• 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.

High Mass bridge

Hey guys/gals:

I am SERIOUSLY considering a Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz bass. Just wanted to know if a Fender High Mass bridge will fit (exactly) if I replace the stock bridge. I know it’s a 5 hole mount. Has anyone done this. Thanks a ton!
Put this on mine...only way to go, imo.
Not very handy with tools, but this was a fairly easy mod.
2ztgay9.jpg
 
Hey guys/gals:

I am SERIOUSLY considering a Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz bass. Just wanted to know if a Fender High Mass bridge will fit (exactly) if I replace the stock bridge. I know it’s a 5 hole mount. Has anyone done this. Thanks a ton!

The 5 hole mounting is the same on a Squier VM as it is on a Squier CV. The High Mass Bridge will fit either just as Babicz FCH Bridges like jd56hawk used will also fit and any other designed to install with a 5 hole mount.

Here are the Babicz Bridges on my two CVs

00707_9ykT8wBEzb_1200x900.jpg
mattfreeman.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jd56hawk
Thanks for the response, jd56...

Did you also change the volume/tone plate to black? Never saw a Squier VM with that. They come with a stock chrome one. Thanks again!
Yes, it's a black steel control plate for a different look to match the bridge.
And, of course, the Babicz bridge design is revoluntionary.
If my G&L L2000 and my Reverend Thundergun didn't already have high-mass bridges, I definitely would've modded them, too.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: soulman969
Hey guys/gals:

I am SERIOUSLY considering a Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz bass. Just wanted to know if a Fender High Mass bridge will fit (exactly) if I replace the stock bridge. I know it’s a 5 hole mount. Has anyone done this. Thanks a ton!

FWIW Kipp the High Mass Bridge used on some Squier Basses isn't all that much of an improvement over a standard bridge. Both share the same basic issue in their design and more mass doesn't overcome that.

That issue is with how the saddles contact the base plate and transfer string energy to the body. In both cases the main contact between the string, saddle, and bass plate are the two adjustment screws on the top of each saddle.

When you look at other designs such as the Babicz FCH Bridge you see how the entire saddle is in contact with the base plate and a cam system is used to raise and lower string height then both cam and saddle are locked in place.

It's this increase on contact area between the saddle, base plate, and body and it's inability to shift while playing that can add clarity and sustain to each note not the mass. An FCH Bridge is quite light and weighs just 3.7 ozs.

Of course you should use whichever bridge you prefer but I though this might be worth mentioning. The standard and high mass bridges are fine and have been used on Fender Basses for a very long time but if you're truly seeking an improvement in tonality and sustain you might want to look into the others mentioned here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bahjark
It's this increase on contact area between the saddle, base plate, and body and it's inability to shift while playing that can add clarity and sustain to each note not the mass.
Exactly! The Fender design with its two little screws as points of contact allows the saddle to move when a note is played. That movement equals loss of energy and loss of tone.
I put the KSM on one of my Peavey Foundations and the increase in volume and tone is noticeable. Almost like going from passive to active, YMMV.
IMO you'll not be able to hear any difference between the more expensive (KSM) and more affordable (Hotshot). What's important is that the saddles have good contact with the bridge and that they're locked in so they can't "dance around" like the Fender design.

I went with the KSM because it looks cool and I like the simple and elegant design.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts