Gibson's '60s Era Adjustable Bridge: Tone Killer or Another Way to Get the Job Done? - Page 2

duluthdan · #16 03-22-2015, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Dave - exactly my belief up until Mollie sent me this guitar a few weeks ago. This one knocked tha old bias for a tailspin. As with many things Gibson - the rule "try before you buy", especially on the older issues, hold most true. Frankly, when I got this in my hands I could not believe it. To MY ears, at least, its a wonderful instrument.

Aaron Smith · #17 03-22-2015, 04:24 PM

I've played probably a dozen Gibsons from that era with the adjustable saddle hardware, and they all stunk.

Then last year, I played a 63 Epiphone Texan with the adjustable saddle, and a plastic bridge. It sounded unreal; as good as any 50's Gibson I've ever played.

So at this point I'm not so sure that the adjustable bridge was the actual culprit for the bad-sounding Gibsons of that era, or at least the only culprit. There were a lot of other construction changes around that time.

zabdart · #18 03-22-2015, 06:08 PM

The first guitar repairman I ever met (while I was still in college) advised me to replace the adjustable bridge on my '67 J-50 with one with a fixed, bone saddle. I did and, man, what a difference! In the 45 years since then, I've met a lot of people who own Gibsons from the 1960s who have done the same thing and are very happy with the results, even though it lowers the price on the collectors market (which shows you how silly it is).
It's a fairly common repair and shouldn't be too expensive. The results are immediately audible. One thing you may want to do at the same time is replace the laminated maple bridge pad that Gibson was using in those days with a solid maple one. This will also improve the sound... and give more structural stability to the top.

#19 03-22-2015, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duluthdan

Dave - exactly my belief up until Mollie sent me this guitar a few weeks ago. This one knocked tha old bias for a tailspin. As with many things Gibson - the rule "try before you buy", especially on the older issues, hold most true. Frankly, when I got this in my hands I could not believe it. To MY ears, at least, its a wonderful instrument.

Some guitars "work" in spite of poor design choices. Take Martin guitars from 1969-1988. Most of those had large IRW bridge plates. Some still sound very good, but it doesn't mean a 3 1/4" IRW isn't a bad idea. And I never heard one that sounded worse when that big plate was replaced with a proper small maple one.

The Gibson adjustable bridge is a bad idea, but no worse than their plywood bridge plates. We can't see those, so we don't talk about them as much. I put those things in the same category as Bridge Doctors, brass bridge pins, and the like.

Wade Hampton · #20 03-22-2015, 07:14 PM

With all of the before and after comparisons I've had a chance to make, first with the adjustable bridge and then with a replacement saddle, I've always preferred the "after" tone. To my ear, those adjustable bridges ARE tone-killers.

I agree with some of the comments in this thread so far, that any Gibson acoustic guitar equipped with an adjustable bridge that does manage to sound good is doing so in spite of the all the hardware.

whm

cpmusic · #21 03-22-2015, 08:14 PM

I've never been a Gibson fan so I can't speak to the difference, but Frank Ford made a good case for replacing the original bridge and saddle at http://frets.com/FretsPages/Luthier/.../hbirdbr1.html.

However, I was always surprised to see an adjustable bridge on an expensive guitar. It seemed to me that they appeared much more often on cheaper models.

tpbiii · #22 03-22-2015, 08:36 PM

Here is an unmodified 62 Hummingbird. I have historically passed on Gibsons from this period, but my judgement of this one was it was good enough to buy and good enough to leave original.

Best,

-Tom

semolinapilcher · #23 03-23-2015, 06:10 AM

I won't be changing anything on my Texan.

PTC Bernie · #24 03-23-2015, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tpbiii

Here is an unmodified 62 Hummingbird. I have historically passed on Gibsons from this period, but my judgement of this one was it was good enough to buy and good enough to leave original.

Best,

-Tom

I did hold onto the original hardware when I made the change on my J45 and passed them along to the new owner so he could reinstall them if he wanted.

#25 03-23-2015, 06:27 AM

I had a mid-60s J-50 (the pic below is me playing it in the late 1970s at a outdoor concert). It was a real workhorse, and I enjoyed playing it in concerts and coffeehouses etc. but when stacked up against friend's guitars, it was pretty dead. I ended up trading it for my current Yairi. It wasn't bad enough to trash, but the adjustable bridge and the extra 20 pounds of bracing on it didn't help things lol - -

gibbyguy · #26 03-23-2015, 06:51 AM

I have a '64 Hummingbird that had the ADJ bridge. Many of the bridges of that era were ceramic and warped and slightly pulled away from the top. The only thing I thought that held the bridge in place were the through bolts.

I had the bridge replaced with a rosewood and bone nut and saddle. It improved the sound greatly. This enabled me to put a K&K mini style (JJB 330) pickup in it.

Greoff2 · #27 09-12-2016, 05:09 PM

I have several square shouldered Gibsons with adjustable saddles and like them a lot. Would never change to blocks with ordinary saddles though they sound good too. 2 different concepts indeed. But the ceramic voice is unique and very gibsonesq - especially the low end. That counts for J-45's also.

SalFromChatham · #28 09-12-2016, 07:11 PM

I have a Gibson Country Western Reissue with an adjustable bridge. It sounds great. It depends on the guitar. For example I don't think Hummingbirds were ever designed to compete as a Grasser. But they have this sound... And the ones that have it... They don't all have the fixed more modern bridges.

Anyhow, will my CW stay with me forever? Doubt it. Especially when I find the chance to play a Hummingbird Vintage...

AZLiberty · #29 09-12-2016, 07:34 PM

Never owned a Gibson but the pawn shop Epiphone I bought had one of those tune-o-matic abominations. Cost me $10.

Sounded many, many, times better once I replaced the bridge and saddle with a standard design.

Cibby · #30 09-12-2016, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by themissal

I have a Gibson Country Western Reissue with an adjustable bridge. It sounds great. It depends on the guitar. For example I don't think Hummingbirds were ever designed to compete as a Grasser. But they have this sound... And the ones that have it... They don't all have the fixed more modern bridges.

Anyhow, will my CW stay with me forever? Doubt it. Especially when I find the chance to play a Hummingbird Vintage...

I have the same new Country Western Reissue. I brought it to a luither for a set up he was surprised how good it sounded. He replaced the adjustable tusq saddle with bone and adjusted the depth of the nut slots. The CW has a strong bass and good sustain and I'm happy with it.