Author Topic: Les Paul with Tele Bridge...? + hamer discussion apparently (Read 30151 times)

sambo · « **on:** May 14, 2007, 05:46:22 PM »

anyone know of any examples of this?

just considering it as something a bit experimental for an LP...

imagine just a standard LP body... but with a 6-saddle, routed-for-humbucker tele bridge...

would it look silly?

sound silly?

any info much appreciated.

cheers,

sam.

Kilby · « **Reply #1 on:** May 14, 2007, 05:51:18 PM »

String height would be an issue, as 'gibson' styled tonomatic bridges are so much higher than the fender family.

Rob...

sambo · « **Reply #2 on:** May 14, 2007, 05:53:24 PM »

ahh... there we go... theres already an issue i completely overlooked...

what about if it was completely custom built from the ground up?

im guessing that could be accounted for somehow?

or not?

lol

Kilby · « **Reply #3 on:** May 14, 2007, 06:00:53 PM »

I'm sure it is possible, almost anything is if you throw enough money at it ;)

I remember seeing the Sax player in Floyds Momentary Lapse of Reason tour playing what looked like a LP but with a tele neck (or was it a Tele with a LP neck, I was too busy enjoying the show to do any serious guitar watching)

If that transplant can take place then most any other one can too.

Rob...

Twinfan · « **Reply #4 on:** May 14, 2007, 06:01:00 PM »

You'd need a guitar with a straight angled neck, unlike a Les Paul that angles backwards.

Custom build job.

sambo · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2007, 06:05:55 PM »

cheers guys!

and ahh yes of course- that makes sense twinfan.

thats quite a coincidence actually. because after doing most of my learning on the Melody Maker, im now almost unable to play arch-tops altogether... tad annoying usually, but works out well in this case.

another thing- what about nut width and scale length?

im guessing it'd have to be typical tele nut-width? perhaps scale length less important?

although if taking what rob said into account... it can be done somehow.

that could be the annoying part, as i wouldnt be particularly fond of a tele neck/nut width e.t.c.

any ideas?

cheers,

sam.

Philly Q · « **Reply #6 on:** May 14, 2007, 06:54:25 PM »

No problems at all with nut width or scale length, but it would need to have a flat top - like a Junior or Melody Maker.

Do you necessarily want a set neck? It would be easy to make a bolt-on - Warmoth do LP shaped bodies.

sambo · « **Reply #7 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:01:23 PM »

ahh excellent. thanks Phil.

No worries about the neck joint... if i was being nit-picky i would perhaps go for through-neck but thats not really an issue.

Warmoth is an interesting idea actually, but after finding/requesting an LP routed for a tele bridge, and having it shipped here.... it might be easier to have it made by a local luthier.... (depending on price of course)...

also- the reason i was interested in a tele bridge in the first place, was because i wanted to add some brightness to the sound, without changing my desired body, neck, and fingerboard woods... (dont ask why- im just a bit silly)...

and i figured that a lump of metal like that is probably one of the contributing factors to a telecasters bright sound...?

someone please tell me if i've lost it altogether on this one, as its a complete guess. :lol: :oops:

cheers.

PhilKing · « **Reply #8 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:16:40 PM »

The original Hamer Sunbursts use a string through Fender style bridge, I have a 79 with Abraxas's. Also, John Birch guitars had his bridge that is almost a mix of Burns and Fender. I have played an old 335 that had the John Birch bridge, and to tell you the truth there is not much difference to a wrap around Badass style. It will not make the guitar brighter. You can put Graph Tech saddles in a tune-o-matic and get a brighter sound!

The main thing that string throughs and wrap arpunds help with is sustain, but if you are going with high gain, then it really won't make a lot of difference to you. You can get more treble content changing the string type, body wood or the pickups than you will from the bridge. A maple or walhut body will give you a brighter tone, but will be heavier.

I just made TO his 'Chris' tele-ish guitar with VHII and Irish Tour, and it is quite dark in spite of the tele bridge with humbucker, so I am speaking from a lot of experience here.

Philly Q · « **Reply #9 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:21:44 PM »

On a vintage-style Tele, the bridge is a thin bit of bent steel which is quite resonant (or "rattley" if that's a proper word). It definitely contributes to the sound, but so (of course) do the saddles, the bolt-on construction, maple neck, ash body, SC pickups etc.

However... all the Tele bridges I've seen cut for humbuckers are made of thick plated brass (maybe steel, sometimes) with heavy saddles, so the mass of the bridge wouldn't be much different from a tune-o-matic and tailpiece. It would affect the sound a bit, but I'm not sure it would necessarily be any brighter.

One thing you might try is replacing a standard zinc LP tailpiece with a lightweight aluminium one (like Twinfan has done) - that's supposed to make the tone brighter and airier.

Philly Q · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:30:53 PM »

Totally off-topic, but lovely Hamer, Phil! :D

Being completely anoraky, I'm interested in the bridge - my '81 had the same type, but there was a problem with the spacing - the saddles were too wide for the bridge, so the high E saddle was pushed out to the side by the others. I also had a Hamer Vector without that problem, but with extremely narrow spacing - it was 48mm or something stupid. Maybe they changed suppliers a few times.

sambo · « **Reply #11 on:** May 14, 2007, 07:34:01 PM »

i see.

cheers guys.

its all invaluable advice.

okay so theres no other real benefits of a tele-style bridge then?... well benefits isnt really the word- theres no other major [/i]differences
between a tune-o-matic vs. tele... ? apart from the obvious- aesthetics and feel.

and definitely none of a great deal of sonic importance.

Phil- you mentioned maple and walnut. i was initially thinking of mahogany body (as that is what i'm used to and like the sound of)... but i did want something with a bit more edge to it...

however im not a fan of traditional maple tops in terms of aesthetics, and i DEFINITELY want a natural-finish...

so i was thinking about alternatives such as Spalted maple and European Beech...

couldnt find much at all about them in terms of tone woods though... can you shed any light on either of them?

and also- Mahogany back, + spalted maple/european beech top, +mahogany neck, +ebony board.

i was aiming for a very full, thick overall sound, but (as i've found from my jackson), i personally would want something to brighten the natural tone (disregarding pickups entirely), a little... and was hoping one of those top woods combined with the others mentioned, would achieve this.

am i in the right ball park?

any suggestions anyone?

thanks again for all the advice so far everyone- its helping a lot.

Philly Q · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2007, 09:34:07 PM »

A hardwood top will definitely even out some of the warmth/bassiness of mahogany (as in a typical Les Paul Standard), so you're thinking along the right lines. Maybe you could also have a thinner body (PRS rather than LP?) to give a "lighter" tone.

An ebony board would also add some brightness.

AFAIK, spalted maple will have exactly the same tonal properties as regular maple. I really haven't a clue about European beech, I think it's quite a hard wood but maybe not as hard/bright as maple(?).

What about, say, korina? Similar weight and tone to mahogany, but a bit brighter. Looks good with a natural finish too.

Another thing you could consider is a through-neck, maybe maple with mahogany wings? Although in that case the tone is probably dominated more by the neck wood than the body.

sambo · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2007, 09:45:42 PM »

ahh a thinner body would help would it?

again- thats good as thats exactly what i was after anyway. similar thickness to my melody maker which is nowhere near as deep as a standard LP.

and yer i spose your right about spalted maple... i cant imagine it havin drastically different tonal qualities to standard maple..

the ONLY thing i know about beech, is that, as you say, its pretty hard, and the grain can look fantastic.

Korina is an interesting idea- hadnt thought of that...

did you mean as a top specifically or perhaps even the body itself?

and yer i guess the thru-neck would be a way of solving it... and that is a feature i would ideally have... although price might restrict me there...

maybe mahogany and korina as through neck, to ensure that theres no risk of the maple taking away too much of the mahogany qualities that i like... ?

i dont think ever seen a thru-neck LP actually now that i come to think of it...

noodleplugerine · « **Reply #14 on:** May 14, 2007, 09:47:20 PM »

Korina is gorgeous!

A brighter mahogany is a pretty good idea of the tone I think.

Also look at things like Paduak? I heard that's quite bright.