I don't know why people hate on Fender bridges...

[RED J]

Exactly - some people certainly will make quite a stretch to slam Fender, though - it's almost comical...


- georgestrings

This. The one I have found comical is the "flimsy" whine. Can anyone show evidence that a Fender bridge has ever failed because of being "flimsy" ? The utility of the Fender bridge is undeniable. The design is effective and bulletproof.

I do like a quick release feature such as a Hipshot has, though. It is an undeniable plus over many if not most designs.

 

[Smilodon]

Just like a P bass thread...

Many people simply refuse to believe that the Fender bass was the first and got it right. I can see the logic there and I used to be that guy who didn't want a Fender. I mean, how can the first generation of basses still be the best? Everything has been improved upon in the last 60 years, right?

Well, turns out - wrong.

Leo was a visionary, lets just face that fact. He took the most simple approach and it turns out that it is still the best. And I can see how that burns a lot of peoples britches - I mean, c'mon man! How can it still be the best?

It just is.

It's not that simple. The P bass is the best if you want a P bass. If you are looking for the sound of a MM a P bass won't work very well.

(FWIW the P bass is my favorite.)

 

[Johnny Alien]

I guess I just never realized that changing frequently was an issue. I put strings on and change them when they go dead. I never break strings (at least I never have) and I would never dream of swapping stings quick on the fly to change my tone. That is why I have more than one bass.

If I was doing what some of you are doing then I suppose I would want another bridge design as well. But I wouldn't fault Fender or say they make an inferior product just because it doesn't suit an extremely niche audience.

Some of this talk reminds me of the infomercials where they make the most simple task look frustratingly hard.

Pasta Pro - YouTube

 

[georgestrings]

This. The one I have found comical is the "flimsy" whine. Can anyone show evidence that a Fender bridge has ever failed because of being "flimsy" ? The utility of the Fender bridge is undeniable. The design is effective and bulletproof.

I do like a quick release feature such as a Hipshot has, though. It is an undeniable plus over many if not most designs.

Agreed on both - however, in the case of the "3 point" Gibson bridge I'm dealing with on my recently aquired Thunderbird, I would MUCH rather have independantly adjustable bridge saddles, and a better intonation scheme, than quick release... After all, even playing as much as I do, I always get atleast a month out of a set of strings, usually two - and can't imagine changing strings during a gig or session...

I didn't have the Ric all that long, but it's bridge was a pain in the neck, and this is only the 2nd Gibson bass I've ever owned - the 1st was an RD Artist that already had a BA bridge when I got it... Hence, the timing of this thread... Still, once I get it dialed in, I suspect this Thunderbird is going to be pretty nice...


- georgestrings

 

[georgestrings]

It's not that simple. The P bass is the best if you want a P bass. If you are looking for the sound of a MM a P bass won't work very well.

(FWIW the P bass is my favorite.)

Agreed - but then again, the bridges on MM basses are highly functional, too... Leo was the man!!!


- georgestrings

 

[RED J]

Agreed on both - however, in the case of the "3 point" Gibson bridge I'm dealing with on my recently aquired Thunderbird, I would MUCH rather have independantly adjustable bridge saddles, and a better intonation scheme, than quick release... After all, even playing as much as I do, I always get atleast a month out of a set of strings, usually two - and can't imagine changing strings during a gig or session...

I didn't have the Ric all that long, but it's bridge was a pain in the neck, and this is only the 2nd Gibson bass I've ever owned - the 1st was an RD Artist that already had a BA bridge when I got it... Hence, the timing of this thread... Still, once I get it dialed in, I suspect this Thunderbird is going to be pretty nice...


- georgestrings

I'm with you on that as well. Though I think that there is also a lot of hyperbole about the shortcomings of the three point, I would like to see individual height adjustable saddles.But I can live with it because overall, I really like the one bass I have with one.

 

[Red Planet]

I guess I just never realized that changing frequently was an issue. I put strings on and change them when they go dead. I never break strings (at least I never have) and I would never dream of swapping stings quick on the fly to change my tone. That is why I have more than one bass.

If I was doing what some of you are doing then I suppose I would want another bridge design as well. But I wouldn't fault Fender or say they make an inferior product just because it doesn't suit an extremely niche audience.

Some of this talk reminds me of the infomercials where they make the most simple task look frustratingly hard.

Pasta Pro - YouTube

I want a bridge with a Pasta Pro built in.


Leo for sure got it right the first time with the Single Coil P Bass, and the second time with the Split Coil P Bass, and the third time with the J Bass, and the fourth time with the Stingray and that is what I play (one of each).

FWIW I consider it anal retentive to change strings between songs. One should get that checked out with a shrink.

 

[Pilgrim]

I guess I just never realized that changing frequently was an issue. I put strings on and change them when they go dead. I never break strings (at least I never have) and I would never dream of swapping stings quick on the fly to change my tone. That is why I have more than one bass.

If I was doing what some of you are doing then I suppose I would want another bridge design as well. But I wouldn't fault Fender or say they make an inferior product just because it doesn't suit an extremely niche audience.

I agree on both counts. I don't change strings (flats) on a bass more often than about once every 10 years.

If I had to change them often, I'd certainly prefer a quick-change feature, and that feature makes perfect sense to me.

But I've had a couple dozen basses, many with Fender bent-metal bridges, and I've never had a problem with one. No spring rattle, no loose set screws, no saddles rattling around (a problem that I think is due to operator failure to adjust rather than any design problem.) If I did have any of those problems, none would take more than 5 minutes to fix.

To me, the Fender bridge is one of the most elegant, effective designs I have ever seen.

 

[JLS]

I'm with Pilgrim...

 

[JLS]

The Hipshot A bridge is heaven sent!

BUT, look into the Hipshot vintage bridge if you don't like the A. It's just like a Fender bridge, only built much better and it has quick load slots for the strings. No more ruining your strings by scraping them through that hole, super quick string changes, and you can even take the strings off without ruining them with this bridge.

I like the quick change design of this, a lot.

 

[Pilgrim]

I like the quick change design of this, a lot.

Yes, and it must be noted that this bridge is a minor but very nice variation on Leo's original design.

 

[JLS]

No offense, but Ric bridges are pretty fugly, too - only, they don't work as well as a Fender...


- georgestrings

I always refer to them as, "accursed" Ric bridges...

 

[JLS]

Yes, and it must be noted that this bridge is a minor but very nice variation on Leo's original design.

Yup!

The extra right angle bend is interesting.

 

[Hawkbone]

You certainly can't fault Fender bridges on bang for the buck. I do prefer bridges with more features, but they aren't a necessity.

No experience with Rics, but the Fender bridge trumps the Gibson 3-point any day - cheaper, simpler, better.

 

[darkstorm]

I dont like fender or gibson bridges. Though the new high mass fender bridges are big improvement. Theres to many other makers using much better bridges then fender and gibson to even concider either brand for myself. Since these two brands also have numerous other issues that disqaulifies then from concideration for me.

Keep in mind that companies like gotoh, schalller, baddass, became famous and rich from all the peeps buying them to replace the terrible fender bridges on their fenders. Fender is the number one contributor to the success of aftermarket hardware replacment companies. If fender had done like other mfg and paid attention to musican wants theyd of improved these things on their stock instruments. Instead they chose to help make the aftermarket companies rich thru them selling replacement parts. lmao

 

[georgestrings]

Yes, and it must be noted that this bridge is a minor but very nice variation on Leo's original design.

Agreed...


- georgestrings

 

[georgestrings]

I dont like fender or gibson bridges. Though the new high mass fender bridges are big improvement. Theres to many other makers using much better bridges then fender and gibson to even concider either brand for myself. Since these two brands also have numerous other issues that disqaulifies then from concideration for me.

Keep in mind that companies like gotoh, schalller, baddass, became famous and rich from all the peeps buying them to replace the terrible fender bridges on their fenders. Fender is the number one contributor to the success of aftermarket hardware replacment companies. If fender had done like other mfg and paid attention to musican wants theyd of improved these things on their stock instruments. Instead they chose to help make the aftermarket companies rich thru them selling replacement parts. lmao

One of these days, you're going to post something that's right - this isn't that day, apparantly...

I'll give you a hint - look at sheer numbers of basses sold, and recordings made, and *maybe* you'll get a clue...


- georgestrings

 

[mmbongo]

Yes, and it must be noted that this bridge is a minor but very nice variation on Leo's original design.

Makes you wonder why Leo could never think of something that simple.

 

[Spencer!]

Makes you wonder why Leo could never think of something that simple.

Right? The Fender bridge would be perfect if it just had a quick release.

 

[Dark Horse]

I dont like fender or gibson bridges. Though the new high mass fender bridges are big improvement. Theres to many other makers using much better bridges then fender and gibson to even concider either brand for myself. Since these two brands also have numerous other issues that disqaulifies then from concideration for me.

Keep in mind that companies like gotoh, schalller, baddass, became famous and rich from all the peeps buying them to replace the terrible fender bridges on their fenders. Fender is the number one contributor to the success of aftermarket hardware replacment companies. If fender had done like other mfg and paid attention to musican wants theyd of improved these things on their stock instruments. Instead they chose to help make the aftermarket companies rich thru them selling replacement parts. lmao

Often times people don't replace something due to failure or a faulty design.... often they replace something due to the "advertising" that says "you need this", when really it offers little to no improvement. Things that I can see as a real improvement - quick release, and controlling side to side movement. Personally, I don't have issues with either, as I don't play hard enough to shift the saddles (and sometimes I play pretty hard), and I have no problems changing strings quickly with the old Fender design. So the "advertising" has no appeal to me...I've used Hipshot, Leo Quan, Gotoh, Schaller, etc, etc bridges in the past and the offered *me* no real improvement. That's not to say that they aren't better for somebody else. But one thing you do have to keep in mind is that just because someone makes an aftermarket part, that doesn't mean the part is necessarily an "improvement" over the original. Sometimes it's just "snake oil" and an enterprising businessman with a good advertising department.