Hey Guys, Lookin to replace the bridge on my 5 string Lakland

[RonnyBaby]

Anyone have any good advice for me in this regard?
I own a 55-01 and love the bass, but I need to reduce the string spacing and have checked out numerous bridges.

I have looked for string through bridges, though the problem is that the Lakland string through is on an angle and no other bridge will accommodate that.

So I've thought about going with a top load fixed bridge like the Kahler 7450 or an ABM. I'm leaning toward the Kahler as it is very adjustable to almost any string spacing.

I will also be replacing the nut to reduce string spacing. OR does anyone know of an adjustable nut that would work on the Lakland? The Laklands are ALL set up at 19mm spacing and I simply need to reduce it down to 18mm to accommodate my smaller fingers.

Does anyone know how the bass will sound on the B and E strings without going through the bass body?

Any other things I should know about?

[bongomania]

The whole "top load vs. thru body" thing is not to be taken too seriously. We have huge debating threads on that subject all the time, perennially--I'd say roughly 80% of the posts say "it makes no difference", with 10% saying "it makes a noticeable difference" and the last 10% saying "it seemed to have made a difference on this one bass, but didn't on other basses". IOW, don't worry about it. Even if it could be shown to have some sort of impact, think about all the basses like Sadowsky or Roscoe that are top-load and have fantastic-sounding B and E strings.

As far as bridges go, there are two approaches: adjustable, like the Kahler, or fixed at 18 mm or whatever spacing you like. There are plenty of 17 and 18 mm fixed bridges out there. For adjustable, I do like the Kahler, but I like the Schaller Model 2000 even better (lower profile, and easier to adjust the string height).

[Zooberwerx]

My first response would be to say "sell the 55-01 and buy something with narrower spacing". However, given the "budget" nature of the beast and the fact you're diggin' it, I wouldn't feel bad about modifying it with an aftermarket bridge. The Schaller would be first choice after the more expensive Hipshot.

Would you really have to modify the nut if doing a 19 mm > 18 mm squeeze?

Riis

[JazznFunk]

You'll most likely have to re-drill holes for the bridge since the Lakland bridge is a custom piece essentially, as you observed with the thru-body stringing issue. This will destroy the resale value of the instrument later and convert it to a FrankenLakland. Try contacting the shop in Chicago and see if they have any suggestions for you before you ruin the bass with an aftermarket bridge. The placement and geometry of the Lakland bridge design contribute a lot to the sound of the B-string (the debate of through body vs. thru bridge aside), so I'd check your options thoroughly before proceeding.

Originally Posted by RonnyBaby

Anyone have any good advice for me in this regard?
I own a 55-01 and love the bass, but I need to reduce the string spacing and have checked out numerous bridges.

I have looked for string through bridges, though the problem is that the Lakland string through is on an angle and no other bridge will accommodate that.

So I've thought about going with a top load fixed bridge like the Kahler 7450 or an ABM. I'm leaning toward the Kahler as it is very adjustable to almost any string spacing.

I will also be replacing the nut to reduce string spacing. OR does anyone know of an adjustable nut that would work on the Lakland? The Laklands are ALL set up at 19mm spacing and I simply need to reduce it down to 18mm to accommodate my smaller fingers.

Does anyone know how the bass will sound on the B and E strings without going through the bass body?

Any other things I should know about?

[walterw]

what about getting un-grooved brass saddles or threaded rod saddles made, so that you could just narrow up the spacing without tearing up the bass trying to put a different bridge on it?

[RonnyBaby]

Originally Posted by Zooberwerx

My first response would be to say "sell the 55-01 and buy something with narrower spacing". However, given the "budget" nature of the beast and the fact you're diggin' it, I wouldn't feel bad about modifying it with an aftermarket bridge. The Schaller would be first choice after the more expensive Hipshot.

Would you really have to modify the nut if doing a 19 mm > 18 mm squeeze?

Riis

Yes, because the strings are a bit wide there too. most people don't realize that the 55-01 has a bit wider nut than the 55-02.
I want the string to be exact width going down the neck. Thx!

[RonnyBaby]

Originally Posted by bongomania

The whole "top load vs. thru body" thing is not to be taken too seriously. We have huge debating threads on that subject all the time, perennially--I'd say roughly 80% of the posts say "it makes no difference", with 10% saying "it makes a noticeable difference" and the last 10% saying "it seemed to have made a difference on this one bass, but didn't on other basses". IOW, don't worry about it. Even if it could be shown to have some sort of impact, think about all the basses like Sadowsky or Roscoe that are top-load and have fantastic-sounding B and E strings.

As far as bridges go, there are two approaches: adjustable, like the Kahler, or fixed at 18 mm or whatever spacing you like. There are plenty of 17 and 18 mm fixed bridges out there. For adjustable, I do like the Kahler, but I like the Schaller Model 2000 even better (lower profile, and easier to adjust the string height).

Thanks for your insight! I ended up getting the Kahler for $60.

Originally Posted by JazznFunk

You'll most likely have to re-drill holes for the bridge since the Lakland bridge is a custom piece essentially, as you observed with the thru-body stringing issue. This will destroy the resale value of the instrument later and convert it to a FrankenLakland. Try contacting the shop in Chicago and see if they have any suggestions for you before you ruin the bass with an aftermarket bridge. The placement and geometry of the Lakland bridge design contribute a lot to the sound of the B-string (the debate of through body vs. thru bridge aside), so I'd check your options thoroughly before proceeding.

Believe me, I already did contact Lakland and they were NO help at all. Just got shunned. There is no other bridge like the lakland as they install the string through the body on an angle. HipShot is the company that makes this bridge and I even called HipShot to see about this situation and they said GOOD LUCK!

So I will install the Kahler and most likely fill in the rear string holes and have it painted maybe a medium metallic blue or something like that.

I know about re-sale. Once I make the alterations to this bass, it will be with me for LIFE! THANKS for the input!

Originally Posted by walterw

what about getting un-grooved brass saddles or threaded rod saddles made, so that you could just narrow up the spacing without tearing up the bass trying to put a different bridge on it?

I did think about this, but this will not work. The strings are too close to the intonation screw and could not be moved.

[JazznFunk]

On some level, I find this hard to believe. Lakland CS (and the basses in general) are what made me want to endorse them to begin with. The kindest and best in the biz on many levels. On another, I accept the fact that Lakland has its product, its sound, and its geometry, and anything outside that 'orbit' will be foreign to the final product and sound. In terms of being 'shunned', I without question find that hard to believe. The folks at the shop are very helpful and understanding and would never 'shun' anyone, but if you're trying to use an aftermarket part on a very 'in-house' design, I can understand. I would consider trying a different bass that met your needs more closely at this point.

Believe me, I already did contact Lakland and they were NO help at all. Just got shunned. There is no other bridge like the lakland as they install the string through the body on an angle. HipShot is the company that makes this bridge and I even called HipShot to see about this situation and they said GOOD LUCK!

[RonnyBaby]

Originally Posted by JazznFunk

On some level, I find this hard to believe. Lakland CS (and the basses in general) are what made me want to endorse them to begin with. The kindest and best in the biz on many levels. On another, I accept the fact that Lakland has its product, its sound, and its geometry, and anything outside that 'orbit' will be foreign to the final product and sound. In terms of being 'shunned', I without question find that hard to believe. The folks at the shop are very helpful and understanding and would never 'shun' anyone, but if you're trying to use an aftermarket part on a very 'in-house' design, I can understand. I would consider trying a different bass that met your needs more closely at this point.

Well, the bottom line was that he knew nothing about reducing string spacing, other than to customize a bass in shop and he said that would be VERY expensive and for me, not worth it. He told me to find another bass (like you did). But the 55-01 feels very comfortable on me and I love the fretboard. I just need to squeeze the strings a little bit so I can easily hit them, both fretting and finger plucking hands.

I even like the sound of the stock Bartolini's on this bass, through my MarkBass LM Tube 800.

Yes, I don't want to pull the Lakland bridge, but there are no alternatives at this point. I can play this bass fairly well at home in my comfort zone, but I know once hitting the stage, I will #uck up on my playing.

I also own a Dingwall ABZ 5 string in WPB and a Warwick Fortress Masterman which I play very well. But I am doing classic rock right now and the Lakland fits the part.

Thanks for the input!