Bent plate bridges: Who likes them?

[sharkbait130]

I have two pretty identical P basses , one with a stock bent plate and one with a Gotoh. They do sound a bit different but I have no idea if it' because of the different bridges or other causes such as Pups , pots , or wood or even all of the above. Both were bought the way they are and I have no desire to change either one. I would not have gone to the Gotoh if it hadn't already been on the bass.

 

[DD Gunz]

I have two pretty identical P basses , one with a stock bent plate and one with a Gotoh. They do sound a bit different but I have no idea if it' because of the different bridges or other causes such as Pups , pots , or wood or even all of the above. Both were bought the way they are and I have no desire to change either one. I would not have gone to the Gotoh if it hadn't already been on the bass.

I think any change in sound in relation to a bridge being the only differing factor on the same bass is it's marriage to the body. A good solid install with a tight bond yields the same tone no matter what the bridge to my ears.

 

[Pilgrim]

I've never seen a Fender bent plate bridge that didn't work well. Inspired design, elegantly simple.

Threaded saddles FTW.

 

[Axstar]

I sold my P bass with threaded saddles, and I miss the bridge! I like bent bridges, as they are so simple that there isn't much room for nonsense to creep into the mix. Having said that, my Jazz bass currently has a Fender-branded Badass II fitted and I'm getting on ok with that.

A big disappointment for me was buying a used bass that had been upgraded to a Gotoh 201 bridge, and the back of the bridge was lifting. The metal had weakened along a line intersecting the mounting screw holes, and visibly lifting at the back under string tension. Having removed the bridge I was a bit disappointed to see that the block of the bridge wasn't actually solid metal at all. Like so:

A hollow bridge! Not exactly 'high mass', and a bit cheeky at £60. The good side of the Gotoh was that the saddles are held in place by grooves. I've not personally had too much issue with saddles shifting around on a bent plate bridge, but the scope is there for it to happen I suppose.

And at least with a bent plate bridge you can adjust it with a $5 multitool. I've come across a few fancier bridges that basically come with a ream of setscrews you need to slacken off, make softly-softly adjustments by hand, then tighten the whole charade back up. Lots of fiddly bespoke components and parts waiting to disappear up the hoover.

While the Badass II on my Jazz looks cool, I could not tell you what it adds or subtracts from the tone of the instrument. I've never seen any sort of cogent case for why or how a high mass bridge would improve the tone of an instrument. I like the look, and I like that the saddles are held firmly in place.

 

[GIBrat51]

I don't particularly care for how they look - but as far as sound and function goes, they're awfully hard to beat. And, as an engineer, I'm genetically inclined to simple and functional, anyway... My '78 P-Bass has it's original bent plate bridge on it - under the cover (with the mute as well), as Leo intended. My Eastwood Magnum has a pretty nice one on it, too; but, honestly? IMO, it really could do with a cover, as well...

 

[Nev375]

I only like the old 2 saddle string thru ones. And only on P-basses. I hate the 4 saddle bent plate bridges.

 

[TimB 619]

I replaced the bridge on my 2002 MIM fretless jazz with a vintage type bridge-the one with the threaded saddles. I like it a lot. Last November, I put a Hipshot A style brass bridge on it. Honestly, other than adding additional weight, the only thing I find I like better on the Hipshot, is the fact that you don't have to thread the strings through a hole in the plate. That being said, the vintage bridge is going back on. I can adjust string spacing easily, and threading through the hole in the plate isn't a big enough deal for me, that it would be a deal breaker.

 

[DD Gunz]

I only like the old 2 saddle string thru ones. And only on P-basses. I hate the 4 saddle bent plate bridges.

Why is that? I am curious as I see the 4 saddle as an improvement over the two.

 

[Nev375]

Why is that? I am curious as I see the 4 saddle as an improvement over the two.

I really love irony. And a precision bass with a 2 saddle bridge that can't easily be intonated is poetic to me.

But there ARE ways to intonate them either by swivel or compensated saddles or selecting custom string gauges accordingly.
Also they are less susceptible to side to side saddle movement because of the added compression from 2 strings on the saddle plus a more extreme break angle from string-thru loading.

 

[DD Gunz]

I really love irony. And a precision bass with a 2 saddle bridge that can't easily be intonated is poetic to me.

But there ARE ways to intonate them either by swivel or compensated saddles or selecting custom string gauges accordingly.
Also they are less susceptible to side to side saddle movement because of the added compression from 2 strings on the saddle plus a more extreme break angle from string-thru loading.

Valid and interesting. I personally have never had an issue with the side to side movement. It happens; however, I have yet to identify an issue related to this occurring. My bent plates all stay in tune fine and intonation has not been problematic.

I often wonder why Fender high end basses come with bent plates when the bridges on the American Standards were said to be superior and "upgraded." I have a bass with the upgraded bridge and I like it just fine. I just don't see the need for it as the old bent plates do the job without issue.

 

[walterw]

Love the simple and effective design.

i'll take fender's perfected update from the '90s (and it would fit right on!):

the one issue with the regular 5-hole threaded-saddle bridge is that with the fine threads and the shallow break angle, the fatter strings can jump a groove if you yank 'em too hard.

this first-gen american standard bridge takes advantage of the steeper through-body string angle, even with fine grooves the strings aren't going anywhere.

 

[SturmUndDrang]

I'm not a fan of having to use loctite to keep the height adjustment srews from slipping. Are hipshot vintage or type B bridges better in this regard?

 

[DD Gunz]

I'm not a fan of having to use loctite to keep the height adjustment srews from slipping. Are hipshot vintage or type B bridges better in this regard?

I do not have any direct knowledge of the Hipshot. I have not had the issue with any of my bridges. They all stay where I put them.

 

[Gilmourisgod]

Leo's best bridge was the G&L bass bridge IMO, rock solid, with a "foot" routed into the body for extra strain relief, individual saddle adjustment on height and intonation, and a lockdown screw to form it into one big chunk of metal, the original "high mass" bridge.

 

[DD Gunz]

I know the bridge you speak of; however, I would be interested in hearing a tonal benifit in a real world situation. I am not debating the functionality of the G&L.

 

[Watchootognbout]

Like them?
No.
I prefer a Hipshot "A" over a bent plate bridge any day.

 

[Gilmourisgod]

I'm pretty sceptical that there is any real perceptible tonal difference between one metal bridge and another. I remember when the Badass II came out, everybody just had to have one, me too. Actual tonal difference? Bupkis that I could hear. If the bridge functions as intended, and is easily adjustable, anything else is gravy. It might be nice to have some string spacing adjustment, but that's kind of wired into most basses by pickup poles, neck width, etc. The newer Fender bent plates are much heavier guage steel, so they have jumped on the high mass bandwagon too, but its more about marketing than tone.

 

[bass71]

I've always thought the whole expensive aftermarket bridge thing is snake oil at its best .
Just fitted a cheap 60's Fender one to my VM Squire. Really like the improved better string spacing cause I can move the strings on the saddle and here's the kicker..better sustain and I love the simplicity.