Official Luthiers Forum!

Hello. I'm new here, and I'm looking for guidance, and pro advice on how best to solve my problem. I will however be taking my guitar to a professional Luthier in a few days.

Guitar: 2005 Gretsch Firebird, maple top, mahogany body, semi chambered.

Several weeks ago, I ordered a new bridge to replace a Tru-Arc Bar bridge on my 2005 Firebird:
Original Bridge: http://imagebin.org/196551
With a new Faber ABRL replacement bridge: http://www.cvgshop.com/images/ABRL-GN-N.JPG

The Faber incorporates 2 steel studs, 8mm at the base which is threaded into the guitar's block like on a Gibson Les Paul, while the top portion of the same stud tapers to 4mm.
Once the posts are set into the body, the thumb-wheels are threaded on, and then the bridge. The added benefit is that the Faber also incorporates "locking collars", that thread into the top of the bridge's post holes - which are also countersunk, and onto the actual 4mm portion of the studs - locking everything into place. Like this:
http://cvgshop.com/images/IMG_6675%20%28Medium%29%20%282%29.jpg

In my case, the original floating rosewood base had bridge posts screwed into the top - not all the way through, then the thumb-wheels threaded on, and finally the bridge sat on top, with string tension holding everything down. But, the guitar is semi chambered, with a solid block under the bridge. To me, having this bridge is pointless, I wanted more mass and much improved intonation - hence the Faber ABR style bridge.

The person who originally installed it made an error with the angle of the bridge; the base E string was closer to the treble side of the fret board, while the treble E string was even closer to it's edge of the fretboard. He admitted he wasn't happy with the installation - nor was I to say the least. It looked similar to this: http://imagebin.org/196555

He offered to remove the posts, dowel the holes in the top with maple dowels, color correct as best he could, and re-drill, re-tap, then re-install. I stopped him after the dowel plugs where glued in and color matched, deciding to take it to a better luthier.

This is what it looks like now:
http://imagebin.org/196552
http://imagebin.org/196553
http://imagebin.org/196554

Now, the issue is cosmetic - to hide those ugly dowels. Not only is the color incorrect, but he used an automobile epoxy paint, and the surface where the dowels are, are not smooth, they're risen and bumpy. Where he tried to smooth them out by buffing, left swirl surface scratches that weren't there before.

QUESTION: IF the "better" luthier wanted to hide these holes, could he somehow screw down my rosewood floating base to the guitar top? - FIRST by drilling out the holes in the rosewood base all the way through, and reaming them just slightly, because the center to center spacing of the Faber's holes are off by 1mm. and don't exactly match the holes in the rosewood base. Then, slide rosewood base holes OVER the Faber's posts, then thread these: http://buy.traxxas.com/images/products/3647.jpg over the top 4mm portion of the Faber posts — all the way down until they make contact with the top of the rosewood base?

Take it a step further... Could he countersink the holes on top of the rosewood base down to say 2mm, to actually recess it slightly, so that the flange portion on the nuts actually drop into the countersink? See: http://imagebin.org/196564

I'm just looking for the most structurally sound way to secure the floating bridge to the guitar's block. What's the best solution to hide the blemishes and ugliness, and also keep the rosewood base from moving at all? Thanks.

You might get more responses if you post this in the main forum.
MK

_________________
I'm outside looking in, just farther from the window than most.

i can't answer your questions, but i just wanted to say, based on that workmanship, i wouldn't trust the dowl material and glue either, you never know whats down there, pencil stubs, cigarette butts, whatever.....
so i would drill them completely out and redo them "correctly", just in case

If the bumps bother you why not get a bit wider base to cover them.
screwing the base to the guitar is not really an option in my books.
That guitar probably has a solid core so if the core is wide enough, I think it may be possible to get rid of the rosewood base altogether, redrill it for a standard set of Gibson style post inserts.
To be sure it would work, one would have to check the core width, the neck angle and required bridge height.
It most likely has more than say a LP or a 335 but if it could work, it may look like nothing ever happened other than you modified the guitar. Which is done already.
But it will change the sound a bit depending on how you play, you might not like it. Or you might like it better. One never knows.
If it were me and I like the way it played and the sound and I could get the bridge base set contacted properly to the top, I'd probably just leave it as it is.
JMO

_________________
You just pick up a chord, go twang, and you're got music. -Sid Vicious

William Bustard & Cocobolo...

Cocobolo, I know for a fact that the previous tech used maple dowels, and gorilla glue. They were installed properly. Most luthiers wouldn't use mahogany dowels, they all seem to use Maple - even the "really good" techs and luthiers. The top part of the guitar is maple, painted red, with a nitrocellulose finish, and underneath it's solid mahogany, only chambered in certain areas.

I wanted to keep my last post direct, not long winded. The issue is this...
The neck angle on these Gretsch guitars, is slightly more convaved than on a Gibson Les Paul - because it was designed to use a floating rosewood base. On top of the rosewood base is the standard rolling bar bridge, or a Gretsch Adjustomatic (a cheaper Gibson stlye ABR bridge).

Because this new Faber bridge is screwed into the body - as are most Gibson ABR style bridges, the need for the rosewood base isn't necessary. However, without the rosewood base, the bridge posts "appear" to ride much higher off the guitar's top, appearing naked and barren, like this:
http://imagebin.org/196860 — Imagine the black lines as being the guitar top. The bridge rides much higher than it would on a Gibson Les Paul, or SG - where the bridge typically rests like this: http://img1.imagilive.com/0809/retrospecs_1.jpg

All because Fender decided to keep the "old school" look of the Firebird. The neck angle is considerably concaved backwards to accommodate a floating rosewood base to keep the look "vintagae" - not straight like a Les Paul. It's actually a very stupid design considering that my Gretsch Firebird has a solid block, and is only "semi" chambered. Fender missed the boat on this one. They chose style over practical function. There's absolutely NO acoustic or structural benefit to having a floating/pinned bridge ON TOP of a guitar's solid block - unless it's an arch-top (hollow, or semi-hollow). I get FAR more body resonance with the Faber.

Previously, WITH the rosewood base, it looks like this:
http://angela.com/images/products/detail/nickaombridge.jpg In other words, WITH the original rosewood base incorporated into the bridge you see in the image, it acts partially as a shim to take up all that naked space that you'd see between the body and the thumb-wheels, if the rosewood base wasn't there.

This would make sense on a hollow-body, archtop stlyle, but Gretsch made a very stupid decision to use a floating rosewood base in this design. Why? because my Gretsch, and the current duo-jets etc, are more solid body than hollow. The rosewood base is typically just "pinned" to the body, where an ABR style bridge sits on top. You lose a lot of mass that would have been better used by using studs into the guitar's block. But, using an after-market bridge like the Faber, or ANY ABR style bridge that incorporates posts — into the body feels considerably better and gives a massive amount of resonance.

When the Faber was installed the first time (last week), although the string alignment was off, there was so much increased resonance and sustain in my guitar, that it made the previous setup with bar bridge & floating rosewood base feel lifeless in comparison. I actually played a brand new "stock" chambered Gretsch in the store on the same day, with an ABR — , but that sat ON TOP of the rosewood base, NOT fixed into the body, and it felt absolutely awful. No sustain, it felt constricted. Mine rang and resonated for days. The Faber is a much better design. It's no different from a "standard" ABR style bridge, except, the bridge posts that thread into the body are 8mm, not 4mm. See:
http://cvguitars.com/Faber/BSWKIT/BSWKIT-1.jpg See the thicker 8mm bottom portion of the studs? Those go into the body, giving considerably more mass.

My only dilemma is purely cosmetic - to hide the dowels that were glued and tapped into the body. When my new luthier re-drills, he will certainly be drilling into a portion of those dowels. This means that a good portion of the dowel(s) will be overlapped by the 8mm portion of the stud - which is good. It will hide the majority of the paint/colour matching that was done. However I'm still in this dilemma with how to take up some of that naked space between the guitar top, and the underside of the thumb-wheels.

I might just write a letter and send it registered to Larry Thomas, CEO at Fender. This stuff really irritates me.

If I understand this; its a first for me a "floating bridge" that doesnt really float.

I cant say...Maybe you could cover the unwanted areas with a larger rosewood spacer, in other words make a new rosewood bridge with a larger footprint.

Its very hard to troubleshoot with out actually seeing the guitar as I am unfamiliar with this model.

Much thanks for teaching me a lesson about giving advice online,in many/most instances it cant be done effectivley.
I wont be trying it again anytime soon.
Good luck with the Gretch!

_________________
You just pick up a chord, go twang, and you're got music. -Sid Vicious

William, I took your advice well. It's just that I know this guitar — well. It's a design flaw in my opinion - based entirely on Fender's need to market a product; not actually improve upon the design.

The irony is, from 2001-2003 (before Fender acquired Gretsch), Gretsch tried making a more "Gibson" style Gretsch, and it failed miserably in the market. Not because the build quality wasn't there, but because the styling looked to much like a les paul - without much of the traditional Gretsch styling.

Case in point: Modern Gretsch Duo Jet http://www.gretschguitars.com/products/index.php?partno=2410412806
Great looking guitar, has all the styling and details of the "older" ones, but again, that dang stupid "pinned rosewood bridge".

In comparison, here's a 2001 "NEW JET": http://www.sheltonsguitars.com/images/2009/10-14-09/gretsch%20new%20jet/big/big%20gretsch%20new%20jetDSCN0947.jpg

This model failed because of aesthetics, not playability. The bridge is threaded into the body, the body is entirely solid, (although most people think they're chambered), the neck thickness is much better feeling, more girth, and slightly wider than the modern ones.

If they'd just use this as a platform, solid, same headstock, same neck, but the "more correct" Gretsch Neo thumbnail inlays like on the black duo jet, it would be an all round better guitar. Just my opinion.

Oh no no worries, I was just pointing out that giving advice on things which you cant actually handle is difficult and better left for in person, in most cases anyways.

I understand that if you used a gibsin es335 style bridge and bushing set up, the bridge would have to be too high.

Who knows what happened, maybe the designers left something out in the begining and tryed to make up for it at the end.
I always thought that what proto-typing was for. Now adays with money tight its like the manufacturers need to get it out there as fast as possible.
Well if its only a cosmetic flaw at least Its not too much to worry about.

cheers!

_________________
You just pick up a chord, go twang, and you're got music. -Sid Vicious

William Bastard, You sent me a PM but you are set so that you can't recieve replies.
viewtopic.php?f=10124&t=24454&hilit=tricone+for+sale

Sorry to be off topic .

okay

_________________
You just pick up a chord, go twang, and you're got music. -Sid Vicious