ABR 1 vs Nashville Tuneomatic bridge

I'm not surprised some will say the ABR-1 is the one to have for tonal reason -- it's almost predictable. Fender has the same thing going on. After years of making "improved design" cast saddles for the Strat, they now equip their hot models with stamped steel saddles to "recapture that vintage tone." and maybe it's all true. maybe it's exaggerated. maybe it's total BS. but I think it is safe to say that while different designs have their pros and cons, the tonal aspects are among the most elusive and difficult to quantify for most players -- otherwise we would be need so many expert testimonials and opinions to tell us and assure us what's what? I recommend that in making your decision, you understand and weigh clear and quantifiable pros/cons (retaining wire rattle, intonation travel) against that possibility you are missing out on some elusive and ineffable tonal goodness only a few can maybe hear, and then decide what's it worth to you.

I'm usually skeptical about claims of improved tone due to tweaking bridge mass, structure and material. Firstly, because true or not, the claims are invariably exaggerated by the marketing department. Secondly, because claims of improvement or vintage superiority are often attached after-the-fact to changes made for a completely different reason, such as cheaper manufacture, scarcity of original material, discovery of a cache of "fossilized" vintage material (and therefore big profit to be had, or simply "good old daze were betta, baby". Thirdly, because they are usually second and third order effects compared to fretting and picking technique. but it's such an easy justification to claim a tonal improvement, because what idiot would argue against that? well this idiot would like to hear a bit of proof. and even if I hear the difference, different does not always translate into better or worse. sometimes it's just different.

This idiot, but then, you knew that.

....and yes, what you say. +1

Thats what I like about this place. Good sound advice ... and advice I happen to agree with too. :wink:

I think a great deal of such claims, from individuals, are subjectively correct. Those who drive 4 or 5 year old cars (and even more so for those with much older cars) know every whir, click, hum and knock in the car. Let someone else drive it and they won't notice any, but the most obvious. It is the same with an instrument. Play it for a few years and you get to know every nuance of its sound. Change one part of the instrument and you notice the difference.

But it is only you, because you know it so well. No-one else has the level of familiarity that you have.

Secondly, the sort of difference that a bridge makes, is likely to only be valid until you introduce some distortion/overdrive. Effects, such as compression or EQs, are also likely to negate any "benefit" gained by a particular bridge.
IMNSHO.

I don't disagree with that perspective either, but the audience will never benefit from the player's prior knowledge of the tone, they will only hear the current tone. Even if you did an A/B with the average listener they'd never pick out the difference.

You know people will spend all this time and money improving their tone by switching out components and 20 years from now everyone will be buying replacement knock offs of the original pieces everyone just now got rid of. Why? Because "the tone was so much better back around 2010....it was classic".

Now days I just say "if it makes you happy who am I to tell you not to do it?"

I don't disagree with that perspective either, but the audience will never benefit from the player's prior knowledge of the tone, they will only hear the current tone. Even if you did an A/B with the average listener they'd never pick out the difference.

Exactly.

GB -- I'm sure some people can indeed hear the differences, I'm not minimizing that. but we are talking nuance here, and as Nick points out, it doesn't matter to most player/listeners. from running formal codec testing, I've experienced first hand that different people hear better and worse in the various sonic dimensions -- pitch, distortion, freq respon ... another thing I learned, is some perceptual differences don't even matter to some listeners who can clearly identify them -- a category I sometimes occupy. (not directed at TR =>) I don't encourage new players in a "quest" for that "perfect tone", as it often detracts from learning to play, and sometimes it stops the new player from taking responsibility for the tone. getting close enough is often a good starting point.

as far as pre- and post- effect: in some cases, non-linear effects such as compressors and gates will actually emphasize a difference in another dimension. for example, a difference in sustain may result in hum being more or less noticeable post compression. that might matter to someone.

Lets look at this from a Telecaster bridge perspective. 3 metal cylinders vs 6 notched saddles. There are technical improvements for sure and the old stuff can sound different. Which is better is a matter of taste though as far as I am concerned. Thats why I'm going with the modern bridge. There are tangible differences. Wider sadle travel, no wire and if we buy into the thinking that Gibson Les Pauls are better than Epiphone ones then lets look at what is different. That darn bridge for one thing. :lol: Seriously, I am a tinkerer and adjuster, I like to keep my instruments setup. Form a mechanical end I like the newer Nashville style TOM bridge so I ordered one. I am keeping the old ones though so that when they put the Nashville bridges on the new Epi's and I buy one I can swap the bridge for the old ABR 1 style. :P

GB -- I'm sure some people can indeed hear the differences, I'm not minimizing that. but we are talking nuance here
That's exactly what I said.
Nick points out, it doesn't matter to most player/listeners
I also agreed with that.
from running formal codec testing, I've experienced first hand that different people hear better and worse in the various sonic dimensions -- pitch, distortion, freq respon ...
It will only make a difference, if they have the reference to the original set-up (Nick: ""the audience will never benefit from the player's prior knowledge of the tone, they will only hear the current tone"). We are talking about comparative tone, not absolute.
as far as pre- and post- effect: in some cases, non-linear effects such as compressors and gates will actually emphasize a difference in another dimension. for example, a difference in sustain may result in hum being more or less noticeable post compression. that might matter to someone.
Which is why I said "likely". Enhanced dynamics and greater/modified frequency response are far more "likely" to be affected by compression and EQs, thereby, possibly, negating the benefit of the new bridge.

right - I took it as we pretty much agree, GB.