A Theory

[djw]

I had a kind of a random thought the other day.

So, you know I'm a tweaker. In the last year, having pretty much settled on my LSC's tweak-state, I've been tweaking my guitars.

The most recent additions to the family are my two Fenders -- an American Standard Tele, and an American Deluxe Strat -- and as they are the two I take to shows nowadays, I've been intent on getting them ship-shape. Same story as the LSC, in a way: they were pretty great as-is, but... geez, if I just make this change, it'll be that much better. So: new pickups, new innards, and most recently: new bridges.

I should have started with the bridges, because they've actually made the biggest difference in both guitars. The electronic upgrades were cool, and definitely the pickups were an improvement... but improving the steel connecting the strings to the body really, really sweetened things up. In both cases I went with a Callaham upgrade: first the Strat got the Deluxe replacement block, saddles and springs; then the Tele got the Standard replacement 3-brass saddle bridge plate.

I was going to leave the Tele's bridge stock because it sounded pretty good as-is. But the one complaint I had was that compared to the Strat, which sounds crystal clear and responds like a piano since it got that new block, I noticed my Tele had a tendency to bottom out. The highs were nice and clear, but no matter how much I lowered the pickups on the bass side, notes on the low E tended to just poop out. Loss of definition, especially down low (I use D'Addario 11-49, so decently heavy strings). Funf-funf-funf.

Sound familiar?

So I swapped the Tele's bridge, and now it's all clear and tight down low, but it also got me thinking: is it possible that some of the mud that I was hearing in my Lone Star wasn't necessarily a result of inherent muddy amp performance, but at least partly -- maybe mostly -- an accurate translation of what the amp got from the guitar?

I know one big selling point for me was the amp's advertised ability to preserve the guitar's character whether it was in crystal-clear or high-gain mode.

I'm not disavowing the mod ideas, and I'm glad I've spent all this time fuggin with my amp... but it's interesting. I wonder, how many of us have really kick-*** guitars out there? Anyone else feel like the hardware on their axes is maybe sub-par? Swapping bridges is definitely more expensive than either of the Reeder mods, so it's possible the mods are more efficient mud-cutting techniques... but it kinda makes me wonder what it would sound like for me to plug my Strat into a stock LSC and hear the difference.

So, ah... Discuss. :lol:

 

[Scary]

My experience with Mark series amps has shown me clearly that guitars make or break the amp. It's just as important as great cables, and the right cabinet. I've read tons of posts on here that support the "theory".

I also have a Fender American Deluxe. I love it, but am also interested in upgrading the bridge. Glad to hear it was a solid improvement over the factory setup.

 

[plan-x]

I heard nothing but good stuff about those Callaham bridges.

An approach from a different direction....I use a BBE stomp pedal. They claim it corrects phase and signal loss translation that occurs going from the amp to the the speaker. I've had mine on for the last few years. I just can't live without it. Tightens and brightens up everything, and bass notes sound bolder and proper. Most people say that it's like taking a blanket off the amp. This pedal certainly helped the amp pre-Reeder. Post-Reeder really sounds fantastic.

I just keep going for better tone. Speakers and cabs definitely help also. If I had money to burn.... I'd score some EV's for starters.

Overall, I was told by a wise old guitar player once that overdrive ch's on amps can be disappointing. The vast majority are not so hot. And even if you find one that's pretty good, it usually does one thing, one trick pony.

Putting it altogether....amp mods, guitar mods, speaker mods, & pedals, certainly make it worth it, cuz all you got to do is strip it back down to stock to realize how much better those tweaks are.

 

[thom]

I also have a Deluxe strat, and went through a similar process of mods, with similar results. I replaced the pick ups with a set of Kinman Woodstock plus, with the wiring harness offering some non standard combinations. It was only when I replaced the block for a Callaham steel one that the guitar really sounded good. My strat was an earlyish deluxe, one that came with a horrible cast zinc alloy block. If your strat has one of these then I would definately replace it before bothering about pickups. I had one of the very first Callaham blocks for the deluxe strat, and the difference was really night and day. Not really talking sustain, but just the tonal improvement. This was all before I had my LSS, which has both Reeder mods and replacement neo speakers. It has to be said that people think I am nuts buying high end gear and then messing with it, but I am pretty happy with the tones I can get and enjoy having something that I have put something into. My strat is also fitted with a thing called an RBTC from MIJ Fenders, which fattens up the tone when the volume is reduced. You can find all sorts of slanging matches on other forums about this device, but I tried it, liked it, took it out just to see, and refitted it again. I think this is a key point; listen to others opinions, but go with what you like...lots of people hate neo speakers, but for ME they sound better than the C90s and have the added benefit of reducing the weight by about 13.5 lbs, really makes it much more moveable.

 

[djw]

The bridge upgrades are definitely the real deal. It's bad, actually, because now it has me going "hmmmmm" at my Gibsons...
Between tone quest-related activities, the irresistible urge to tweak, and good ol' standard GAS, getting into these upgrades is definitely a slippery slope. And there's nothing wrong with it -- I know about the fudgy block that came with the Dlx Strat... oy, what a hunk of junk, you can just see the crappy tone coming out of that. Improving components reversibly seems like a non-violation to me; it's when you start drilling holes and routing cavities in things that I draw the line, personally. But that's just me.

I just think it's interesting that what started out basically as an impulse to tweak my Strat, turned into a need to improve the low-end clarity in my Tele, which was really similar to what got me fooling around with my LSC in the first place. Once I heard what a real bridge sounded like, it became even more obvious that the integrity of the source input (the guitar) played a huge part in what came out at the other end (the amp). Well, duh -- nothing new in that, but maybe it's just taken me all these years to finally understand how the steel literally plays into this.

Maybe it's about bringing the instruments up to snuff with the amp, finally.

 

[Charles Reeder]

Hey 'Pardner':

I definitely think you're on to something (re: density/weight of bridges affecting boominess/tightness of lower bass notes).
I too like to 'tinker' with guitars. I have not put a 'high-end' bridge, bridge-block or bridge-plate on any guitars...but I have noticed a difference in responce in some guitars which are set up (by me) with same wiring, pickups, etc. There seem to be 2 differences in some of my guitars which have the better (tighter) low end responce. #1. They DO have heavier bridge-blocks...and #2. They have ASH bodies. Ash is usually 'touted' as producing a 'brighter responce' than Mahogany, Alder, Poplar etc. and it does seem to do that. But, Ash also seems to tighten up the bass responce (on my guitars at least) and shed some of the 'exteraneous' clutter of string vibrations which degrade the focus of the bass notes. The Ash seems to work better (for me) on both Rosewood and Maple necked guitars. Thus far I've spoken mainly of Strat type guitars and their offshoots.
I've noticed the same thing happenning in 'Les Paul type' guitars which have bookmarked Maple tops over Mahogany. I'm not talking about a thin veneer; but 'slabs' of Maple. They too seem to hold the bass notes better.
I will when time and $ allows try out a bridge-block or plate such as the type you mentioned. Feel it will help things even more.

Regards: Charles

 

[djw]

Hey Charles -- you're right about ash bodies. My Tele's an "Ash" too; when I was shopping around for it, I A/B'ed it against a couple of Alders and the Ash was definitely brighter. My Strat is an Alder though, and when it was the only one with the bridge upgrade it really left the Tele in the dust as far as note & tone definition goes. Of course, now that the Tele has a proper bridge it really smokes; it has a really solid, beefy tone, and makes the Strat sound reedy by comparison. Both of these have maple necks, by the way.

I'm not sure what my Gold Top has in the way of a top... it's a 2001 Standard, so probably an actual Maple cap. It's probably next in line for a bridge upgrade... and pickups too. What a slippery slope indeed.

 

[fishyfishfish]

Don't forget to add a couple NOS 12AX7's to V1 and V2