• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Hi-mass bridge? Bahhh humbug!

I have found the stock bent steel bridge to be the same way.

And it isn't ugly with gaudy laser etching on it.

I like the laser etching.

My stock bridges have been OK, but they do move from side to side. I have a pretty heavy fingerstyle attack, and they move on you. I don't know if it makes any big difference in intonation, but it bothers me that they'll move.

I don't know that I can hear a big sound difference between a stock Fender bridge and the Babicz. I didn't pay real close attention when I swapped them out, to be honest. I thought the Babicz looked a lot cooler and I felt secure that I wasn't going to move anything.
 
I will testify to the Spector bridge being pretty meh. I've got a Legend custom here that I want to smash into itty bitty pieces because of it. I'll concede that yes, the bent metal stamped cheapo whateverthefeckuwannacallit Fender bridge can be improved upon by having slots for the set screws, but that would ruin my toanz.
 
The Babicz bridge in my opinion is the first Fender replacement bridge that is actually a real improvement over the stock bridge. The adjustments are so smooth and easy, and everything locks down when you are done. I guess I would say the same about Hipshot, because of the top load features. Both the Babicz and Hipshot (aluminum) are light weight as well, which I like.
 
I use ABM 3704 and 3705 and with my 5 string I originally had a problem with B string intonation. Because of the design all I had to do was turn the saddle around and put it back in and intonation problem solved. It also adjusts for spacing. I once had a Samick and put a BAII on it and it did nothing for the sound so I put the stamped plate back on it and sent it packing but the body was just north of being particle board. If higher mass wasn't an improvement why is Fender putting them on so many of their newer products?

Because there are enough misinformed consumers who think they hear a difference.

'FIND A HOLE - AND FILL IT" is a marketing ploy, especially in slower sales and questionable economic times. If you have enouigh diverse (and divisive) products, something will sell.
 
The point here is that neither are bad. The point is that any can do the job at hand. There is one little trick with a Fender threaded saddle you need to know and then it performs flawlessly. HM is no better, they are just different. Remember that Badass and Babicz likely won't remain the "pinnacle" of bridge design: someone will surely be 3D printing something "superior" soon enough.

The point, that improvement isn't needed because all options available today work just fine, is moot.
 
Why? What do you prefer and what do you like about it over the Fender? I'm just curious.

The stock L plate bridge allows too much lateral movement of the string saddles, it won't maintain it's adjustment without some sort of thread locker, and even with nail polish or loctite to keep the height screws in place, it still relies on string tension to maintain intonation. add to that the current version of the L plate with it's single string slot not being lined up with the pup pole pieces, requiring either replacement of the bridge saddles with the more popular (and functional) threaded bar type saddle, or compromise in string position relative to pickup pole location.

And while it's really not an issue for all L plates, the so called "vintage" plates with the slotted screw height adjusters rather the a hex drive screw, are stupidity for the sake of vanity. Why would anyone want to suffer through the slotted screw nightmare just to look like they have an old bass when the parts are in fact repop rather than OEM? You are not adding a penny's worth of value with the slotted look, and you are opening yourself up to much greater potential for a slip and scratch in the finish from a flat blade screwdriver, something that's virtually impossible with a hex drive.

Other than the above, and the stock L plate, or any bridge that fails to lock in the saddle lateral position for that matter, not working with my playing style, I can't think of single reason to not like the stock L plate.

Oh wait, there is also the (very highly subjective) differences in tone and sustain attributed to various styles of bridges to endlessly argue, which insures this topic will never go away so long as TB exists as an open discussion forum.
 
IMO, the only way the traditional Fender bent-metal bridge would be bad is if it continued to bend under string tension, which it does not. Functionally, there is nothing there not to like. The threaded saddles of the vintage version address any string spacing issues.

What I HAVE found high-mass bridges to be good for is ballast against neck dive. Some of those buggers weigh a half-pound, which is more than enough mass, when placed at it's usual spot, to affect the balance of an instrument.
 
I'm putting a Squire project together. Nothing really new in idea... I'm switching out the tuners for Grover's, putting an Audere preamp in, and switching out the bridge.

I've considered the threaded vintage Fender as well as a Badass2 or a Babicz. I have experience with the threaded Fender (On my 2008 MIJ Fender Jaguar) and the BA2 on jazz bass I sold a few years ago. Positive experiences with both bridges.

Now here is the silly part: I am sure the Babicz is a perfectly good bridge... But I think it looks dumb. This is irrational... Yet it's how I feel. Likely, I will buy the Babicz and give it a try in order to defy my own prejudice.

I will say this... The vintage Fender is definitely easy to set up and is quite stable.
 
The stock L plate bridge allows too much lateral movement of the string saddles, it won't maintain it's adjustment without some sort of thread locker, and even with nail polish or loctite to keep the height screws in place, it still relies on string tension to maintain intonation. add to that the current version of the L plate with it's single string slot not being lined up with the pup pole pieces, requiring either replacement of the bridge saddles with the more popular (and functional) threaded bar type saddle, or compromise in string position relative to pickup pole location.

And while it's really not an issue for all L plates, the so called "vintage" plates with the slotted screw height adjusters rather the a hex drive screw, are stupidity for the sake of vanity. Why would anyone want to suffer through the slotted screw nightmare just to look like they have an old bass when the parts are in fact repop rather than OEM? You are not adding a penny's worth of value with the slotted look, and you are opening yourself up to much greater potential for a slip and scratch in the finish from a flat blade screwdriver, something that's virtually impossible with a hex drive.

Other than the above, and the stock L plate, or any bridge that fails to lock in the saddle lateral position for that matter, not working with my playing style, I can't think of single reason to not like the stock L plate.

Oh wait, there is also the (very highly subjective) differences in tone and sustain attributed to various styles of bridges to endlessly argue, which insures this topic will never go away so long as TB exists as an open discussion forum.

Any idiot can slip while adjusting a slotted screw, just like any idiot can strip a hex screw. Two sides of the same coin and a nominal difference at best as far as functionality is concerned. When people buy a RI, they know what they are getting and if they don't put enough care and forethought into adjustments, shame on them.
 
Might be interesting to compare with a sound clip... I've understood that Fender vintage bridge with threaded saddles was providing more mid range than a high mass bridge.
Anyone experimented it?
 

Latest posts