Johan. I have been ranting about this for years now. I know exactly why these old ABR1's sound so much better than anything being made now. So here, goes. MATERIALS, ENGINEERING DESIGN. The zinc body casting was made of Zamak. But there not ONE Zamak alloy, there are 8. The one that ALL the modern companies are using is a much harder Zamak alloy than was used in the classic Les Paul era. Why are the doing this? Stupidity, OR they are afraid of the "collapsing bridge" phenomena that very few old bridges did. But back in those days we only had Black Diamond strings that were 12-13 gauge, really heavy stiff strings with alot of tension. Next are the saddles. The old saddles were fatter, shorter, and had a much less extreme angle and flatter top. They weighed more. Most likely they also used the softest brass alloy than what is being used now. The adjuster screws were probably the same softest alloy, but I've not sent these to a lab, because I only have two pre- '62 ABR1's and don't want to destroy them. When the Patent bridges were used, they changed the saddles to pot metal , though a few rare ones have brass that I see rarely on Ebay. These are still better than anything modern because they were still using the softest Zamak. The Patent saddles though had the modern measurements less weight, and steep angle with sharp tops, sharp angle equals brighter sounds. Modern brass replacement saddles will NOT FIT pre-'62 ABR1's at all. The casting of the early bridges were narrower but weighed more than the Patent ones, this is why modern replacement saddles won't fit oldest ABR1's. Now here's the worse thing I discovered. I bought a Gibson Historic ABR1, it sounded awful on any guitar I put it on, real harsh, not very loud, tinny and sterile. So, I decided to buy a few others from Stew Mac and a couple other places. Well guess what? On close examination, they were all made by the SAME COMPANY, they were all identical. I quit buying ABR1 bridges because they all seemed to be coming from one single source, Korea probably, NOT US made. I did try one more bridge from Faber, the ABRH, and ABRM (metric). This is the ONLY bridge that came very close to my originals. But where it fails is on the low bass strings, the Faber is noticeably softer and bassier than originals. The original have a tight, bright and sweet bass sound. So, I use the Faber on all my demo guitars and many videos showing off real vintage PAF's and my replicas of them. I talked to one company selling replica bridges who claim they make their own, but they are the same bridge, I told him what I know without telling him how to make them and he wasn't interested at all. All these hardware sellers just go for the "looks" and have done no homework, and seem to have never looked at or tried original hardware. ALL the hardware on a vintage LP and other Gibsons are being done WRONG by Gibson. The tailpiece anchors, the stud bolts are all steel, but Gibson uses brass bolts and some are pot metal anchors. If you swap all your hardware out for vintage correct alloy materials, and physical measurements, your guitar completely changes for the better, and approaches true vintage sounds. I've not found any one making the anchors correctly, Retrospec is the closest but currently they aren't making them. I have a pair of original anchors, you rattle them in your hand and you hear acoustically how they sound, the replica anchors sound noticeably brighter, WRONG alloy. There are hundreds of steel alloys. Anyway, this is still a subject that annoys me no end. Worse yet we got companies making ABR1's out of solid brass, solid steel, titanium saddles, ridiculous materials that were never used. So, you got a Les Paul with all the wrong material hardware and throw on a solid steel bridge unit, well good luck with that. My own obsessive pursuit is to make my guitars sound like an original unplugged Les Paul, because thats where the tone STARTS, its natural acoustic sound, and the hardware is a HUGE part of that. If you go to my channel I did a simple demo of several ABR1 bridges vs my vintage one, on a '68 conversion, unplugged, so you can hear how the original bridge just beats all the others to hell.
Let me ask you. Can you tell me what parts you recommend? I know the Faber bridge but is that with the brass saddles? What tailpiece, studs, etc? Also, how do you feel about the tuners?
Yes, I have a complete list of everything that I've used that match vintage materials and are the right sizes etc. Tuners-I like Grovers on all my LP's and SG, because they add some mass to the headstock which beefs up the mids a bit and sustain too. Here's my list: Vintage pots were always AUDIO taper, stick with that. Gibson uses linear, in their guitars which is WRONG. I don't know which Gibsons use long or short shaft pots, thats up to owners to find out, so I am just giving links to what I know, most of these are short shaft but some of these companies may have long shaft as well, so take a look. Short shaft is what original Les Pauls used, later on Gibson made the control cavities larger, weight relieved the bodies and used long shaft pots, not very authentic. StewMac CTS pots: www.stewmac.com/Pickups_and_Electronics/Components_and_Parts/Potentiometers/CTS_Control_Pots.html Emerson smooth taper: www.stewmac.com/Pickups_and_Electronics/Components_and_Parts/Potentiometers/Emerson_Pro_CTS_Pots.html If you like really loose turning pots Mojo has CTS vintage taper, I have these in my SG and like them alot, but they are VERY loose turning, some may not like that. www.mojotone.com/guitar-parts/CTS/Mojotone-Vintage-Taper-CTS-500K-Short-Split-Shaft-Guitar-Potentiometer#.VgNcmGRVhBc Basically you want to try to get 550K for the neck position, REMEMBER YOU WANT AUDIO TAPER NOT LINEAR TAPER, ALL SHOULD BE AUDIO TAPER. Then 500K for bridge. Look for vintage taper and stick with CTS pots, Alpha pots and Bourns are cheap junk. I do my own CTS pots for neck by shaving the tracks, its a pain in the butt to do but worth the gains. For tone caps you want this for bridge: Del Ritmo Vitamin Q .022uf You have to search around for these, I don’t know where they are made, not in the USA, I used to recommend the Jensen coppoer foil but lately their tolerances have slipped too much. Ebay has them but check locally in your own country for other sources: www.ebay.com/itm/DEL-RITMO-Vitamin-Q-Black-Candy-Chiclet-Shaped-022uf-Tone-Cap-for-Guitar-/351785366586?hash=item51e80ab43a:g:sm0AAOSwARZXip4j MOJO VITAMIN T .022UF ARE GREAT TONE CAPS FOR BRIDGE: I like these alot for bridge www.mojotone.com/amp-parts/Capacitors_1/Mojotone-Vitamin-T-Oil-Filled-022uF-600V This for neck: www.ebay.com/itm/015-uf-Vintage-Russian-Paper-in-Oil-Capacitor-K40Y-9-LP-335-SG-NEW-OLD-STOCK-/221635091787?hash=item339a7b1d4b Mojo has the bus wire: www.mojotone.com/amp-parts/amplifier-wire/18-Ga-Solid-Tinned-Copper-Bus-Wire Recently Gavitt has been making really nice vintage replica braided wire for the wiring, there are many resellers of this wire and its what I am using on my pickups now. Ebay has several sellers, again check around to see who carries nearest you: www.ebay.com/itm/Gavitt-Guitar-Wire-22AWG-w-Vintage-2-strand-Exterior-Braided-Shield-6-Feet-/222281031641?hash=item33c0fb5fd9:m:mTA1qzBhZ-Jot8uVQ25JN0A Gibson has been using the wrong braided wire for years, vintage braid wire had the outer braid wire, then inner black cloth, and THEN A WHITE CELANESE layer, then the core wire. Gibson has been using only the black cloth and no Celanese, so the capacitance is too high and clarity is lost. Thats all you need and you're done. This video shows how the wiring is to be done: th-cam.com/video/f71ewsDLv08/w-d-xo.html You want to measure the pots when they come in, put the two highest reading ones in the neck and lowest reading ones in the bridge. HARDWARE RECOMMENDATIONS TO GET CLOSE TO WHAT VINTAGE LES PAULS HAD ON THEM: Faber ABRH bridge, these are the closest I could find to vintage, but the sad truth is that NO ONE makes an actual accurate replica, so if you want vintage ABR1 bridge tone you have to buy an original with brass saddles dated '63 or earlier. www.faberusa.com/product-category/faber-bridges/faber-abr-59-bridges/faber-abrh-bridges/ Brass thumbwheels 6-32 in correct brass alloy: www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheels-with-fine-knurling-fits-usa-gibson-nickel/ Brass posts: www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheel-posts-for-usa-gibson-nickel/ Vintage length long stud bolts in steel: www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/replacement-nickel-tailpiece-mounting-studs-vintage-length-1-1-2-overall/ Vintage length stud bolt anchors in steel: Unfortunately no one is making these correctly at this time. Kluson aluminum lightweight stop bar-don't use their bolts they are short modern, use the long vintage bolts above and use the long anchors, those are correct vintage lengths and will give you more sustain: www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-USA-Made-Kluson-Vintage-Lightweight-Aluminum-Stop-Bar-Tailpiece-Nickel-/271541372447?hash=item3f3920861f:g:o48AAOxyx0JTiXbr
Wow that's one of the most surprising comparisons that you've done! I wouldn't expect much difference, but it was significant. Thanks for another great video!
Definitely a difference! The newer unit was dull with no ring to it while the original unit had a ringing chime that was clear and distinct. Is it a material thing such as nickel content or crystalline structure of the original material as opposed to other materials and/or how the material was produced. Certainly there must be a way to reproduce the original that preserves the sound qualities we all love. This is killing me that it cannot be reproduced!
Thanks for the comparison man. I've always thought that the bridge is a major factor in tone, and this proved it to me. The cleans on that old bridge sound phenomenal. Your playing is sounding real good too, nice work.
So strange...I had no idea tone was so subjective before this. I'm amazed to see how many people prefer the 50's bridge including Johan. I actually liked the 2008 tone way more overall thought there were some bits where I preferred the 50's bridge. Just goes to show, it's different strokes for different folks
Its hard to tell alot from an amplified demo, I posted a link to an acoustic demo I did a couple years ago. But when you put a vintage bridge on a guitar, it really kind of shakes up your world. Among the ones I tried were the Gibson Historic, which is the exact same bridge as StewMac sells and others, all identical. The Stew Mac one even has "GibsonABR1" on the bottom that was sanded off, but you can see it in the right light. In the acoustic and amplifed sounds of the Historic, it sounds ok, but when you put in a GUITAR, you quickly find you can't deal with it. Notes become harsh, mids are sterile. I put that bridge in SG's and Les Pauls and several other guitars and it sits proudly collecting dust where it belongs.
Both sounds are good and have their use! The modern tone is not scratchy like in cheap guitars, depending on your style you need these high frequencies and some clarity in the mids. I made on "high gain" LP where I had to even go further than that. But I also have a 2nd more "standard" one - it's cool to have the choice ;-)
@@charliethegent I'm with you on that.. (puzzled). And I also am amazed by the preference of the older bridge. I thought the newer one was really showing its musicality.
Wow, what a difference. Both shine in their own right but the modern bridge sounds, well...modern. Brighter and kind of scooped. The 50’s bridge is fat and fuller. It was much more of a difference than I was expecting. Nicely done.
I love your videos but what is even more amazing than your great playing and access to so much vintage gear is that you seem really comfortable playing while sitting on the floor.
Hi, Johan! This is my favorit type of videos - not everybody able to remoove bridges from Custom Les Paul! Yeah, you are right. 1958 was better sounding. I guess, the reason is the metal of the bridge parts is the reason, but the enginery is not the same. Am I right? Have a good weekend! There is NO weekend without your post! So, as usual, we are watching you during the rehearsal on the studio. Greats from our band! We are all your fans! Zigfrid, Andrew, Sergio and Terry:-) Cheers!
Hi Zigfrid! I’m so glad the entire band watches the videos! Say hi to the guys from me! Check out Dave Stephens comment in this thread. He goes through the materials of the originals. Cheers Johan
huge difference! I had a similar ecperience, changed my original nashville bridge on my SG Standard to a Tonepros abr-1, but it lost all the ooomph and sounded very thin. So i changed it back in the end.
Of course, in my case the change was not positive, in your video the change to the 50s bridge was very positive. just proves how much the bridge material/construction impacts tone.
I have a Collings with a TonePros bridge that sounds awesome... It is mainly a matter of strict tolerances and how the bridge sits on the washers. In Johan's example, I'm pretty sure the curvature of the old ABR is more adapted to the guitar he does the test with.
Definitely surprising. I recently installed a maestro vibrola on my Flying V and was astounded to hear the tone difference (luckily for the better). I’m starting to realize how much of a difference the little things make in tone. Would you ever consider looking at the difference between vintage pots and current standard ones? I’ve been told there’s a massive tone difference between them.
I've been into reproducing vintage harnesses for years now. I heard Bonamassa say that the MOST important thing about his vintage LP's was the "pots." You know, he's a guitar nerd like I am, but it seemed to me he fell for some forum garbage. So, I bought a set of vintage Centralabs. They came off a '58 era LP Junior, when they were using 500K for volume and 250K for tone (few know this). The 500K Centralab measured 560K, so I put it in bridge position, because if there was any "magic" it would show up in the brightest pickup. All I heard was a 560K pot, too high a value for bridge position, it brought out all the wrong frequencies, it was no different than a 560K CTS vintage taper pot that many sources sell now, including even Stew Mac. I did not like it at all. I replaced it with a modern CTS 500K measured value vintage taper pot. SO MUCH better. Be CAREFUL of hyped BS mythical claims. Vintage pots are not magical, not in a modern guitar with modern pickups. They worked with vintage PAF's, and those are not magical either, there are reasons they sound the way they do, and pots have nothing to do with it.
Don't worry about what you are told Pots are just a variable resistor of a given value expressed in Ohms there;s NO magic involved but results will vary according to the pots actual value and will reflect on the tonal outcome.Quality of the pot used is a separate issue and of more importance for its longevity if one is constantly rotating it There is a lot of misinformation on forums unfortunately
For years you only heard guitar nerds mention that the vintage PAF is the secret to getting the sound of a vintage Gibson. But the hardware is SO important. All the RIGHT parts on a good slab of wood come together to make the sound of the holy grails of tone. When I got my Gibson 59R that fact was very clear. Steel studs, aluminum bridge, PIO caps, pots. And now the bridge. Thanks to Johan and Stephen’s Design to educate us on how we are not at the pearly gates of tone yet. Not like we used to be. After I got my 59R I then went through my other Gibsons. 2 standard LP’s and my SG and upgraded the hardware, pots, and pickups. The guitars sounded that much better. It doesn’t surprise me how just changing the bridge would improve so much on a guitar. It’s also interesting to realize how ALL the parts on the originals were right in the sum of all the parts and added UP to THE sound and tone.
The `50's bridge is more open & clear. That 2008 has a harshness to it and is muddy in the mids.For a new bridge I'd get the ABM bell brass as it has clarity that's even across the freq. range and sounds really nice. I use to think that a brass bridge would be a tone robber, but not so with the ABM T-o-M. They're machined in Berlin.
The design of the saddles looks completely different to me - the '08 saddles appear to be sharper and uniform with less string contact vs the flatter 50s saddles with more string contact, and each of the saddles on the 50s look different depending on the string. Am I correct? Or is an optical illusion?
No, you're right about that. I saw it almost immediately, myself, and wondered if that made a difference in sound. If so, then I wonder, is it possible to have the newer ones machined to match, and the bridge raised to compensate, in order to achieve the same results? Others have commented on the material being at least a possible factor, but if I had the means, I'd at least see if the machining makes any difference, especially if the 2008s are as cheap as others have implied, before swapping anything out completely.
Yes the saddles were way different. They were wider, thicker, shorter, the tops weren't worn down they were flat like that to begin with. ALL modern saddles since '66 or so were copied from Patent saddles, which were less massive with tall sharp peaks, which make the strings sound more sharp treble. I looked around and nobody makes true replica saddles anywhere.
I noticed something in the first pair of clips. Your right hand is in a different position. In the "1950s" clip, with the exception of the last strum, the pick strikes the strings in the area between the two pickups. In the "2008 CS" clip, the pick strikes the strings, for the most part, over the bridge pickup. This might explain why the first pair of clips exhibits a stronger difference between the two bridges.
Yup that will definitely make a bigger difference than the bridge. Many small factors that necessarily change between two separate takes make it impossible to actually isolate the bridge as the reason for the difference in tone. Hell if you try two separate takes with the same bridge an hour apart you’ll have a hard time matching exactly.
You'd never be able to intonate then. There's also a misconception that you can buy a modern bridge and buy brass saddles and it will sound vintage. NOPE ;-) Most modern bridges already have brass saddles, but they are wrong shape, and were copied from Patent era bridges, which have pot metal saddles.
What a difference Johan !! Going to do some experimenting with my Orville Les Paul. Wondering if you'd hear as much difference in sound if you'd used a Celestion G12H etc. Great demo, thanks for all effort in putting these up for the music community every week! Cheers!!
I'm just in the process of fooling around with different bridges and stop bars. Do you measured the weight of the bridges? Yesterday i tried a brass milled bridge from ABM - it produces exactly the tonal change you showed in your video! Less high frequency "bling", more mids and "cream". This modern LP sound also is very useful and not bad at all, depends on your need. Best is to have both ;-) These ABM parts are high end, very precise machined and a joy to work with. I don't think Gibson ever made parts close to them :-)
Johan,I sure wish I could learn playing from you and glen kuykendall . You are very very smart on technical specs of guitars and their parts too . Very wise man . One that digs for that old school tone .
50's bridge to my ears has a more open and ringing tone. Subtle but noticeable with good speakers/headphones. Great stuff as usual Johan. Have a great weekend!
Johan, thanks for going so far into these comparisons. How do you feel about Callaham's ABR hardware? Does anyone make bridges comparable to vintage these days? Thanks again
Did you check if the pickups height remained the same between the two bridges? Maybe all we hear is a slight difference in string action and therefore pickup height!
Really cool video, do you know if they are the same materials ? I heard the modern ABR is nickel plated brass body. What about original ? Could it be different ? Maybe solid nickel?
Great video. I remember watching your epiphone explorer and flying V video and hearing how good they sounded compared to the Gibsons you were comparing them to. I wound up buying a couple of Vs for my collection. After watching this I may track down a couple of bridges for my guitars. Thanks.
You always do the most interesting comparisons! Someone else commented on how subjective tone is and so is the feel. I'm sure the bridges make the guitar feel at least a little different. I heard the 50's bridge as having a stronger midrange, fundamental tone focus. The 2008 bridge sounded sonically wider, slightly scooped and maybe more overtones by comparison. All this is relative though and is surely somewhat dependent on the particular guitar.
I've been thinking about your experiments with different materials, especially metals on the tone and sustain of guitars. This is a prime example upon those intricacies that make a difference.
Could it possibly be because the older stuff is pig steel or some other metal with high carbon content? Carbon resonates very well, metals with high carbon content resonate better than without. I know myself, going by my snare drums.
Stunning! But obviously first there is a physical difference between the saddles. SD, obsessive genius that he is, points out a variety of additional issues. My suggestion is get all the bridges from major makers and do a taste test. Thanks for the great work.
I have replaced the original ABR 1 to a Faber tonelock on my 3 les pauls. Big difference! Even more with the locking bolts from Faber on the tailpiece.
The Fabe ABRH is the best of the modern bridges, but its not a replica and not even close. The Fabers on high strings are close, but the bottom strings are way too bassy.
It's hard to tell how much TH-cam compression factors in, but... ...during the D-chord shape progression in the middle of the video, I think I heard two things: that the 50s sounded brighter in the upper mids with each attack, and the 08 a little darker. ALSO with the 08, the sustain between each chord sounded much stronger and even seemed to swell(!), in fact, the sustain was so strong it was causing feedback. With the 50s, the sustain between chords seemed to tail off more naturally. Man, I love these videos.
@@JohanSegeborn I have don't this before and noticed every time the second bridge sounded lifeless and dull compared to the first. Only when I used both new strings both times did I get a proper comparison. It seems the loosening and pulling of strings kills their tone. I'm guessing the 50s bridge was first and the 08 after strings got loosened
I’ve never heard tuners make a difference , you think that modern klusons will sound different than a vintage kluson with 12:1 ratio vs the supreme 18:1 in the vintage format ? Thanks Johan !
Sorry if I show my ignorance but couldn't you take a file to the crap 2008 bridge saddles and flatten the contact surface? I am very interested in hearing if that would make a difference.
Thats not a good way to test. You need to test old vs modern UNPLUGGED. Must be done on same guitar with new strings. The difference is very clear. Have done that on my channel.
This is really helpful and interesting. I would love to see you get a new "historic" abr-1 from Gibson (which is supposed to be an exact replica of the ABR made before 1962) and see how it compares. Thanks, as always, for your dedication to great tone!
Already did that in a short video on my page, the Gibson Historic bridge was the worst among Faber, cheap Chinese stock bridges, and the supposedly American ones StewMac sells. It was harsh, the least loud, Really bad.
Great video! I think your channel is one of the best. I don't dislike the sound of the 2008s--that could be made to work--but the 50s one definitely sounds more like a classic Gibson to me. It might be more accurate to say that it works better with HBs. The sound has more midrange, and less top end, to me. Your test setup probably helps bring that out more.
WoW that's a shocker... have filed few bridge 'grooves' to stop string breaks and have considered roller bridges - but now going to have a go at getting vintage bridge - Thanks
Hi Johan! have you weight both bridges? Is there any one in aluminium?! does one rings more than the other, like how it happens on stoptails? who would you describe the material of both?
The difference is easy to hear. I prefer the sound of the old bridge, but the new one doesn't sound Bad. Thanks for another interesting experimental sonic comparison, delivered without any personally opinionated B.S. - U are doing a great service for all of us who watch. CHEERS to the weekend Johan !!!
How does this noticable difference come from ? I assume both bridges have brass saddles an alloy body and steel srews. And dimensions and so the weight should not be too different as well. Strange ....
The smallest parts affect the sound in a very important way! Thanks to Johan, we can hear the difference in this fantastic video. The strigs that vibrate, have as support the ABR, but on the opposite side we have the frets, so given the importance of the material also the frets are a fundamental part of the TONE, you do not think? Ask yourself: what material are my frets? What kind of wood do my frets support? Thanks Johan for your videos!
to think about it, it would be very nice a video that alternates the unplugged vs amplified sound with the different ABR, to hear the timbric differences that arise from the wood!
You are good...it is so hard to capture subtle difference in the stuff I hear when I make small changes especially after youtube is done with it. Any tips on micing/recording/post that you would offer. Would be cool to hear vs say a Callaham, Pigtail, Faber, etc if someone has one handy.
Are the '50's bridges all nickel-plated brass? I doubt they were using zinc back then, maybe I'm wrong. I have a new 335 with titanium saddled ABR-1 and it's amazing sounding - now my Les Paul with a stock Nashville sounds dull and cheap. Looking at a Faber AVR with conversion posts (Nashvhille to ABR).
One thing to keep in mind is that the current ABR-1 bridge that Gibson is using on their Reissues is nearly identical to the original. The 2008 Reissue bridge had the retainer wire like many of the Gibson USA Les Paul Traditionals currently, and as far as I’m aware didn’t have the same material as the 50’s original or the current ones found on the Custom Shop Reissues. It’d be interesting if you could get ahold of a 2015-2018 Historic Les Paul Reissue and do the comparison again with the bridge on that versus the 50’s original...
I would respectfully disagree. No company has ever reproduced the originals. Believe me, I spent alot of money trying to find anyone doing them right. A simple hardness test will reveal the use of wrong alloys, and thats where the action is coming from. If you have one of these modern bridges, compare it to the photos in this video. Are the saddles high angles, with sharp peak? WRONG. Will the saddles in them fit in a vintage ABR1 casting? No. Nobody yet has made saddle with the low angle, more massive measurements and weight. Gibson does everything wrong.
Fair enough. There is however far less of a difference between them than the 2008 one shown here. The retainer wire will do nothing but harm the sustain and create unsympathetic frequencies whereas the current Reissues do not have the wire and have a more accurate appearance to the originals.
packelind I think you misread my comment. I clearly stated that the ABR-1 bridges on modern Reissues do NOT have the retainer wire, just like the originals from the 50’s...
packelind As I said, the 2008 Reissues had a retainer wire bridge, whereas the more recent Reissues do not, just like the 50’s originals. Also, I do believe Gibson was using an inferior grade of material on their earlier Reissue bridges than they are using now.
One last comment. There are many companies selling "repro" hardware. Few of them are actually even close to real vintage hardware. Bottom line is BUY vintage if you want vintage tones. Personally, I have bought real vintage hardware pieces, so I have something to compare the repro stuff too. So, unfortunately, unless you have a real vintage part to compare to, you're just buying stuff for its "looks." Here is my list of closest hardware parts that I personally compared to real vintage parts, some of which were analyzed in metals labs. Faber ABRH bridge, these are the closest I could find to vintage, but the sad truth is that NO ONE makes an actual accurate replica, so if you want vintage ABR1 bridge tone you have to buy an original with brass saddles dated '63 or earlier. www.faberusa.com/product-category/faber-bridges/faber-abr-59-bridges/faber-abrh-bridges/ Brass thumbwheels 6-32 in correct brass alloy: www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheels-with-fine-knurling-fits-usa-gibson-nickel/ Brass posts: www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheel-posts-for-usa-gibson-nickel/ Vintage length long stud bolts in steel: www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/replacement-nickel-tailpiece-mounting-studs-vintage-length-1-1-2-overall/ Vintage length stud bolt anchors in steel: Retrospec is the only place that I got fairly accurate anchors from, but they don't make these currently. No one has copied the knurling pitch yet, along with the same steel alloy. These were steel, not brass, not pot metal, not zinc. Kluson aluminum lightweight stop bar-don't use their bolts they are short modern, use the long vintage bolts above and use the long anchors, those are correct vintage lengths and will give you more sustain: www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-USA-Made-Kluson-Vintage-Lightweight-Aluminum-Stop-Bar-Tailpiece-Nickel-/271541372447?hash=item3f3920861f:g:o48AAOxyx0JTiXbr
I get this suggestion a lot, but I really don't want to spend more money and find out I just bought the same bridge again. I've not seen anyone make claims for doing an accurate replica. All you really have to do is look at a photo of any ABR1 and if the saddles are pointy with narrow tops, they didn't do it right. If you look at Johan's photo at the start of this video you can plainly see the saddles are radically different. If they don't get that right, odds are nothing else is right either. I will go take a look however, thanks.
Y'all seem knowledgeable enough. I asked this question in a reply to another comment, but I'd like to ask it here as well. Let's say we had a pointy-saddled bridge of unknown, dubious, but functional quality (or in other words, assume that we have to settle for the saddles we have, but that they're good enough for the physical function even if not any tonal one); and we took the saddles to be machined so that they're less pointy. Assume also that we got the bridge adjusted to compensate for loss of string height and whatever else changed--etc. Would that improve the tone, and by how much?
I thought about doing this, you wouldn't need to have them machined, just take a file and file them down until the top look like the ones in the photo at the beginning of this video. It would certainly help, but its doubtful if would get you "there," because the body casting is the main tone producing part of the bridge, and the modern ones are using physically harder material than vintage. Worth an experiment though, might try it myself.
Johan. I have been ranting about this for years now. I know exactly why these old ABR1's sound so much better than anything being made now. So here, goes. MATERIALS, ENGINEERING DESIGN. The zinc body casting was made of Zamak. But there not ONE Zamak alloy, there are 8. The one that ALL the modern companies are using is a much harder Zamak alloy than was used in the classic Les Paul era. Why are the doing this? Stupidity, OR they are afraid of the "collapsing bridge" phenomena that very few old bridges did. But back in those days we only had Black Diamond strings that were 12-13 gauge, really heavy stiff strings with alot of tension. Next are the saddles. The old saddles were fatter, shorter, and had a much less extreme angle and flatter top. They weighed more. Most likely they also used the softest brass alloy than what is being used now. The adjuster screws were probably the same softest alloy, but I've not sent these to a lab, because I only have two pre- '62 ABR1's and don't want to destroy them. When the Patent bridges were used, they changed the saddles to pot metal , though a few rare ones have brass that I see rarely on Ebay. These are still better than anything modern because they were still using the softest Zamak. The Patent saddles though had the modern measurements less weight, and steep angle with sharp tops, sharp angle equals brighter sounds. Modern brass replacement saddles will NOT FIT pre-'62 ABR1's at all. The casting of the early bridges were narrower but weighed more than the Patent ones, this is why modern replacement saddles won't fit oldest ABR1's. Now here's the worse thing I discovered. I bought a Gibson Historic ABR1, it sounded awful on any guitar I put it on, real harsh, not very loud, tinny and sterile. So, I decided to buy a few others from Stew Mac and a couple other places. Well guess what? On close examination, they were all made by the SAME COMPANY, they were all identical. I quit buying ABR1 bridges because they all seemed to be coming from one single source, Korea probably, NOT US made. I did try one more bridge from Faber, the ABRH, and ABRM (metric). This is the ONLY bridge that came very close to my originals. But where it fails is on the low bass strings, the Faber is noticeably softer and bassier than originals. The original have a tight, bright and sweet bass sound. So, I use the Faber on all my demo guitars and many videos showing off real vintage PAF's and my replicas of them. I talked to one company selling replica bridges who claim they make their own, but they are the same bridge, I told him what I know without telling him how to make them and he wasn't interested at all. All these hardware sellers just go for the "looks" and have done no homework, and seem to have never looked at or tried original hardware. ALL the hardware on a vintage LP and other Gibsons are being done WRONG by Gibson. The tailpiece anchors, the stud bolts are all steel, but Gibson uses brass bolts and some are pot metal anchors. If you swap all your hardware out for vintage correct alloy materials, and physical measurements, your guitar completely changes for the better, and approaches true vintage sounds. I've not found any one making the anchors correctly, Retrospec is the closest but currently they aren't making them. I have a pair of original anchors, you rattle them in your hand and you hear acoustically how they sound, the replica anchors sound noticeably brighter, WRONG alloy. There are hundreds of steel alloys. Anyway, this is still a subject that annoys me no end. Worse yet we got companies making ABR1's out of solid brass, solid steel, titanium saddles, ridiculous materials that were never used. So, you got a Les Paul with all the wrong material hardware and throw on a solid steel bridge unit, well good luck with that. My own obsessive pursuit is to make my guitars sound like an original unplugged Les Paul, because thats where the tone STARTS, its natural acoustic sound, and the hardware is a HUGE part of that. If you go to my channel I did a simple demo of several ABR1 bridges vs my vintage one, on a '68 conversion, unplugged, so you can hear how the original bridge just beats all the others to hell.
Thanks Dave! Great feedback! I really appreciate that you took the time to share your knowledge. Cheers Johan
Do you know which alloy it was? Zp0400, 410 or 810? thx
You have some great videos and amazing guitars and amps, I am a fan.
Let me ask you. Can you tell me what parts you recommend? I know the Faber bridge but is that with the brass saddles? What tailpiece, studs, etc? Also, how do you feel about the tuners?
Yes, I have a complete list of everything that I've used that match vintage materials and are the right sizes etc. Tuners-I like Grovers on all my LP's and SG, because they add some mass to the headstock which beefs up the mids a bit and sustain too. Here's my list:
Vintage pots were always AUDIO taper, stick with that. Gibson uses linear, in their guitars which is WRONG. I don't know which Gibsons use long or short shaft pots, thats up to owners to find out, so I am just giving links to what I know, most of these are short shaft but some of these companies may have long shaft as well, so take a look. Short shaft is what original Les Pauls used, later on Gibson made the control cavities larger, weight relieved the bodies and used long shaft pots, not very authentic.
StewMac CTS pots: www.stewmac.com/Pickups_and_Electronics/Components_and_Parts/Potentiometers/CTS_Control_Pots.html
Emerson smooth taper: www.stewmac.com/Pickups_and_Electronics/Components_and_Parts/Potentiometers/Emerson_Pro_CTS_Pots.html
If you like really loose turning pots Mojo has CTS vintage taper, I have these in my SG and like them alot, but they are VERY loose turning, some may not like that.
www.mojotone.com/guitar-parts/CTS/Mojotone-Vintage-Taper-CTS-500K-Short-Split-Shaft-Guitar-Potentiometer#.VgNcmGRVhBc
Basically you want to try to get 550K for the neck position, REMEMBER YOU WANT AUDIO TAPER NOT LINEAR TAPER, ALL SHOULD BE AUDIO TAPER. Then 500K for bridge. Look for vintage taper and stick with CTS pots, Alpha pots and Bourns are cheap junk. I do my own CTS pots for neck by shaving the tracks, its a pain in the butt to do but worth the gains.
For tone caps you want this for bridge: Del Ritmo Vitamin Q .022uf You have to search around for these, I don’t know where they are made, not in the USA, I used to recommend the Jensen coppoer foil but lately their tolerances have slipped too much. Ebay has them but check locally in your own country for other sources:
www.ebay.com/itm/DEL-RITMO-Vitamin-Q-Black-Candy-Chiclet-Shaped-022uf-Tone-Cap-for-Guitar-/351785366586?hash=item51e80ab43a:g:sm0AAOSwARZXip4j
MOJO VITAMIN T .022UF ARE GREAT TONE CAPS FOR BRIDGE: I like these alot for bridge
www.mojotone.com/amp-parts/Capacitors_1/Mojotone-Vitamin-T-Oil-Filled-022uF-600V
This for neck:
www.ebay.com/itm/015-uf-Vintage-Russian-Paper-in-Oil-Capacitor-K40Y-9-LP-335-SG-NEW-OLD-STOCK-/221635091787?hash=item339a7b1d4b
Mojo has the bus wire:
www.mojotone.com/amp-parts/amplifier-wire/18-Ga-Solid-Tinned-Copper-Bus-Wire
Recently Gavitt has been making really nice vintage replica braided wire for the wiring, there are many resellers of this wire and its what I am using on my pickups now. Ebay has several sellers, again check around to see who carries nearest you:
www.ebay.com/itm/Gavitt-Guitar-Wire-22AWG-w-Vintage-2-strand-Exterior-Braided-Shield-6-Feet-/222281031641?hash=item33c0fb5fd9:m:mTA1qzBhZ-Jot8uVQ25JN0A
Gibson has been using the wrong braided wire for years, vintage braid wire had the outer braid wire, then inner black cloth, and THEN A WHITE CELANESE layer, then the core wire. Gibson has been using only the black cloth and no Celanese, so the capacitance is too high and clarity is lost.
Thats all you need and you're done.
This video shows how the wiring is to be done:
th-cam.com/video/f71ewsDLv08/w-d-xo.html
You want to measure the pots when they come in, put the two highest reading ones in the neck and lowest reading ones in the bridge.
HARDWARE RECOMMENDATIONS TO GET CLOSE TO WHAT VINTAGE LES PAULS HAD ON THEM:
Faber ABRH bridge, these are the closest I could find to vintage, but the sad truth is that NO ONE makes an actual accurate replica, so if you want vintage ABR1 bridge tone you have to buy an original with brass saddles dated '63 or earlier.
www.faberusa.com/product-category/faber-bridges/faber-abr-59-bridges/faber-abrh-bridges/
Brass thumbwheels 6-32 in correct brass alloy:
www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheels-with-fine-knurling-fits-usa-gibson-nickel/
Brass posts:
www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheel-posts-for-usa-gibson-nickel/
Vintage length long stud bolts in steel:
www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/replacement-nickel-tailpiece-mounting-studs-vintage-length-1-1-2-overall/
Vintage length stud bolt anchors in steel:
Unfortunately no one is making these correctly at this time.
Kluson aluminum lightweight stop bar-don't use their bolts they are short modern, use the long vintage bolts above and use the long anchors, those are correct vintage lengths and will give you more sustain:
www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-USA-Made-Kluson-Vintage-Lightweight-Aluminum-Stop-Bar-Tailpiece-Nickel-/271541372447?hash=item3f3920861f:g:o48AAOxyx0JTiXbr
Wow that's one of the most surprising comparisons that you've done! I wouldn't expect much difference, but it was significant. Thanks for another great video!
Thanks Michael!
.... aaaaaaand the prices of vintage Gibson bridges went up by 100% :D
;-) Cheers Tuomas
Tuomas Raatikainen he should change his name to Midas...I can't even find a lead 12 ANYMORE!
So true mate... So true..
I found 3 on ebay lately..
Definitely a difference! The newer unit was dull with no ring to it while the original unit had a ringing chime that was clear and distinct. Is it a material thing such as nickel content or crystalline structure of the original material as opposed to other materials and/or how the material was produced. Certainly there must be a way to reproduce the original that preserves the sound qualities we all love. This is killing me that it cannot be reproduced!
Gibson needs to watch these.
Thanks Jay :-)
Also Marshall needs to watch I don't think they know what their amps are supposed to sound like anymore
People, who buy Gibson’s over-hyped CS ’replicas’, should watch this; and wonder why they pay so much for replicas that do not sound like original.
Rich people need guitars too LOL
Guitar ocd Yeah, Saudies buy LP’s dipped in 24K gold.. Still won’t sound any better than stock Epiphone..
Thanks for the comparison man. I've always thought that the bridge is a major factor in tone, and this proved it to me. The cleans on that old bridge sound phenomenal. Your playing is sounding real good too, nice work.
Thanks, I'm glad to hear that!
So strange...I had no idea tone was so subjective before this. I'm amazed to see how many people prefer the 50's bridge including Johan. I actually liked the 2008 tone way more overall thought there were some bits where I preferred the 50's bridge. Just goes to show, it's different strokes for different folks
Its hard to tell alot from an amplified demo, I posted a link to an acoustic demo I did a couple years ago. But when you put a vintage bridge on a guitar, it really kind of shakes up your world. Among the ones I tried were the Gibson Historic, which is the exact same bridge as StewMac sells and others, all identical. The Stew Mac one even has "GibsonABR1" on the bottom that was sanded off, but you can see it in the right light. In the acoustic and amplifed sounds of the Historic, it sounds ok, but when you put in a GUITAR, you quickly find you can't deal with it. Notes become harsh, mids are sterile. I put that bridge in SG's and Les Pauls and several other guitars and it sits proudly collecting dust where it belongs.
I read this two weeks ago... still can't make heads or tails of it. Am I going crazy here or is this a really difficult reply to comprehend?
Both sounds are good and have their use! The modern tone is not scratchy like in cheap guitars, depending on your style you need these high frequencies and some clarity in the mids. I made on "high gain" LP where I had to even go further than that. But I also have a 2nd more "standard" one - it's cool to have the choice ;-)
@@charliethegent I'm with you on that.. (puzzled). And I also am amazed by the preference of the older bridge. I thought the newer one was really showing its musicality.
Same here. 2008 sounded way better to me, using headphones.
Wow, what a difference. Both shine in their own right but the modern bridge sounds, well...modern. Brighter and kind of scooped. The 50’s bridge is fat and fuller. It was much more of a difference than I was expecting. Nicely done.
2:44 great tone. Love how you can hear the room in stereo. Adds so much warmth.
I love your videos but what is even more amazing than your great playing and access to so much vintage gear is that you seem really comfortable playing while sitting on the floor.
Thanks my friend :-) I am actually
Hi, Johan! This is my favorit type of videos - not everybody able to remoove bridges from Custom Les Paul! Yeah, you are right. 1958 was better sounding. I guess, the reason is the metal of the bridge parts is the reason, but the enginery is not the same. Am I right? Have a good weekend! There is NO weekend without your post! So, as usual, we are watching you during the rehearsal on the studio. Greats from our band! We are all your fans!
Zigfrid, Andrew, Sergio and Terry:-)
Cheers!
Hi Zigfrid! I’m so glad the entire band watches the videos! Say hi to the guys from me! Check out Dave Stephens comment in this thread. He goes through the materials of the originals. Cheers Johan
Johan Segeborn Thank you, Johan! I will!!:-)
THIS is why I'm subscribed. I would neverhave thought this could make that much of a difference. Well done. Excellent work. Thank you.
Thanks, I'm really glad to hear that!
huge difference!
I had a similar ecperience, changed my original nashville bridge on my SG Standard to a Tonepros abr-1, but it lost all the ooomph and sounded very thin. So i changed it back in the end.
Thanks Mattias
Of course, in my case the change was not positive, in your video the change to the 50s bridge was very positive. just proves how much the bridge material/construction impacts tone.
I have a Collings with a TonePros bridge that sounds awesome... It is mainly a matter of strict tolerances and how the bridge sits on the washers. In Johan's example, I'm pretty sure the curvature of the old ABR is more adapted to the guitar he does the test with.
@@frantisca I think that's a good explanation of the difference. It didn't matter of individual fit and how well it's installed.
My favorite Johan riff at 2:55. Great video man.
INCREDIBLE.... The tonal range Difference is huge.... Fantastic video.........The real facts...Thank You
Definitely surprising. I recently installed a maestro vibrola on my Flying V and was astounded to hear the tone difference (luckily for the better). I’m starting to realize how much of a difference the little things make in tone.
Would you ever consider looking at the difference between vintage pots and current standard ones? I’ve been told there’s a massive tone difference between them.
TJ Downing Where i can find a maestro vibrola for my Gibson SG?
Thanks, Yeah the pots are coming up too! :-) Cheers
TJ Downing good pots I'd recommend Seymour Duncan's bourns pots
Or Emerson Custom is the best EVER but expensive
I've been into reproducing vintage harnesses for years now. I heard Bonamassa say that the MOST important thing about his vintage LP's was the "pots." You know, he's a guitar nerd like I am, but it seemed to me he fell for some forum garbage. So, I bought a set of vintage Centralabs. They came off a '58 era LP Junior, when they were using 500K for volume and 250K for tone (few know this). The 500K Centralab measured 560K, so I put it in bridge position, because if there was any "magic" it would show up in the brightest pickup. All I heard was a 560K pot, too high a value for bridge position, it brought out all the wrong frequencies, it was no different than a 560K CTS vintage taper pot that many sources sell now, including even Stew Mac. I did not like it at all. I replaced it with a modern CTS 500K measured value vintage taper pot. SO MUCH better. Be CAREFUL of hyped BS mythical claims. Vintage pots are not magical, not in a modern guitar with modern pickups. They worked with vintage PAF's, and those are not magical either, there are reasons they sound the way they do, and pots have nothing to do with it.
Don't worry about what you are told Pots are just a variable resistor of a given value expressed in Ohms there;s NO magic involved but results will vary according to the pots actual value and will reflect on the tonal outcome.Quality of the pot used is a separate issue and of more importance for its longevity if one is constantly rotating it There is a lot of misinformation on forums unfortunately
Yet another brilliant comparison video by the Segeborn. Well done.
Thanks my friend! ;-)
Excellent video, such a huge difference. Thanks for the lesson!
Wow. Didn't expect such big difference .
Great video.
I swapped my 2007 Paul brilliant and tail. To a aluminium 1n and also put a brass nut on it too made a big difference to the sustain and tone 🎸🔊
Do you think you would get the same tone if you only changed the saddles to the same material, since that is the part that touches the strings?
That's a good point, I'll try that!
OH my GOD. That makes such a difference sonically. This was incredibly valuable. Thank you.
Thanks, I'm glad to hear that!
50's mojo... Great work man. Thanks alot!
Thanks, I'm glad to hear that!
For years you only heard guitar nerds mention that the vintage PAF is the secret to getting the sound of a vintage Gibson. But the hardware is SO important. All the RIGHT parts on a good slab of wood come together to make the sound of the holy grails of tone. When I got my Gibson 59R that fact was very clear. Steel studs, aluminum bridge, PIO caps, pots. And now the bridge. Thanks to Johan and Stephen’s Design to educate us on how we are not at the pearly gates of tone yet. Not like we used to be. After I got my 59R I then went through my other Gibsons. 2 standard LP’s and my SG and upgraded the hardware, pots, and pickups. The guitars sounded that much better. It doesn’t surprise me how just changing the bridge would improve so much on a guitar. It’s also interesting to realize how ALL the parts on the originals were right in the sum of all the parts and added UP to THE sound and tone.
Thanks, Yeah it's indeed the sum of many small contributors.
The `50's bridge is more open & clear. That 2008 has a harshness to it and is muddy in the mids.For a new bridge I'd get the ABM bell brass as it has clarity that's even across the freq. range and sounds really nice. I use to think that a brass bridge would be a tone robber, but not so with the ABM T-o-M. They're machined in Berlin.
The design of the saddles looks completely different to me - the '08 saddles appear to be sharper and uniform with less string contact vs the flatter 50s saddles with more string contact, and each of the saddles on the 50s look different depending on the string.
Am I correct? Or is an optical illusion?
They do look different, I don't know what's due to design and what's due to wear. I'll take a look at that. Cheers
No, you're right about that. I saw it almost immediately, myself, and wondered if that made a difference in sound. If so, then I wonder, is it possible to have the newer ones machined to match, and the bridge raised to compensate, in order to achieve the same results? Others have commented on the material being at least a possible factor, but if I had the means, I'd at least see if the machining makes any difference, especially if the 2008s are as cheap as others have implied, before swapping anything out completely.
Yes the saddles were way different. They were wider, thicker, shorter, the tops weren't worn down they were flat like that to begin with. ALL modern saddles since '66 or so were copied from Patent saddles, which were less massive with tall sharp peaks, which make the strings sound more sharp treble. I looked around and nobody makes true replica saddles anywhere.
The saddle tops were like that new. You get more string contact, so warmer sound, less trebly.
You are correct. 50's saddles don't have steep and sharp pointy tops on them. 50's saddles weigh more, have more mass.
I noticed something in the first pair of clips. Your right hand is in a different position. In the "1950s" clip, with the exception of the last strum, the pick strikes the strings in the area between the two pickups. In the "2008 CS" clip, the pick strikes the strings, for the most part, over the bridge pickup.
This might explain why the first pair of clips exhibits a stronger difference between the two bridges.
Yup that will definitely make a bigger difference than the bridge. Many small factors that necessarily change between two separate takes make it impossible to actually isolate the bridge as the reason for the difference in tone. Hell if you try two separate takes with the same bridge an hour apart you’ll have a hard time matching exactly.
Yes, variations in picking intensity, picking angles, picking place, and what part of the pick is used can all make a difference.
Hi Johan, nice video. What about nylon saddle on bridge?
I’m floored by the difference. Thanks
Here's where the difference becomes really audible to me:
3:42 (attack sounds fuller)
3:55 (the attack sounds plink-ier after the hammer-ons)
Yes its audible.... crazy
Damn, had no idea the difference was THIS big. Splendid vid Johan!
Thanks Fabrizio!
I love the riff around 2:50. Do you have it tabbed out or could teach it? I know its not the style of your channel but its worth a shot!
Play the video at 25% speed and look at his hands!
whoa that riff your playing around 2:51. real good stuff . Just realized you are a Guitar Guru.
Carlsberg - Probably the best beer in the world. Goes exeptionally well with Gibson and Marshall !
Man your vids are cool and original Johan! Happy Friday!!!
Thanks Tom! Have a nice weekend! Cheers
woa ...thanks 4 this one johan
Great job. Have you had the chance to check out the Callaham abr1?
That´s a big difference, everything makes a difference but that one is huge. Thanks for the videos, not everyone is able to do that.
Thanks man!
Johan, It would be interesting to solder the saddles to the bridge and see if it makes a difference (on a newer ABR-1, not a 50's of course)
You'd never be able to intonate then. There's also a misconception that you can buy a modern bridge and buy brass saddles and it will sound vintage. NOPE ;-) Most modern bridges already have brass saddles, but they are wrong shape, and were copied from Patent era bridges, which have pot metal saddles.
I am amazed.
Cheers :-)
its time to make a segeborn plexi
and get released in namm 2019
i ll be the first to buy it
Thanks my friend :-)
sweet guitar sound, nicely picked mate.
Thanks! :-)
Hello Johan,
Vilken stop bar rekommenderar du? Har en CS Les Paul 59 Bloomfield sign.
Curt.
Interesting, in one of the pics they seem to have a different radius?!
What a difference Johan !! Going to do some experimenting with my Orville Les Paul. Wondering if you'd hear as much difference in sound if you'd used a Celestion G12H etc. Great demo, thanks for all effort in putting these up for the music community every week! Cheers!!
Thanks Jim, I'm glad to hear that. These JBL D120F Speakers are very revealing so with a G12H the difference may indeed be smaller
I'm just in the process of fooling around with different bridges and stop bars. Do you measured the weight of the bridges?
Yesterday i tried a brass milled bridge from ABM - it produces exactly the tonal change you showed in your video! Less high frequency "bling", more mids and "cream". This modern LP sound also is very useful and not bad at all, depends on your need. Best is to have both ;-)
These ABM parts are high end, very precise machined and a joy to work with. I don't think Gibson ever made parts close to them :-)
I'm blown away the 50s bridge is way louder and thicker. Awesome video
What impressed me was the 50s had the neck radius built into it and the modern was dang near flat
I noticed that. It looks like it collapsed
That would impact the tone for sure
Johan,I sure wish I could learn playing from you and glen kuykendall . You are very very smart on technical specs of guitars and their parts too . Very wise man . One that digs for that old school tone .
Hi Johan! You also replaced the mounts?
50's bridge to my ears has a more open and ringing tone. Subtle but noticeable with good speakers/headphones. Great stuff as usual Johan. Have a great weekend!
Thanks my friend, you too!
Johan, thanks for going so far into these comparisons. How do you feel about Callaham's ABR hardware? Does anyone make bridges comparable to vintage these days? Thanks again
Thanks, I’ve heard they make great steel bridges. I’ve heard that Faber makes vintage style bridges that are good but have never played one. Cheers
Thank you! I've got an R9 and a Greco Super Real Goldtop... both of which seem to need a bit more bite and attack. I'm gonna try this.
Hi Johan, did you put new (same) strings both times before comparison? Cheers, K
Hi Kiryk, The same ones, I just loosened the strings and swap the bridges.
@@JohanSegeborn Perfect ...What was I expecting? ; )
Did you check if the pickups height remained the same between the two bridges? Maybe all we hear is a slight difference in string action and therefore pickup height!
Really cool video, do you know if they are the same materials ? I heard the modern ABR is nickel plated brass body. What about original ? Could it be different ? Maybe solid nickel?
Great video. I remember watching your epiphone explorer and flying V video and hearing how good they sounded compared to the Gibsons you were comparing them to. I wound up buying a couple of Vs for my collection. After watching this I may track down a couple of bridges for my guitars. Thanks.
You always do the most interesting comparisons! Someone else commented on how subjective tone is and so is the feel. I'm sure the bridges make the guitar feel at least a little different. I heard the 50's bridge as having a stronger midrange, fundamental tone focus. The 2008 bridge sounded sonically wider, slightly scooped and maybe more overtones by comparison. All this is relative though and is surely somewhat dependent on the particular guitar.
Whoa, almost as much difference as changing pickups! Very informative are your comparison videos, brother thanks cheers!
Thanks my friend, Cheers!
I've been thinking about your experiments with different materials, especially metals on the tone and sustain of guitars. This is a prime example upon those intricacies that make a difference.
Yeah the hardware is a huge part of the tone. Cheers!
Its ALL in the materials. The vintage materials have no exact match. Took us two years to get everything identical.
I wonder how these compare to the 3rd party reissue bridges like retrospec.
Hi Peter, check out Dave Stephens comments here in the thread. He lists some of the best current bridges
Could it possibly be because the older stuff is pig steel or some other metal with high carbon content? Carbon resonates very well, metals with high carbon content resonate better than without. I know myself, going by my snare drums.
Hi, check out Dave Stephens comments here in the thread. He goes through the material of the originals.
Wow !! Amazing !! There is something for Gibson to think about !!
Stunning! But obviously first there is a physical difference between the saddles. SD, obsessive genius that he is, points out a variety of additional issues. My suggestion is get all the bridges from major makers
and do a taste test. Thanks for the great work.
I have replaced the original ABR 1 to a Faber tonelock on my 3 les pauls. Big difference! Even more with the locking bolts from Faber on the tailpiece.
The Fabe ABRH is the best of the modern bridges, but its not a replica and not even close. The Fabers on high strings are close, but the bottom strings are way too bassy.
@@SDPickups I have the hybridge, titanium saddles on bass strings and brass on high…
Wow! That certainly shows a big difference for sure.
Thanks! :-)
It's hard to tell how much TH-cam compression factors in, but...
...during the D-chord shape progression in the middle of the video, I think I heard two things: that the 50s sounded brighter in the upper mids with each attack, and the 08 a little darker. ALSO with the 08, the sustain between each chord sounded much stronger and even seemed to swell(!), in fact, the sustain was so strong it was causing feedback. With the 50s, the sustain between chords seemed to tail off more naturally.
Man, I love these videos.
Thanks man! Yeah in the D-chord progression the 08 hit some resonant frequency of the system. Cheers
Did you use a new set of strings with both bridges?
No, I changed strings right before the test and loosened them when I exchanged the bridges
@@JohanSegeborn I have don't this before and noticed every time the second bridge sounded lifeless and dull compared to the first. Only when I used both new strings both times did I get a proper comparison. It seems the loosening and pulling of strings kills their tone. I'm guessing the 50s bridge was first and the 08 after strings got loosened
Yeah something’s off in this test methodology. Some other variable besides the bridge.
You should do a comparison Four Uncles bridge vs. 50s bridge.
Always early for a video of the mighty Johan Segeborn! 👊
Thanks my friend! Have a great weekend! :-)
Would filing down the tip of the saddles to make the contact point wider make a difference ?
Right on Johan 👍👍
The differences in the angles and shapes of the saddles remind me of the effect that different bearing edges have on the sound of drums.
But still may I ask still is the Gibson ABR 1 reissue still better the all the copies out there ?
ABR Bridges often end up bent on vintage Gibson's - I'm currently attempting to rebend mine back to the original radius. Good video...
I’ve never heard tuners make a difference , you think that modern klusons will sound different than a vintage kluson with 12:1 ratio vs the supreme 18:1 in the vintage format ? Thanks Johan !
Sorry if I show my ignorance but couldn't you take a file to the crap 2008 bridge saddles and flatten the contact surface? I am very interested in hearing if that would make a difference.
Did you measure the pickup heights on both bridges from the strings to the polls? That could make a huge difference in the tone
Thats not a good way to test. You need to test old vs modern UNPLUGGED. Must be done on same guitar with new strings. The difference is very clear. Have done that on my channel.
This is really helpful and interesting. I would love to see you get a new "historic" abr-1 from Gibson (which is supposed to be an exact replica of the ABR made before 1962) and see how it compares. Thanks, as always, for your dedication to great tone!
Thanks Blake, I'll see if I can get a hold of one. Cheers
Already did that in a short video on my page, the Gibson Historic bridge was the worst among Faber, cheap Chinese stock bridges, and the supposedly American ones StewMac sells. It was harsh, the least loud, Really bad.
Wow never would have thought a bridge would make that much difference in tone . Whats the difference in materiel between the 2
+Granville Friel I'm not sure actually. I'm gonna send the original for analysis and show you the ingredients of the alloy soon. Cheers
Great video! I think your channel is one of the best.
I don't dislike the sound of the 2008s--that could be made to work--but the 50s one definitely sounds more like a classic Gibson to me. It might be more accurate to say that it works better with HBs. The sound has more midrange, and less top end, to me. Your test setup probably helps bring that out more.
Thanks Rob, it’s really good to hear that!
So who makes a good sounding bridge and stop tail piece ,I’m looking for one for a kit guitar
Ever played with edged vs roller?
WoW that's a shocker... have filed few bridge 'grooves' to stop string breaks and have considered roller bridges - but now going to have a go at getting vintage bridge - Thanks
Thanks Gerry :-)
Same strings for each example?
is the 2008 bridge zinc or aluminum?
Wow what a huge difference! The harmonic content in the one from the 50s is amazing
Thanks Warren!
So will this bridge fit in a modern Gibson Les Paul standard without any modification?
Yeah, it will!
Johan Segeborn it sounds like this has more effect than replacing the pots and caps on a guitar
Wow that really makes a difference
I just love your Mythbuster vids!!!
Thanks Bengan! :-)
Hi Johan! have you weight both bridges? Is there any one in aluminium?! does one rings more than the other, like how it happens on stoptails? who would you describe the material of both?
The difference is easy to hear. I prefer the sound of the old bridge, but the new one doesn't sound Bad. Thanks for another interesting experimental sonic comparison, delivered without any personally opinionated B.S. - U are doing a great service for all of us who watch. CHEERS to the weekend Johan !!!
Thanks Byron! Have a great weekend!
How does this noticable difference come from ? I assume both bridges have brass saddles an alloy body and steel srews. And dimensions and so the weight should not be too different as well. Strange ....
The smallest parts affect the sound in a very important way! Thanks to Johan, we can hear the difference in this fantastic video.
The strigs that vibrate, have as support the ABR, but on the opposite side we have the frets, so given the importance of the material also the frets are a fundamental part of the TONE, you do not think?
Ask yourself: what material are my frets? What kind of wood do my frets support?
Thanks Johan for your videos!
Thanks, yeah it would be really interesting to compare fret wire and material. Cheers
to think about it, it would be very nice a video that alternates the unplugged vs amplified sound with the different ABR, to hear the timbric differences that arise from the wood!
Incredible difference !
Thanks
You are good...it is so hard to capture subtle difference in the stuff I hear when I make small changes especially after youtube is done with it. Any tips on micing/recording/post that you would offer. Would be cool to hear vs say a Callaham, Pigtail, Faber, etc if someone has one handy.
Thanks, Yeah we should compare it to the best bridges today. I used JBL D120F Speakers for this clip which are very revealing. Cheers
Yep. My first word after hearing the difference? “Wow.”
Significant difference. 50's for the win, Alex!! Man, the 2008 was way too bright.
Are the '50's bridges all nickel-plated brass? I doubt they were using zinc back then, maybe I'm wrong. I have a new 335 with titanium saddled ABR-1 and it's amazing sounding - now my Les Paul with a stock Nashville sounds dull and cheap. Looking at a Faber AVR with conversion posts (Nashvhille to ABR).
One thing to keep in mind is that the current ABR-1 bridge that Gibson is using on their Reissues is nearly identical to the original. The 2008 Reissue bridge had the retainer wire like many of the Gibson USA Les Paul Traditionals currently, and as far as I’m aware didn’t have the same material as the 50’s original or the current ones found on the Custom Shop Reissues. It’d be interesting if you could get ahold of a 2015-2018 Historic Les Paul Reissue and do the comparison again with the bridge on that versus the 50’s original...
Interesting! I'll look into that. Cheers
I would respectfully disagree. No company has ever reproduced the originals. Believe me, I spent alot of money trying to find anyone doing them right. A simple hardness test will reveal the use of wrong alloys, and thats where the action is coming from. If you have one of these modern bridges, compare it to the photos in this video. Are the saddles high angles, with sharp peak? WRONG. Will the saddles in them fit in a vintage ABR1 casting? No. Nobody yet has made saddle with the low angle, more massive measurements and weight. Gibson does everything wrong.
Fair enough. There is however far less of a difference between them than the 2008 one shown here. The retainer wire will do nothing but harm the sustain and create unsympathetic frequencies whereas the current Reissues do not have the wire and have a more accurate appearance to the originals.
packelind I think you misread my comment. I clearly stated that the ABR-1 bridges on modern Reissues do NOT have the retainer wire, just like the originals from the 50’s...
packelind As I said, the 2008 Reissues had a retainer wire bridge, whereas the more recent Reissues do not, just like the 50’s originals. Also, I do believe Gibson was using an inferior grade of material on their earlier Reissue bridges than they are using now.
One last comment. There are many companies selling "repro" hardware. Few of them are actually even close to real vintage hardware. Bottom line is BUY vintage if you want vintage tones. Personally, I have bought real vintage hardware pieces, so I have something to compare the repro stuff too. So, unfortunately, unless you have a real vintage part to compare to, you're just buying stuff for its "looks." Here is my list of closest hardware parts that I personally compared to real vintage parts, some of which were analyzed in metals labs.
Faber ABRH bridge, these are the closest I could find to vintage, but the sad truth is that NO ONE makes an actual accurate replica, so if you want vintage ABR1 bridge tone you have to buy an original with brass saddles dated '63 or earlier.
www.faberusa.com/product-category/faber-bridges/faber-abr-59-bridges/faber-abrh-bridges/
Brass thumbwheels 6-32 in correct brass alloy:
www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheels-with-fine-knurling-fits-usa-gibson-nickel/
Brass posts:
www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/brass-abr-1-bridge-thumbwheel-posts-for-usa-gibson-nickel/
Vintage length long stud bolts in steel:
www.philadelphialuthiertools.com/bridge-and-tailpieces/replacement-nickel-tailpiece-mounting-studs-vintage-length-1-1-2-overall/
Vintage length stud bolt anchors in steel:
Retrospec is the only place that I got fairly accurate anchors from, but they don't make these currently. No one has copied the knurling pitch yet, along with the same steel alloy. These were steel, not brass, not pot metal, not zinc.
Kluson aluminum lightweight stop bar-don't use their bolts they are short modern, use the long vintage bolts above and use the long anchors, those are correct vintage lengths and will give you more sustain:
www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-USA-Made-Kluson-Vintage-Lightweight-Aluminum-Stop-Bar-Tailpiece-Nickel-/271541372447?hash=item3f3920861f:g:o48AAOxyx0JTiXbr
Thanks Dave, I really appreciate this!! Cheers Johan
What about Pigtail Musics stuff? They seem to be extremely accurate on both materials and dimensions?
I get this suggestion a lot, but I really don't want to spend more money and find out I just bought the same bridge again. I've not seen anyone make claims for doing an accurate replica. All you really have to do is look at a photo of any ABR1 and if the saddles are pointy with narrow tops, they didn't do it right. If you look at Johan's photo at the start of this video you can plainly see the saddles are radically different. If they don't get that right, odds are nothing else is right either. I will go take a look however, thanks.
Y'all seem knowledgeable enough. I asked this question in a reply to another comment, but I'd like to ask it here as well. Let's say we had a pointy-saddled bridge of unknown, dubious, but functional quality (or in other words, assume that we have to settle for the saddles we have, but that they're good enough for the physical function even if not any tonal one); and we took the saddles to be machined so that they're less pointy. Assume also that we got the bridge adjusted to compensate for loss of string height and whatever else changed--etc. Would that improve the tone, and by how much?
I thought about doing this, you wouldn't need to have them machined, just take a file and file them down until the top look like the ones in the photo at the beginning of this video. It would certainly help, but its doubtful if would get you "there," because the body casting is the main tone producing part of the bridge, and the modern ones are using physically harder material than vintage. Worth an experiment though, might try it myself.
Is that a vintage bear or a modern reissue?
Hahaha! Its 1970s vintage so the taste is horrible, but just right ;-)
Johan Segeborn You ate it? I thought those were endangered?