spudmunkey
Well-Known Member
My luck, someone would think it's supposed to be "NEW-mee Bros".
This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
I don't think that's a good analogy, because tape is essential to it's distinctive and pleasant sound. A 3 part bridge is not necessary for a Telecaster to have it's charm, it's much more due to other factors which is probably what you are appreciating.I think the 3-saddle bridge is like analog tape recording or something.
That has nothing to do with the 3 saddle bridge though.there's just nothing like the sound of a single coil guitar running through a tube amp. It's an unmistakable tone that almost shapes the way you play,
My luck, someone would think it's supposed to be "NEW-mee Bros".
Anyway =) ... i just don't like this "meh it's good enough, most guitarists are sloppy, no-one cares, no-one notices, sloppy design is ok" attitude. It's sloppy, negative, defeatist, depressing, inverted snobbery, and obstructs progress. Everything we appreciate about our guitars came about from people not having that attitude, there would be no Floyd Rose tremolo for a start.
I don't think that's a good analogy, because tape is essential to it's distinctive and pleasant sound. A 3 part bridge is not necessary for a Telecaster to have it's charm, it's much more due to other factors which is probably what you are appreciating.
That has nothing to do with the 3 saddle bridge though.
Fender has had 65 years to upgrade the Telecaster hardware to 6 saddles and there is no reason why that couldn't be done, but they didn't. This is one of the reasons i dislike Fender and Gibson, the pointless clinging to tradition.
Leo Fender was an innovator so it seems the company has since been run in a way that disrespects his innovative spirit.
Long ago someone lent me a Telecaster. It is one of the ugliest guitars i have ever seen. I'm still trying to work out why someone screwed a metal ashtray to the front. Certainly the ugliest bridge of any mainstream guitar, again never changed.
Anyway, i would respect the Abasi company more if their attitude to those with old-fashioned tastes was: "this place isn't for you, go away". I can imagine the Space-T was 'popular' at NAMM, but of course only because mainstream taste in guitars is so bad and so old fashioned.
Now Strandberg has unfortunately released an ugly 'Teleberg' which also looks wrong. Their 'classic' looks ok because it keeps the same shape.
Anyway =) ... i just don't like this "meh it's good enough, most guitarists are sloppy, no-one cares, no-one notices, sloppy design is ok" attitude. It's sloppy, negative, defeatist, depressing, inverted snobbery, and obstructs progress. Everything we appreciate about our guitars came about from people not having that attitude, there would be no Floyd Rose tremolo for a start.
I don't think that's a good analogy, because tape is essential to it's distinctive and pleasant sound. A 3 part bridge is not necessary for a Telecaster to have it's charm, it's much more due to other factors which is probably what you are appreciating.
Fender has had 65 years to upgrade the Telecaster hardware to 6 saddles and there is no reason why that couldn't be done, but they didn't. This is one of the reasons i dislike Fender and Gibson, the pointless clinging to tradition.
Fender has made plenty of teles with six saddle bridges. My early 2000s American Standard has one, and the current Player and Elite series have them. They still make guitars with 3 saddle bridges because there are still customers who want them.
Come on. Guitarists are barely real musicians.
We literally play the most easy mode version invented for our instrument.
Case in point: we even have our own paint-by-numbers "sheet music" (aka "TAB").
That has nothing to do with the 3 saddle bridge though.
Fender has had 65 years to upgrade the Telecaster hardware to 6 saddles and there is no reason why that couldn't be done, but they didn't. This is one of the reasons i dislike Fender and Gibson, the pointless clinging to tradition.
Leo Fender was an innovator so it seems the company has since been run in a way that disrespects his innovative spirit.
Long ago someone lent me a Telecaster. It is one of the ugliest guitars i have ever seen. I'm still trying to work out why someone screwed a metal ashtray to the front. Certainly the ugliest bridge of any mainstream guitar, again never changed.
Anyway, i would respect the Abasi company more if their attitude to those with old-fashioned tastes was: "this place isn't for you, go away". I can imagine the Space-T was 'popular' at NAMM, but of course only because mainstream taste in guitars is so bad and so old fashioned.
They do contribute to a specific sound.
I'd argue they affect sound in the same way a fly landing on the headstock would, technically yes but not in any perceivable way. Have you ever thought to yourself "man my guitar sounds like shit, I should change the bridge"?Bridges don't affect sound?
I'd argue they affect sound in the same way a fly landing on the headstock would, technically yes but not in any perceivable way. Have you ever thought to yourself "man my guitar sounds like shit, I should change the bridge"?
I'd argue they affect sound in the same way a fly landing on the headstock would
Dozens of legit physicists on sso have pissed in the wind by explaining, to people with zero interest in adapting their beliefs to new information, the nature of how guitar hardware reflects energy back into the string. Those this information is intended for stick with their horseshoe beliefs based in nothing.