View Single Post
  #21  
Old 09-13-2017, 04:16 PM
ChrisN ChrisN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 1,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canyongargon View Post
Lots of really great input here guys. Thanks so much, lots of considerations I never would have even thought of. I guess the heart of my question is "Is there any reason given my measurements that it would be inadvisable to hang onto this guitar?"

I really like everything about this one except that the setup is a hair high from the factory. The straight-edge test tipped me off that I should ask better minds for some advice. If it can be brought down to where I'd like without trouble and nothing about my measurements screams that there's something drastically wrong, then I'm just wondering if anything about the guitar screams "foolish" if I were to hold onto it.
Given the excellent input above (not mine), it appears you have nothing to worry about so long as you're willing to spend a bit more $$ to shave the bridge/saddle to get the action where you want it while keeping sufficient saddle exposure and string break angle. You should not have to do that, and I assume your dealer would allow a swap, but that solution may be preferable for you to swapping for a different guitar that might not sound as good as the one you have.

Per Howard's excellent input, your guitar's issue isn't that the neck on yours wasn't set to the correct angle, it's that the assembler grabbed the wrong bridge for that neck angle - if the next-lowest-thickness bridge had been used, instead, then your guitar would easily pass the straightedge test. I don't know if bridge-grabbing is a by-the-book measurement, or a judgment call for the operator. If you had your measurements, but with a shorter (LOWER!, scream many) bridge already installed, then that might be a different issue.

I mentioned Godin and noted they, too, use different-height bridges. I've got an A & L Ami that's in your Martin's position - straightedge hits 1/64 below the bridge top and the low E is just a smidge under 1/2" off the top. The bridge height appears thick at 12/32 - to get my preferred 5/64 low E action, the saddle midpoint is only 3/32 exposed at the middle, which is insufficient by most standards. By comparison, the Taylor next to it easily passes the straightedge test, and its bridge height is 3/32 lower, at 9/32. The Taylor's low E sits only 13/32 off the deck with low E action of 5/64 requiring a 5/64 saddle exposure (sufficient). Arguably, the Taylor should have had a slightly taller bridge affixed.
Reply With Quote