Best practices for a floating bridge

[Chuck H]

I looked them up and they're made for PRS guitars as well as being available from aftermarket vendors. Just *oogle stratocaster tremolo screws grooved.

One thing that I especially like about the grooved screws that the standard screws won't do is allow for a raised parallel bridge plane. That means you can pull up or push down and the physics regarding string bends and detuning that Helmholtz discussed could still be idealized (not to mention that it looks better). If you need a lot of pull travel for your tricks and techniques you can always add a tiny tilt to the neck so that the screws could be raised a little without detriment to action height

The image on the left is how I did my screws. On the right is just a sketch of what I'm talking about in this post. Same pull travel as the tilted bridge with the stock screws, but now you can have the bridge parallel to the body.

Also demonstrated would be Dulles 30° tilt. As you can see, it's pretty extreme and I think Dulles may even reassess his commentary and agree that this isn't what he's doing with his guitar. Especially since it seems physically impossible to keep the bridge saddles on the bridge or add enough tilt to the neck and adjust the rest of the guitar at this point without excessive action height and pickups well below the strings.

[Chuck H]

Ok... More on the 30° tilt.

As it happens, my vintage style bridge stays in tune better than I remember. But then I don't play a lot anymore and my strings are old and well stretched out, the nut is well worn at any edges since the last time I used that vibrato and I guess the same could be said for the bridge itself. I built it twenty five years ago. So I guess it's settled, played in and otherwise worked out for itself a few problems. What I learned...

My vibrato does not have the vintage style block. It has a later style block with the taper that allows for more dive travel in the route pocket. The majority of strat bridges certainly have the typical, straight, vintage type block. I can only get about 30° tilt at full dive. No way you could do it with the more common block. That said, I don't know what block Dulles has.

Then there's the control arm. With the bridge at 30° the control arm couldn't even be installed unless it was bent severely. Much less used to depress the bridge. And no mention was made about this above, which I find suspect.

This combined with the other things I mentioned in my previous post have me convinced that either Dulles is in error with the 30° figure or we are being messed with and Dulles is waiting to see how we manage this information that has already been determined discordant. To what end goal I can't say, but I have my guesses.

[dmartn149]

or we are being messed with and Dulles is waiting to see how we manage this information that has already been determined discordant. To what end goal I can't say, but I have my guesses.

LOL really?
He probably meant 3 deg.

[Mick Bailey]

8mm screw height would allow a much higher angle than is usual.

[Helmholtz]

8mm screw height would allow a much higher angle than is usual.

True, but without using grooved pivot screws the bridge will tend to wander up and down for several mm. Even with grooved screws most strats will require neck shims to restore good action.
But it seems we lost the OP anyway.

[Mick Bailey]

Understood - I'm not endorsing this, just an observation that the OP may well be talking about 30 degrees and not 3.

To me there's a purity and elegance with a Strat that pushing the design gets away from. I like my Floyd Rose for different reasons to why I like a Strat trem, or a Steinberger, or Parker. They don't compete - they're different systems for different reasons and for different players with different tastes.

[Chuck H]

I think I made it obvious early on. If I'm wanking on a trem (vibrato) then it's a Floyd type. I'm 51 so I was playing in bands between about 1984 and 1997. It's just where I come from But to concur with Mick, I built my Warmoth strat with the standard Fender bridge and never even thought about changing it.

[Fluoroscope 5000]

I was convinced that "decking" my S-type trem gave guitars better sustain, but after understanding that what is heard in the sustaining note through the pickups is about minimizing damping, and after a long discussion on some forum about it, I tried raising it off the body and heard a more open high end quality. I think wood fibers actually absorb more string vibration than the springs. I eventually tried using a small door bolt in the trem cavity, because I just don't like it floating. That may be a better solution than decking it.

I also don't see how a 2 point system puts more stress on the body? It focuses the stress at two points, but the total fiber stress at those points has to do with how thick the posts are. The majority of stress will fall on 2 of 6 screws anyway, because it's impossible for the stress to be evenly distributed. Leo used a two point fulcrum system for G&L guitars for a reason...it just works better.

[Chuck H]

Spot on regarding the two point contact bridges. And to some degree, the float vs. decking for the bridge. But it all depends. Most strat bodies are made of alder, bass or ash (probably in that order). And alder and bass are soft-ish. But harder woods (like ash, maple, etc.) can actually offer a lower damping advantage over the spring load on lighter weight bridges. Since most trem (vibrato, for Helmholtz) systems incorporate a fairly heavy block for counter balance and spring attachment sustain becomes a non issue even for harder woods. But steel doesn't have any characteristic resonance like wood does!!! That's really what it comes down to with decking the bridge most of the time IMHO. And on that note sustain with electric instruments has more than one mechanism. If you decrease damping you improve sustain under all conditions by an equal margin, BUT, if you increase resonance you increase sustain more under conditions that instigate acoustic feedback at resonant frequencies. One reason the strat design (and it's many variants by other brands) is so popular is that it's typical body mass and woods are prone to resonate at useful frequencies at volume levels where acoustic feedback can happen. This resonant dependent quality at volume can add to the musical nature of an instrument when at it's best by allowing the desired sustain at volume while also adding desirable timbre that a heavy, floating, steel bridge cannot. At it's worst it can be wolfy or too isolated at only certain frequencies to be versatile musically. This is the difference between a good instrument and a bad one, in general. Interestingly, the best players can find the musical properties in almost any instrument and exploit them.

JM2C on this.

[Fluoroscope 5000]

Yes, it's hard to say if decking to the body damps more high end when you consider wood hardness, or even the finish hardness and thickness. I'm not sure what you are saying about resonance though. Any guitar resonances will drain string energy. It can't possibly increase volume of the resonant freq in the string or it would become a perpetual motion machine, init? How that sounds compared to damping is again hard to say. My belief is that damping will generally drain energy more quickly than resonance. Depends how much energy is damped vs how much resonance, I guess.

[Helmholtz]

But steel doesn't have any characteristic resonance like wood does!!!

??????????

Like all solids steel has lots of characteristic resonances depending on size and shape of the part (e.g. steel tuning fork) just like with wood.

In principle resonant frequencies of all solids can be calculated from shape, dimensions and specific material properties (elasticity, density).

[Chuck H]

But steel doesn't have any characteristic resonance like wood does!!!

??????????

Like all solids steel has lots of characteristic resonances depending on size and shape of the part (e.g. steel tuning fork) just like with wood.

In principle resonant frequencies of all solids can be calculated from shape, dimensions and specific material properties (elasticity, density).

Excellent point. I probably should have stipulated that a steel bridge akin to a Floyd Rose (being a large, non tuned hank of steel) isn't going to exhibit useful resonant characteristics. Maybe a little for a vintage strat bridge because of it's thinner materials? I think it's good that you pointed this out, but a little semantic. Anyway...

Flouroscope5000, if you want an extreme example of how resonance can assist sustain just rig up an acoustic guitar at stage volume and set it in the stand without turning it down . Wood resonates and transfers that vibration to the strings. Which is amplified and in turn vibrates the wood. Round and round she goes. It's a resonant dependent feedback loop. Less pronounced in solid body instruments, of course. And it's a good thing too for the obvious reasons. But it's often enough resonance to generate sustain under high gain, at higher volume levels or both. Anyone whose played several different guitars at stage volumes will attest to the reality of this .

[Helmholtz]

The independent lab measurements (using contactless Doppler laser vibrometer technique) of Acoustics Professors Fleischer and Zollner indicate that there is no significant vibration (vibrational energy) transfer (both directions) between strings and body of typical solid body guitars (Strat, LP, Explorer and others).
Rather the small body vibrations are a consequence of the much stronger neck resonances/vibrations.

Up to around 700Hz (corresponding to musical note F5, e.g. high e string fret #13) no bridge vibrations were found. At higher frequencies between 1kHz and 4kHz some absorptive bridge resonances showed that did change with different bridge saddles.

From this I conclude that the bridge (and saddle!) type mainly influences higher string harmonics.

[Chuck H]

The independent lab measurements (using contactless Doppler laser vibrometer technique) of Acoustics Professors Fleischer and Zollner indicate that there is no significant vibration (vibrational energy) transfer (both directions) between strings and body of typical solid body guitars (Strat, LP, Explorer and others).

At what volume level? Acoustic energy depends on the physical movement of air.

Rather the small body vibrations are a consequence of the much stronger neck resonances/vibrations.

That wouldn't surprise me. Though I still think it's possible that at some relatively high level of acoustic transfer the guitar body makes a more significant contribution. I'll bet you've considered the body wood of your own strat with this in mind. Appearance aside, would you really consider subbing your strat body for one made of rubber or steel to have insignificant tonal affects? I think it's entirely possible to miss a critical aspect in a test requiring nebulous considerations.

Up to around 700Hz (corresponding to musical note F5, e.g. high e string fret #13) no bridge vibrations were found. At higher frequencies between 1kHz and 4kHz some absorptive bridge resonances showed that did change with different bridge saddles.

From this I conclude that the bridge (and saddle!) type mainly influences higher string harmonics.

This makes a lot of sense. Though I didn't figure the contribution would be measurably significant. Exceptions might be cheap "graphite" saddles that actually contain more plastic than carbon. If you remove those from consideration you're left with how vibration might be preserved by hardness and/or mass isolating it from the relatively softer body material. Again, this is a potentially nebulous set of criteria.

I have no problem accepting this studies results under many criteria. In my real world (percieved) experience I'm having some trouble with it. I'd be interested in seeing it if you have a link. Though I can't promise I'll understand the most scholarly aspects.

[Fluoroscope 5000]

I'm pretty sure amplifier driven acoustic feedback is a result of the acoustic vibrations moving the strings directly -- why guitars with open chambers near the strings feedback more, and closing off the chamber ports reduces said feedback. In fact, vibrations within the guitar body may cause more damping due to phase interference -- why resonant electric guitars can loose sustain at frequencies where acoustic feedback on stage is not occurring.

All due respect to studies, I'd say the effect of the body on string damping mainly has to do with the material traits from the neck joint to the bridge, but more or less mass beyond the bridge can have an audible affect via how it limits movement between the bridge and neck joint. Consider how thin the body wood is under an S-type trem system -- could just be considered an extension of the neck. Removing the rear trem cover can even reduce rigidity enough for an audible difference, however subtle. I've done tests switching bodies and necks that show consistent unique body damping results in b4 and after DI recordings.

Popular YT host Johan Segeborn has done tests with body materials and shapes that also show audible affects. These two videos exemplify each point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrEa...b2y8eL_ip7prBt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzuA...7prBt&index=16