Replace SF II rosewood bridge for tune-o-matic style?

[Jake]

I just bought a '97 Starfire II on eBay. Love the look(jet black) and the general ballsy sound...but having trouble getting the intonation right...even after a set-up by the local luthier. It has the original rosewood bridge with no adjustments for separate strings. The G string is a particularly difficult problem...goes sharp no matter what at the 12th fret. I had a suggestion to try a wound G string - which I will - but wondered if any of you have replaced this type bridge with a tune-o-matic or some other (Hagstrom, Gotoh?) adjustable type bridge wherein better intonation is possible?
I have this same bridge on my '66 Starfire XII and the intonation is perfect! Stays in tune up and down the neck - open chords, barre chords, single notes...
This SF II just sounds slightly out of tune even when every string is supposedly in tune(and 5 have good intonation).
Any suggestions will be appreciated.

 

[cc_mac]

The wooden bridge on your Starfire II is specifically designed (compensated) for a wound G string. There's really not a way around that. You may find that very light gauge strings do not compensate well. A set of starting at .011 or .012 with a wound G will provide better intonation. As for a tun-o-matic style replacement, there are many options on the market. Measure the on center spacing of posts on the bridge base and start looking around. You may also want to measure the heigh from the center top of the base to the center top of the wooden bridge. Some tun-o-matics are taller then others. Make sure whatever you go with isn't so tall as to bottom adjustment wise on the base but not provide low enough string height for playability.

 

[Quantum Strummer]

Using a wound G should help. In the end you may choose to go with a TOM bridge anyway, depending on how fussy about intonation you are. A bridge compensated for, say, 12–53 or even 13–56 strings, can result in off intonation with the inner strings of a lighter gauge set even if you can get the two outer strings just right (or vice versa).

My Bluesbird has a floating wooden bridge. It intonates well enough with 11–48 strings (with a wound 18 G), though it's not as precise as I would opt for with a TOM. But I like the way guitars with wooden bridges sound so I accept it. On larger archtop guitars, all with fixed intonation bridges (though not all with wooden saddles), I use heavier strings and intonation isn't really an issue.

-Dave-

 

[AlohaJoe]

I don't care for Tune-o-matics. They impart a more metallic tone than I what I'm looking for. Others love them, but If you like a woodier tone use the wood saddle as-is (for a wound G) or replace it with one compensated for an unwound G. As soon as I turned my Hoboken SFIII into a SFII by replacing the Bigsby with a tailpiece the Tune-o-matic was gone. Just my 2 cents...

 

[cc_mac]

I did replace the stock Hagstrom on my 1969 Starfire with compensated G rosewood saddle and it did change the sound of the guitar and I like it quite a bit. Better? Just different.

 

[kakerlak]

Substituting for a wound G is a poor compromise if you're accustomed to playing with plain Gs. It's a totally different sound and, more importantly, you have to bend the string farther than its plain equivalent to make the same note. For me, that's too weird an adjustment to get used to. A T-o-M swapout is totally reasonable and reversible, but rosewood bridges compensated for plain Gs can be found with some looking. If you want to keep the wooden saddle, I'd just look for a new bridge and not worry about the post spacing. If you get lucky, the new saddle will drop right on the old posts but, if not, no big deal -- just swap out the bridge and its base for the new one -- no harm done.

 

[NEONMOONY]

Kakerlak said :

Substituting for a wound G is a poor compromise if you're accustomed to playing with plain Gs. It's a totally different sound and, more importantly, you have to bend the string farther than its plain equivalent to make the same note.

Gotta agree, not only can you not get the subleties in bending with a wound G but, in a light gauge, the tiny winding on a wound G blows up from heavy use in way to short a time.

 

[powerwagonjohn]

If you can settle on what size strings you want to use a tech can re-compensate your wood saddle or cut a new one to compensate to the strings you want to use. I had this done on a ebony bridge for my Gibson L-4CES to very good effect.
Thanks John

 

[Quantum Strummer]

Kakerlak said :
Gotta agree, not only can you not get the subleties in bending with a wound G but, in a light gauge, the tiny winding on a wound G blows up from heavy use in way to short a time.

Yep, if bending is your thing a wound G can be a problem. I'm not much of a string bender…I learned hammer-ons, pull-offs and glisses early on and have always prefered those. (I do love blues, especially the early acoustic "country" variety, but seldom play in that style.) But if you're not a bender a wound G is IMO overall a Good Thing.

-Dave-

 

[BryBry]

heh funny, I just got a 97 black starfire II and also have trouble with intonation. I use a wound G but the high E is still out. I'm going to try putting a TOM on it because I actually find it's too warm anyways, and I'm really anal about intonation.