neastguy Posted January 9 Posted January 9 what can I get that will drop right in with the studs etc? thanks Quote
velorush Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Are we talking top wrap or replacing the Nashville with a stop tail? Pretty much any flavor (zinc, aluminum, titanium) will work for the former. Everything I've ever read about the latter is that it shouldn't be done without a change in the studs as the Nashville studs aren't designed to handle that kind of lateral stress (they'll tilt toward the nut). 2 1 Quote
hamerhead Posted January 9 Posted January 9 If you're top-wrapping, try this: On my Les Paul I replaced the original studs with two 5/16-24 x 1" button head cap screws and tightened the tailpiece right down on the body. The improvement was better than expected - no more play/wobble/movement on the studs yielded much better sustain, and the tailpiece doesn't slide off when you're changing strings. I do this to all my TOM guitars now. Another trick is to slide the balls off the old set onto the new strings so that the new string kinks over the tailpiece on the string part, not the ball attaching/winding part. I believe the Hamer tailpiece studs are metric (M8-1.25?). But.... Velorush is right - If you want a wrapper like a Junior you need to replace the bridge anchors/studs or have badness happen. 7 Quote
velorush Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) 27 minutes ago, hamerhead said: On my Les Paul I replaced the original studs with two 5/16-24 x 1" button head cap screws and tightened the tailpiece right down on the body. The improvement was better than expected - no more play/wobble/movement on the studs yielded much better sustain, and the tailpiece doesn't slide off when you're changing strings. I do this to all my TOM guitars now. Another trick is to slide the balls off the old set onto the new strings so that the new string kinks over the tailpiece on the string part, not the ball attaching/winding part. Ooh! Very interesting, and frugal (compared to the various booteek tailpiece lockdown engineering schemes). The tailpiece on my Lester has a 20-degree-ish forward slant using the stock Gibby studs. How badly did the tailpiece crush into the top? Definitely put the ball ends from the prior set on before stringing up as top wrapping without puts the ball-end winds exactly right coming over the tailpiece to make them extra stabby! ETA: This was while getting the relief set correctly. The tailpiece studs are now tightened down, but the tailpiece still has that tilt due to the difference between the stud inset and the thickness of the tailpiece. Edited January 9 by velorush 3 Quote
hamerhead Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) 18 minutes ago, velorush said: ....How badly did the tailpiece crush into the top? The tailpiece sits on top of the anchors, so there's actually a little space on the high E side (maybe .015) while the low E side just barely touches ('79 Gibson QC). A thin washer would fix that if I cared enough to worry about it. Either way it's a pretty solid set-up. ETA: 'frugal' - Ha! I'm just a cheap bastard. Edited January 9 by hamerhead 3 Quote
hamerhead Posted January 9 Posted January 9 3 hours ago, velorush said: ....The tailpiece studs are now tightened down, but the tailpiece still has that tilt due to the difference between the stud inset and the thickness of the tailpiece. My anchors have about a 1/16" lip whereas yours are flush. The washer trick would work on yours - without damage - if the washer was the same diameter as the top of the anchor. Tailpieces and studs should be machined for a snug fit. Or better, a slight wedge shape to pull it up tight. What's lost in that poor fit is pretty significant. 2 Quote
neastguy Posted January 10 Author Posted January 10 (edited) 19 hours ago, velorush said: Are we talking top wrap or replacing the Nashville with a stop tail? Pretty much any flavor (zinc, aluminum, titanium) will work for the former. Everything I've ever read about the latter is that it shouldn't be done without a change in the studs as the Nashville studs aren't designed to handle that kind of lateral stress (they'll tilt toward the nut). what is happening is the 1st string is still lying on the bridge even after I raised the tailpiece.. this is a before picture before I raised the tailpiece.. I feel like the tailpiece is getting way too high.. the other strings are way off the bridge Edited January 10 by neastguy Quote
Dave Scepter Posted January 10 Posted January 10 I had added washers under the tailpiece "keeping everything snug" to avoid top wrapping 1 Quote
RobB Posted January 10 Posted January 10 1 hour ago, Dave Scepter said: Or try one of these Dang, that’s clever! 1 1 Quote
Cboss Posted January 10 Posted January 10 The cure for everything.. these are so nicely made, and the spacers are a fantastic idea because tightened down there is much more sustain and resonance through the guitar https://callahamguitars.com/gibson_body_lockingstuds_catalog.htm 2 Quote
Cboss Posted January 10 Posted January 10 5 hours ago, neastguy said: what is happening is the 1st string is still lying on the bridge even after I raised the tailpiece.. this is a before picture before I raised the tailpiece.. I feel like the tailpiece is getting way too high.. the other strings are way off the bridge That is a gorgeous guitar! 2 Quote
BoogieMKIIA Posted January 10 Posted January 10 5 hours ago, Dave Scepter said: Or try one of these Where can this be found? Quote
RobB Posted January 10 Posted January 10 I don’t understand the trend of top-wrapped stoptails. My experience is that the string-tension gets all fukkered up. Is the current wisdom that bolting the tailpiece to the body increases sustain, or some such? I raise the stoptail until both E-strings clear the back of the bridge. If there is too much slop on the studs I’ll install the FaberUSA or Callaham kits. 3 Quote
Dave Scepter Posted January 10 Posted January 10 https://www.stewmac.com/video-and-ideas/online-resources/learn-about-guitar-bridge-and-tailpiece-installation-and-repair/tune-o-matic-setup-is-the-trouble-with-the-bridge-or-the-neck-angle/ Quote
Dave Scepter Posted January 10 Posted January 10 2 hours ago, BoogieMKIIA said: Where can this be found? https://images.app.goo.gl/9AH4WmcwW1DtARck7 https://www.ebay.com/itm/134826618434?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=hv33UW-1SbG&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY 1 Quote
Dave Scepter Posted January 10 Posted January 10 7 hours ago, Dave Scepter said: Or try one of these https://images.app.goo.gl/9AH4WmcwW1DtARck7 Quote
hamerhead Posted January 10 Posted January 10 9 minutes ago, RobB said: I don’t understand the trend of top-wrapped stoptails. ....Is the current wisdom that bolting the tailpiece to the body increases sustain, or some such?.... I've been doing it for awhile....OK, about 20 years but who's counting.....because my LP was kind of a lifeless pig, especially when compared to Hamers. The amount of sustain gained by tightening the tailpiece down is pretty big, and top-wrapping made it easier to play. Tuning stability is better because nothing moves, and the breakover angle isn't as steep. Taking anything moveable out of the path is going to help. Studs are loose in the anchors, tailpieces are loose on the studs, etc etc etc and vibration is lost at every point. I also lock down the stud on the high E side of the bridge (just a nut tightened against the anchor). Anything that can be locked down will increase sustain. I've only had one guitar that top-wrapping didn't improve. And I can't remember what it was..... 3 Quote
velorush Posted January 10 Posted January 10 28 minutes ago, RobB said: I don’t understand the trend of top-wrapped stoptails. My experience is that the string-tension gets all fukkered up. Is the current wisdom that bolting the tailpiece to the body increases sustain, or some such? For me, it's just been an experiment about string tension. So far I like the lower string tension, but realize I'm likely only getting to play a total of an hour a week. That Lester pic, above, was part of an experiment to see why my old Howard Roberts plays so much better than the Lester (really, than any guitar I've ever played). I got out the feeler gauges and my machinist's ruler and went to town. I'm convinced part of the HRF's magic lies in the "fingers" tailpiece, which allows adjustment of break angle for each string. What I discovered was the Lester's top-wrapped break angle was actually less than the HRF (just eyeballing it vs. the picture in my earlier post). The problem had to lie somewhere else. Through measurement I discovered the problem (and this seems to be a persistent complaint on this generation of Gibson Plant guitars): too much relief. I tightened the truss rod and it is amazing how much more compliant the strings became. So much so I was able to lock the tailpiece down to the top (slop in the stud-to-tailpiece-connection-resulting-in-the-forward-tilt, not withstanding). Eyeballing the Callaham setup right now. I really really like their Strat bridges. 3 Quote
hamerhead Posted January 10 Posted January 10 3 minutes ago, velorush said: ...to see why my old Howard Roberts plays so much better than the Lester... String length is a factor, as well. There's a lot more behind the bridge of the HR. 2 Quote
BoogieMKIIA Posted January 10 Posted January 10 26 minutes ago, Dave Scepter said: https://images.app.goo.gl/9AH4WmcwW1DtARck7 https://www.ebay.com/itm/134826618434?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=hv33UW-1SbG&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY Thanks. A bit expensive. To clear the back of the bridge on my Studio Custom, I have to raise the stop tail quite high. It wobbles until string tension is applied. The break angle is very shallow with top wrapping and the stop tail all the way down. This might provide something in between. 1 Quote
Biz Prof Posted January 11 Posted January 11 (edited) On a related note: as I've gotten better at maintaining and repairing my own guitars, I've begun noticing things I likely ignored or took for granted. Case in pount: the break angle on my '90s Specials has certain strings riding the back of the TOM, which creates issues, I've learned. This leads me to raising the stop tail waaaay higher than it arrived from the factory for the strings to have a clear path to the anchor points. I guess this is typical? Or have the Schaller TOMs bent under tension over the last 30+ years? Edited January 11 by Biz Prof Quote
RobB Posted January 11 Posted January 11 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Biz Prof said: This leads me to raising the stop tail waaaay higher than it arrived from the factory for the strings to have a clear path to the anchor points. I guess this is typical? Not necessarily. As stated a few posts above, neck angles do vary. I’d bet that your 90s Specials are pretty similar builds, though. 27 minutes ago, Biz Prof said: Or have the Schaller TOMs bent under tension over the last 30+ years? Unlikely. I supppose it could happen with heavy strings/tension and time. Schaller Nashvilles are pretty robust; I don’t think I’ve ever come across a collapsed one. Vintage ABR-1 warpage is more common. Edited January 11 by RobB 2 Quote
ARM OF HAMER Posted January 11 Posted January 11 (edited) 9 hours ago, RobB said: Not necessarily. As stated a few posts above, neck angles do vary. I’d bet that your 90s Specials are pretty similar builds, though. Unlikely. I supppose it could happen with heavy strings/tension and time. Schaller Nashvilles are pretty robust; I don’t think I’ve ever come across a collapsed one. Vintage ABR-1 warpage is more common. I actually owned a guitar where the Stop Tailpiece itself was distorted from years of string pull. Edited January 11 by ARM OF HAMER Quote
neastguy Posted January 11 Author Posted January 11 On 1/10/2025 at 7:30 AM, Dave Scepter said: Or try one of these I really like the design of this.. I ordered it for my Artist thanks 3 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.