Gibson Now Using Aluminum Bridges

[Obstsalat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzw98noadjA

This is a link to a video where Jim from Gibson is presenting the new features on Gibson Custom guitars at NAMM 2017
He mentions that they now use lightweight aluminium TOM bridges and tailpieces (instead of the normal zinc alloy / zamak)

Jim claim that this enhances sustain and overtones which is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Let me explain why that is not true at all:
Lightweight and soft metals are easily picking up vibrations from the string.
Vibrating hardware means loss of kinetic energy in the string. which means LESS sustain. Same with overtones. Light materials will dampen the sh*t out of overtones

Aluminum is about 2.2 times lighter then zinc alloys and its modulus of elasticity is only 75% of the zinc alloy's...but it's really cheap in production...hmmm
It's probably the least suitable bridge material if you ask me.
If they wanted to enhance sustain and stuff they would go for steel. It's heavier and stiffer then both of the materials above...but can't be pressure casted as easily. So a steel bridge (especially a forged one) would be quite expensive

Basically they cut down production costs using an inferior material, sell it for more and advertise it as an upgrade...it makes me REALLY angry to be honest because i know people WILL fall into that trap.

All I can say is: If you are planning on ordering a Custom Les Paul...go with zinc hardware. It's a better bridge

 

[CapnForsaggio]

Real expensive bridges are machined from bell brass.....

I don't like the change to aluminum either.

 

[cardinal]

Vintage Les Pauls used aluminum bridges and tail pieces, so that's why most people want them. And I'm not sure mass is everything. Otherwise we should use tungsten or something for all the metal parts and bubinga or whatever for all the wood parts. Mass is important, but there may also be some inherent resonance properties of materials that also are important.

 

[CapnForsaggio]

I disagree. Mass IS everything.

There is an entire market segment dedicated to increased mass in guitar bridges, via replacement tremolo blocks.

Read gotoh or hipshot's marketing materials '1/8" thick base plate for toanz.'

Also, physics would suggest that a more massive bridge will have better sustain and harmonics.

There have been alot of guitars made since those early Gibsons.... How may of them have "extra light" bridges installed now days?

 

[cardinal]

Lots of companies market titanium bridges too, which are very light. And tungesten is heavier than brass (as are other metals). Brass is easy to work with, so is popular.

 

[Aymara]

Without wanting to be offensive, but the above explanations about aluminium bridges are not correct, sorry. Let me explain why:

In the Gretsch community aluminium bar bridges are often used to brighten up the tone. I know from experience with my Gretsch Falcon, that an aluminium bar bridge is NOT a sustain or overtone killer.

What kills sustain and tone is the construction of most TOM bridges, which are usually die cast. The above mentioned bell brass on the other hand is mainly used by the German manufacturer ABM, who CNC-cuts their bridges from brass blocks and machines the mechanics to perfection, which leads to better sustain and tone compared to die cast bridges.

I replaced the stock die cast stainless steel TOM bridge of my Gretsch Panther with an ABM 2400 roller bridge, which is a TOM with roller saddles. This bridge added sustain and improved the tone drastically.

Back to Gibson ... I expect Gibson to use die cast aluminium bridges, that will sound much brighter as the so far used stainless steel TOMs. If these bridges will have less sustain and overtones is not a matter of the used metal, but mainly the construction. I don't expect the construction to be worse than on the die cast stainless steel TOMs used before, so I only expect a brighter tone, not less sustain or overtones.

 

[technomancer]

Can't comment on the Gibsons but the 8 I had with a *GASP* custom aluminum Hipshot sustained for freaking ever

 

[Aymara]

Can't comment on the Gibsons but the 8 I had with a *GASP* custom aluminum Hipshot sustained for freaking ever

Which is a further example, that the construction has more impact on overtones and sustain, than the metal choice. Good construction, good sustain

The metal coice just defines the tonal character ... aluminium is brighter than steel, which is brighter than brass.

 

[CapnForsaggio]

According to this, heavier brass equals better sustain.

https://www.bestbassgear.com/ebass/article/brass-vs-aluminum-bridge-which-is-better.html

 

[Obstsalat]

^very true. Construction is indeed more important then material.

yeah i forgot about brass. Brass is so much better then all the lightweight stuff :/

@Aymara: they didn't use stainless steel bridges before. they were made out of zamak, which is a zinc based alloy for pressure casting/die casting

Concerning aluminium being brighter:
Can't comment on that. I never tried aluminium parts because from an engineering standpoint, it is the inferior material for this application.
It might be that the alu kills a lot of low end because it is so light.

@cardinal
The heavier and stiffer your guitar and hardware is, the more sustain it will have. thats just a fact based on simple physics. can't deny that.
(That is the reason why lightweight headless guitars like strandberg need a insanely stiff neck, so they glue in carbon rods. to not lose as much sustain)

And I don't say aluminium kills sustain...but it most definately has less sustain compared to steel, zamak and brass!

The thing is: if Jim would've said that they use smaller tolerances, improved overall construction and fitment but switched to aluminium to balance out the cost, it would've been absolutely okay....but simply marketing aluminium to enhance sustain is just wrong man...plus knowing gibson, they probably didnt even improve the construction
Or saying that is alu bridge is more vintage correct is fine as well. But I hate being lied to by marketing people and salesmen who have obviously no clue what they are talking about

 

[Phantom]

Weight is not the same thing as density. Brass is rather dense (about 8.55 g/cm^3) and Aluminum isn't (about 2.7 g/cm^3). Their densities is what matters when comparing the two materials. The less dense AL gives "more punch" (brighter) sound, but brass offers more sustain because its so dense. The problem with trying to equate that to a general description of what is going to happen to a guitar is that you're completely ignoring everything else that affects the overall sustain and punch. An instrument is an additive compilation of parts that gives a final product. I agree that they seem to advertising it as a "cure all" for sustain, and they probably are largely influenced by cost, most companies are; however, without playing one, its difficult to say one way or the other.

 

[Obstsalat]

density IS volume specific weight...Saying aluminium is 2.2 times lighter than zinc or saying it's 2.2 times denser is LITERALLY the same thing when you talk about materials in general

so yeah if your TOM bridge is made out of aluminium instead of zinc, it will be 2.2 times lighter (given the same construction) because the zinc's density is 2.2 times higher then aluminium's.

 

[dr_game0ver]

1: it has nothing to do with mass but density and hardness, mass is just a side effect.
2: Aluminum is such a generic therm, it almost doesn't mean anything.
3: it's not the material that matters (well a little), it's the quality of it.

 

[Phantom]

While I'm not arguing that aluminum is less dense than the zinc alloy, weight and density are not the same thing. Weight is a product of gravity (Weight = Force net external = mass x acceleration of gravity). Zero gravity = zero weight. Density is not (density = mass / volume), which means an object with always have a density, regardless of gravity. They are not equivalent.

 

[Obstsalat]

^true

but in this application, because we wont build tom bridges on the moon and because we are talking about more or less the same part design (ergo: same volume), it doesn't matter if you compare their densities, the masses or the weights of the bridges because they are all proportional to each other

Getting back to the topic:
Gibson is marketing/selling the aluminium bridge material as a sustain enhancer, which it just isn't and I find that upsetting and I want to know, if other people share my point of view

 

[Phantom]

Ok dude. Either way, they should have stayed with the zinc alloy.

 

[Aymara]

It might be that the alu kills a lot of low end because it is so light.

I wouldn't say, that it eliminates or tames low end.

This topic is more complex ... let me tell you more about my experience with my Falcon:

It has TV Jones Classics pickups and so is already pretty bright. The alumium bridge seems to "multiply" this effect. When I stringed it with Gibson Brite Wires, which are my preferred strings on my Les Paul and my Schecter Hybrid, the Falcon was so bright, that it was only usable as a Country and Rockabilly axe ... the typical Gretsch cliché ... not my cup of tea.

So I thought I should order the same ABM brass bridge, that sounds so good on my Panther, to warm up the sound. But the solution was much simpler than that ... a different string choice. Gibson Vintage Reissue pure nickel strings with a hex core did the trick ... totally equal EQ over all frequency bands without any loss in bite, sustain or overtones.

So does the aluminium really kill low end?

The answer is not a clear yes or no, but ... it depends

 

[Aymara]

Gibson is marketing/selling the aluminium bridge material as a sustain enhancer, which it just isn't and I find that upsetting and I want to know, if other people share my point of view

Yes, aluminium is not a sustain enhancer, better constuction is

 

[P-Ride]

Why aren't more key discussions like this finished by guitar manufacturers using hard science? By the sound of the conflicting views, at least one major guitar manufacturer is plain wrong in terms of the materials they're using?

 

[Aymara]

By the sound of the conflicting views, at least one major guitar manufacturer is plain wrong in terms of the materials they're using?

Customers might have different view, but more importantly have different taste, so manufacturers should not only have different colors and pickups available in one model, but also different bridges.

Some like Mayones already do.