TelePaul
J to the R O C
Is it advisable to wrap strings back around the bridge of a Les Paul or thread them straight through?
muttley600
Banned
Do you mean the tailpiece? If so just thread them through.
TelePaul
J to the R O C
Yeah sorry the tailpiece (stop bar?). I read in a guitar magazine today that certain players advocate threading it backwards and wrapping it over the top. But you know how it is, guitar mags can be full of shit.
muttley600
Banned
Just thread them through. Absolutely no reason to wrap them round. Why did they advocate that?
TelePaul
J to the R O C
Uhmm off-hand they definetely mentioned 'sustain' as a reason. Oh and because Duane Alman does it
But they also mentioned the term 'break-angle', I'll cite the actual article tomorrow.
muttley600
Banned
OK, look forwaed to reading it.
As far as sustain it will do absolutely nothing to increase it. Why would it. Break angle is already adjustable on a tunamatic stop tailpiece and makes precious little difference on a solid body..
Love the Almans though thats the only reason but not really a reason really.
As far as sustain it will do absolutely nothing to increase it. Why would it. Break angle is already adjustable on a tunamatic stop tailpiece and makes precious little difference on a solid body..
Love the Almans though thats the only reason but not really a reason really.
muttley600
Banned
Nope, the tension is what it is. The downward force through the bridge changes a little but not enough to make a difference. If your breaking strings the saddle needs fixing.
ranjam
New member
I first read about it in a Billy Gibbons interview. I tried it once, and it was a bear getting the wrap to seat nicely on the tailpiece. I finally went back to the way it's been done since 1638. I'm sure this 'new' method can be done with some thought and work, but those are two words not in my vocabulary. They just get in the way of my drinking.
N
nubsy
New member
Advisable may be the wrong term, but worth checking out once is OK. I tried this a couple of months ago on my LP that I've had for 19 years now, and found the feel to be a bit looser, and as it's the only guitar I string up with.009s, I do believe that it adds a whiff of sustain. Maybe psychological, maybe due to the extra contact with the stop piece. Regardless, I've enjoyed the different feel, and there must be some difference as look at the lower angle at which the strings cross the bridge. Give it a go, you can always decide that it's moot.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pacodelstinko/2323807451/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pacodelstinko/2323807451/in/photostream/
muttley600
Banned
Lets just get one thing straight.
You CANNOT get more sustain by over wrapping the strings. Unless someone can explain some hitherto unknown law of physics that the Stoptailpiece can take advantage of.
Any break angle possible by over wrapping is possible without doing so. Just raise the tailpiece.
You CANNOT get more sustain by over wrapping the strings. Unless someone can explain some hitherto unknown law of physics that the Stoptailpiece can take advantage of.
Any break angle possible by over wrapping is possible without doing so. Just raise the tailpiece.
N
nubsy
New member
I've already conceded that it may be psychological. And while I can't explain through physics why it would or wouldn't offer any added sustain, can you, Muttley? Not picking a fight, just asking. Does it matter that the string is making double the amount of contact with the stop piece, or why wouldn't it? The feel is definitely not the same, although not radically different.
Does it matter that the string is making double the amount of contact with the stop piece, or why wouldn't it? The feel is definitely not the same, although not radically different.
muttley600
Banned
Yes,.........
G
goldtopchas
New member
I've done this in the past. The only reason I thought it might make a difference is that on my Paul, If I screw the tailpiece down, the strings rest on the back edge of the bridge. Meaning, it travels over the saddle and the hits the edge of the bridge on its way to the tailpiece.
I think the idea behind this is to create a little less angle ,and still be able to screw the stop bar all the way in to the guitar. I used to keep my tailpiece set a little higher( so the strings wouldn't rest on the back of the bridge), and other players would see it and say "You have to screw it down the whole way to get better sustain" I never noticed any difference.
I think the idea behind this is to create a little less angle ,and still be able to screw the stop bar all the way in to the guitar. I used to keep my tailpiece set a little higher( so the strings wouldn't rest on the back of the bridge), and other players would see it and say "You have to screw it down the whole way to get better sustain" I never noticed any difference.
Light
New member
Either way works fine, just don't expect to hear any difference between them, because you won't.
Light
"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
Light
"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
muttley600
Banned
Thats because there isn't any. If there is any difference screwing the stop bar right down would decrease sustain as the unit would then beceome more efficient at transferring energy from the string to the body. As it goes however there is no difference.
Sustain or as physical acoustics would more correctly call it, decay, is a product of the energy in the string and the rate at which it is lost via the impedance or damping of the materials to which it is fixed. Since you are changing neither of these things by over wrapping you are left to look toward break angle as the only thing left that will change the rate or manner in which energy is lost from the string. The effect of that on a solid body is negligible and you can also achieve the same break angle by raising the stop tailpiece.
That is a simplistic look at the physics of the thing. Any specific questions, fire away. Just remember physics is physics and you will not convince me that you can produce more energy by wrapping a string round a piece of metal instead of threading it through one.
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
The stop bar tailpiece was introduces a couple of years before the Tune-O-Matic bridge. In those years the strings wrapped over the tailpiece which also served as the bridge. When the Tune-O-Matic was introduced it was normal for players to run the strings over the tailpiece as they always had. The practice of running the strings straight through began in an effort to increase sustain. I did a lot of set ups each way back in the day. From my personal experience I can tell you it is a myth. There is no difference in sustain.
Stringing over the tailpiece will eventually result in wear to it's finish.
If your right hand makes contact with the tailpiece when you play you may prefer one method over the other for comfort.
Stringing over the tailpiece will eventually result in wear to it's finish.
If your right hand makes contact with the tailpiece when you play you may prefer one method over the other for comfort.
Anfontan
Banned by eurt
I was thinking about the same thing, but you've worked with setting them up and first hand experience with the tailpieces and you stated it all very well. I found a picture of the early gold top's trapeze tailpiece with the strings wrapped around.
Attachments
1
100thdeuce
New member
I don't know if would really matter at all, but my concern would be the structural effect on the guitar. If strung straight thru, the pull on the bridge is low to the body and the only lifting is from tail to neck which might cause a slight rotation of the neck side of the tailpiece, but this seems minimal and how the piece was designed. Almost all the string force is a shearing effect which the studs can certainly handle.
With it wrapped, I see it adding a rotational leverage effect where the rear of the bridge is being 'rolled' about an axis, placing more strain on the wood to hold the studs into the body. I don't know that it ever would pull anything out, but it seems to be a force for which the tailpiece was not designed. I dunno.....but doubt I'll try it on mine.
With it wrapped, I see it adding a rotational leverage effect where the rear of the bridge is being 'rolled' about an axis, placing more strain on the wood to hold the studs into the body. I don't know that it ever would pull anything out, but it seems to be a force for which the tailpiece was not designed. I dunno.....but doubt I'll try it on mine.
G
ggunn
Crystal Flavolian
Actually, the way it was designed was for the strings to come off the top of the tailpiece in a wraparound fashion because the tailpiece was also the bridge. The tune-o-matic design where the tailpiece is just to hold the strings came later.
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
The tailpiece, studs and anchor are all more than robust enough to withstand the forces you are concerned about. Remember, the tailpiece was designed before light gauge strings were available.
The photo in the earlier post is of a '52 or '53 instrument. See if you can find a picture of a '54 or '55 that hasn't been modified. The tailpiece looks just like a modern one but there is no separate bridge.
You'll see the same configuration used on many Les Paul Jrs. except there is compensation cast into the tailpiece.
The photo in the earlier post is of a '52 or '53 instrument. See if you can find a picture of a '54 or '55 that hasn't been modified. The tailpiece looks just like a modern one but there is no separate bridge.
You'll see the same configuration used on many Les Paul Jrs. except there is compensation cast into the tailpiece.