Gibson's '60s Era Adjustable Bridge: Tone Killer or Another Way to Get the Job Done?

[Ed-in-Ohio]

Title says it all...So many "aficionados" hate and bash the ADJ bridge/saddle, yet some owners seem to really like them.

Would love to hear opinions on this from ADJ owners, both those who have kept the ADJ, and those who swapped it out with a Rosewood bridge and conventional saddle.

A few years ago I played an early '60s J-45 ADJ at a guitar show, and it was fantastic...I think of that guitar often, and sometimes regret that I didn't buy it on the spot. I find myself wondering...would it have sounded even better with a Rosewood bridge, or would messing with what was working be silly and unwise?

[zombywoof]

The deal killer for me is not the bridge but the skinny necks and from 1965 on the narrow nuts.

I have never thought the ADJ bridge is a "tone killer." More of a different sound thing. Some folks like it while others do not.

The real problems with the bridges are that if you raise the saddle the only contact it has with the guitar are through those two large bolts. The second issue is the bridge plate. To support that bridge (which weighs about three times as much as a standard bridge) Gibson went to a stiff laminate bridge plate big enough to qualify as a piece of furniture. Changing out the bridge and leaving that bridge plate is only going to get you half way there.

A popular compromise is to not remove the bridge but modify it with a rosewood inset and saddle. As it does not have to be glued in you can always go back to the original bridge configuration.

[6L6]

My 1962 Gibson J-50 with the adjustable bridge was a sonic DUD. I sold it and bought a Guild D-40NT in '74 which proved to be a MUCH better sounding guitar.

[jimmyboy]

My 1973 / J50 is the same here.
Sustain is short compare to mid '90 J50 with regular bridge.
But it has it own tone.So I think it's player preferences.

[riverrummed]

When I first started hanging out with this forum and the Gibson forum about four years ago the consensus was that the adjustable bridge/saddle was just terrible and a total tone killer. I never read one good thing said about it. Over time I've noticed that attitude change quite a bit. Time for duluthdan to weigh in about his newly acquired J-50.

[PTC Bernie]

I had a 1965 J45 Nat with the adjustable ceramic bridge. It was a tone killer. The only contact between the bridge and the soundboard is through the two small adjustment screws. That's not much of a path for all that vibration.

I removed the spring and screws and made a hardwood saddle (sabot ? ) for the ceramic saddle to fit into. The improvement in tone was instant and huge!

I've also seen people have oversized saddles made, but that's a very large piece of bone if you go that route.

Bottom line, worth doing, absolutly!

[PTC Bernie]

Originally Posted by 6L6

My 1962 Gibson J-50 with the adjustable bridge was a sonic DUD. I sold it and bought a Guild D-40NT in '74 which proved to be a MUCH better sounding guitar.

Gotta love the Guilds from that era!

[zombywoof]

Originally Posted by jimmyboy

My 1973 / J50 is the same here.
Sustain is short compare to mid '90 J50 with regular bridge.
But it has it own tone.So I think it's player preferences.

I would guess the now infamous double X bracing has something to do with it.

[DanPanther]

Originally Posted by PTC Bernie

I had a 1965 J45 Nat with the adjustable ceramic bridge. It was a tone killer. The only contact between the bridge and the soundboard is through the two small adjustment screws. That's not much of a path for all that vibration.

I removed the spring and screws and made a hardwood saddle (sabot ? ) for the ceramic saddle to fit into. The improvement in tone was instant and huge!

I've also seen people have oversized saddles made, but that's a very large piece of bone if you go that route.

Bottom line, worth doing, absolutly!

Over sized saddle is one way, or like I've done to several adj Bridge guitars.
I make an ebony insert, with groove cut to fit standard saddle. I've made a couple for members of the forum. They like them. The tonal difference is very noticeable. Sustain is improved also.

Dan

[catdaddy]

I had a rosewood bridge installed in 1988 to replace the adjustable bridge on my '69 Hummingbird. Volume and sustain were noticeably better with the new bridge. Tone was always sweet with my 'bird even with the adjustable bridge. As zombywoof mentioned the skinny neck and short nut-width made for problematic playability. Nice for strumming cowboy chords though.

[duluthdan]

I will be the first to admit a negative bias held against the Gibson Adjustable saddle/bridge contraption. Over the years on the ones I had tried, they always sounded rather "thuddy", and so I usually quickly dismissed all that I ran across. A few weeks ago I noted a fairly priced 1957 J-50 with the dreaded ADJ bridge. Don't know why I caviled about, but I did. I spoke to a sales lady person that has helped me out a lot in the past, and yet to steer me wrong. In fact, she has saved me from driving off the proverbial cliff once or twice. I spoke to het about this guitar - she said it sounded very good, and she kept it on a shelf above her workbench, and would delight n pulling it down for a select few to play, and most were very pleasantly surprised at the tone this thing has. I will say this though - there is an almost instant overnight deterioration in sound once the strings begin to fade, it very quickly adopts a "thud" instead of the more characteristic "thump".

I'm not sure if the bridge plate on mine is laminate or not - doesn't appear to be over-sized at all, but there sure is a lot of strange hardware down there. So much so that it would apparently interfere with install of a Trance Amulet system I had envisioned for this guitar.

Love the tone - and it is so slightly different than my Legend and J-45 that I am pleased top have it.

[PTC Bernie]

[/QUOTE]


When you change strings on that thing do you need a torque wrench? Wow! Lot's of hardware there!

And I would say that the bridge plate is NOT laminated, from the looks of it.

[inadu ridge]

I've owned several 60s Gibsons over the years with adjustable saddles. My opinion is that the adj saddles are NOT the absolute tone killers that a lot of people claim. My '64 J-45 is loud and vibrant and one of the best sounding guitars I've ever played. I've also had friends that converted to a standard bridge on their 60s Gibsons and the results were mixed.
Having said that, I do think that the ebony adj saddles do produce a quieter, mellower, more subdued tone. The porcelain adj saddles produce quite a different tone than the ebony ones. I've also used the Tusq replacement saddle. The Tusq ones tend to be significantly louder with a drier tone. They are definitely worth giving a try, especially if you have a guitar with an ebony saddle.
I agree with zombywoof, it's not so much that the adjustable bridges are tone killers, they just sound different. I also think that 60s Gibsons with adjustable saddles that are sonic duds are gonna be sonic duds regardless.

[kydave]

"Tone killer" works as well as anything in describing that abomination of an acoustic guitar bridge/saddle!

Had one, removed/replaced it.

I believe Frank Ford has said a lot of luthiers had a great sideline out of that single piece of work.

This one seems to sound pretty good...

https://www.youtube.com/