?

 

[NewOldCokeDave]

Damn you, man!!! :lolspin

Now I'm going to have to reinvest in a bunch of damn bridges now!!

The Rolphs rock man!!

 

[2muchmb]

I'm aware of disagreements at Gibson about the composition of the alloys of the various parts earlier in the '90's.

Ed A, do you have any idea when that ABR-1 was from?

 

[Sean]

Hey Ed, does it have anything to do with the way the slots are cut/ shaped maybe?

 

[Ed Rafalko]

zinc alloy with brass saddles.

 

[EdA]

I dont know if it has anything to do with the slots and Im not even sure yet if I like everything about it better, I think its a tradeoff. Ive gotta crank this shit up tomorrow through the big amps to see, plus I put the covers back on my double-whites and thats screwin with my head too. WHEN WILL I LEARN TO STOP FU*KING AROUND! IM DRIVING MYSELF NUTS!

 

[toni]

hee hee...


well, :fatty i think we are already right on the spot tonewise, but we developped a "bad" reflex ...

NOW, after all these tests A/B's etc..., we know that we can get about any tone we want with these fantastic Historics, a bunch of really good pickups, pots etc...

Hey Ed, no joke, for the first time in many years, i didn't touch a single "thing" on my two Les Paul's for the last 2 months.:dude
...and i feel much better ! :lol2

 

[2muchmb]

EdA, are you saying you put the covers back on at the same time you changed the bridge?

 

[tonejunkie]

Ed A

Why did you put the covers back on? What difference did you notice?

 

[Ed A]

No I had put the covers back on a couple weeks before I changed the bridge, so the difference in sound between bridges was not due to any other changes.

Tonejunkie, I wanted to see how the double whites would sound with the covers on plus because of their value, I thought it would be a good idea to protect them. Screw that! I took them back off. I think the guitar sounds more alive with them off, plus I was getting some feedback with them on, so theyre staying off for now.

Ive also decided (for now) to go back to the historic bridge. The guitar has more harmonics, mids and thicker and sweeter top end with the historic bridge. The old ABR, is thinner, brighter and more hollow sounding. It would be a good bridge to wake up a dark middy guitar, but for my guitar and amps I like the historic better (I think!). I still may experiment a little more.

 

[toni]

:wtf

Ed, you make me think...I compared Virtuals no covers with Seths (alnico V's) with covers...:bug

Does it make a big difference or is it subtle ?

 

[Dave Paetow]

Ed, have you switched the ABR1 studs around? The old studs were brass, the HC studs are steel (though I think the '01's are brass). I could always hear a difference there. Maybe the old ABR with brass studs would be the way to go.

 

[EdA]

No Dave, I didnt try that. I didnt know there was a difference in material. I dont have any 50s studs, but I do have a couple from a '70LP, wonder if they are brass?

 

[Dave Paetow]

Might be, take a magnet to them and find out.

 

[toni]

It's the first time i hear about that...

Dave, how wuld you describe the tone difference ?

 

[2muchmb]

The studs in my '72/'73 Custom and '94 '59RI are non-magnetic, but a set of '80's Gibson replacement studs was. FWIW.

 

[Dave Paetow]

I thought the brass studs had a bit quackier mids, and a little less high end.

 

[hogy1]

Dave, I have three original '50s Gibsons with ABR-1s, and none of them have brass studs.
Just last week, I took the original studs out of o '56 Gold top (they were leaning), and they were definitely not brass.
In fact, when you look at them, you'll see that they are simply screws with their heads cut off. The bottom end that's in the wood looks nice and machined, the top end looks rough and hand filed.

About the ABR-1s: one of my guitars has a ca. '61 ABR-1. Still says ABR-1 on it, but has the saddle retainer wire. Saddles are new Allparts nickel plated brass. A couple of weeks ago I bought a completely original '59 ABR-1 (saddles and all) on ebay because the retainer wire bridge is not original to the guitar.
Well, I put it on last night, and guess what? It sounds quite different. Less high end chime, and fatter, pluckier mids. Rounder, and not quite as loud. I'll have to get used to it, but my first impression is that I may prefer the '61 bridge w/ Allparts saddles.
So what's going on? Maybe it's the saddles, maybe the bridge alloy varied from batch to batch.
Of course I could put the Allparts saddles on the '59 bridge, but I won't. I don't want to end up like EdA. hogy