Bridgeplates

[creeksideguy]

I was just looking at the very large rosewood bridgeplate in a 1975 D-35 and wondered what it might sound like with a small maple one instead. Has anyone had this done? Would it make much of difference? Does anyone have any opinions?

Lee

 

[dapmdave]

hmmmm.

 

[GardMan]

I was just looking at the very large rosewood bridgeplate in a 1975 D-35 and wondered what it might sound like with a small maple one instead. Has anyone had this done? Would it make much of difference? Does anyone have any opinions?
Lee

My '72 D-35 has a smaller, maple plate (yes, it's original). My wife HAD a '78 D-35 with a larger rosewood bridgeplate. Side-by-side, the '72, sounded smoother, richer, and had more bass. The '78 was louder, with more "twang." Sold the '78 to help pay for my D-46.

 

[hideglue]

Lee, I won't speculate on any sonic differences based on bridgeplates alone, but I will tell you with certainty: just taking out the bridgeplate is a tall order.
In fact, I've never seen it done (Guilds) with any real success.

 

[creeksideguy]

I agree that removing the old bridgeplate would be very difficult. I also have a `64 D-40 that has a very small maple bridgeplate and that guitar is very loud and resonant and that is what got me wondering how much difference the bridgeplates makes. Does someone know when they switched to rosewood?

 

[GardMan]

Lee, I won't speculate on any sonic differences based on bridgeplates alone, but I will tell you with certainty: just taking out the bridgeplate is a tall order.
In fact, I've never seen it done (Guilds) with any real success.

Based on it's appearance (viewed with an auto inspection mirror), I think the bridgeplate on my D-44 has been replaced. Unlike all my other Guilds, the bridgeplate has the grain running diagonally, as opposed to the more typical direction, where the BP grain is orthoganol to the tops grain and parallel to the line of pin holes, which might weaken it). Also, there is a neatly cleaned, but obvious glue line extending ~1/8" to ~1/4" beyond the current plate, suggesting the original plate was a little larger. Based on these two observations, I think it (the BP) was replaced... but whoever did it did a remarkable job... there is NO evidence that the top or back have ever been removed, and no scarring of the underside of the top that I can see.

I suppose that it's possible the bridge plate is original, and the plate was "slid" into position leaving a glue track... and for some reason this one was made with diagonal grain.

 

[Taylor Martin Guild]

Not sure about Guilds but this is a common practice on Martins that have the large Rosewood BP.
The results that I hear about are well worth the modification, as far as Martins go.
Never heard of this mod on a Guild though.

 

[Brad Little]

The bridge plate on my F-50 had worn to the point that the windings were coming through far enough that some of them were on, or very close to, the saddle. Coincidentally, the sound of the guitar had deteriorated, at least to my mind. The luthier who worked on it just put a new plate over the old one rather than mess with trying to remove it. He used ziricote, and it improved the sound, or at least restored it to what it had been before the deterioration, or so it seemed. I don't know if that was due to the new improved plate or to the fact that the strings were seated properly. I suppose the latter would be due to the plate as well.
Just my take.
Brad