D40 1968 vs. 1978

[donnylang]

Also might be an unconventional opinion, but if that bridge is a replacement, and is in fact taller than the original bridge would have been (kind of looks like it might be to me) ... you could possibly even entertain shaving it.

 

[adorshki]

I defintely do not have a through saddle, then.

thanks

Right, why we suspect it's been replaced. And yes, if the bridge was cracked, replacing bridge might have been a simpler fix than trying to repair the old one, since the bridge'd have to be removed in any case, and replacement eliminates the time/labor of repairing the old one.

A new bridge blank was probably relatively cheap at the time and guitar itself probably not considered to be valuable enough to need originality preserved.. and yes, re-gluing bridge could lead to squeeze-out around edges. Guild themselves had a little trick to help prevent the problem, which was to make the unfinished area of the "glue pad" on the top a little smaller than the outline of the bridge, then ideally, when clamped, the glue wouldn't squeeze out beyond the edges of the bridg

 

[kostask]

Al, my view of the so called "squeeze out" is not that it was something that came from the factory, but something some well meaning (but un-familliar with Guild) luthier had done sometime after the guitar left the factory, or even during the bridge replacement. Guild knew exactly what they were doing with the "bridge pad" vs. full glue surface bridge attachement. Many luthiers are not, and will add glue (in many cases, both to the front edge and back edge of the bridge) to try and address the "bridge lift" in their ignorance.

 

[adorshki]

Al, my view of the so called "squeeze out" is not that it was something that came from the factory, but something some well meaning (but un-familliar with Guild) luthier had done sometime after the guitar left the factory, or even during the bridge replacement. Guild knew exactly what they were doing with the "bridge pad" vs. full glue surface bridge attachement.

Right, why I mentioned that if squeeze-out was present, it was likely another sign of a replaced bridge:

"Guild themselves had a little trick to help prevent the problem, which was to make the unfinished area of the "glue pad" on the top a little smaller than the outline of the bridge, then ideally, when clamped, the glue wouldn't squeeze out beyond the edges of the bridge" (post 42)

Many luthiers are not, and will add glue (in many cases, both to the front edge and back edge of the bridge) to try and address the "bridge lift" in their ignorance.

Ahhh! That's a new one to me!

 

[kostask]

A lot of luthiers who are unfamiliar with Guild will use the corner of a business card and run it along the front and rear edges of the bridge, see that it actually goes underneath, and conclude that the bridge is lifting. With other guitars, this would be true. With Guilds, because of the "bridge pad" idea, it is perfectly normal for the corner of the business card to go in about a 1/16" to 1/8" (at most). Luthiers then try to get glue injected between the bridge and top. This is not correct for two reasons:

1. As stated above, Guild did this intentionally, so it is perfectly normal.
2. Because of the way Guild did this, they are attempting to glue the bottom of the bridge to a lacquered surface. Glue doesn't adhere to lacquer very well, so even if it does get in there, it doesn't really do anything.

Then, they clamp the bridge down, causing squeeze out, and leaving the residue to make a line at the front of the bridge, sometimes in the back of the bridge as well. They literally undo the efforts that Guild took to avoid the glue squeeze out at the factory.

 

[Br1ck]

I didn't pick up on the replaced bridge, so sure, shaving it will buy you a few years, but it still would need a new one come resetting time. Pay now or pay later,

 

[valleyguy]

I will not be shaving the bridge, but will be taking it for a neck reset, plus new saddle and fret dressing or replacement, depending on what the luthier says.

I want this thing playing perfectly, seems worth it to me. It'll still be cheaper than buying a new one.

 

[wileypickett]

You're right about the 1/16" perimater of the bridge that is not glued down, but. . . .

If the bridge is seated correctly you won't be able to slide a business card, or anything else, between the bridge and the top -- unless the bridge IS lifting.

Try putting a business card under the front side of the bridge, for instance, and you'll find there are no gaps. It should be the same behind the bridge.

The gap behind the bridge occurs -- almost invariably -- because there is some amount of bellying behind the bridge, and a flat surface (the bridge) won't fully adhere to a rounded one (the top).

It has a little to do with the way Guild constructed the guitar, but more to do with physics.

I've owned upwards of 70 old Guilds and I'd estimate that a quarter of them had some lifting behind the bridge when I got them, and the ones that did also had bellied tops.

I've often wondered: if Guild had fully glued down their bridges, as most other makers do, whether we'd see as much lifting behind the bridge on our vintage Guilds as we do.

Does anyone know if bridge lift occurs as frequently on vintage Martins and Gibsons as on Guilds?

 

[adorshki]

I will not be shaving the bridge, but will be taking it for a neck reset, plus new saddle and fret dressing or replacement, depending on what the luthier says.

I want this thing playing perfectly, seems worth it to me. It'll still be cheaper than buying a new one.

Precisely. Plus it's already opened up. Can't buy that new.

 

[Br1ck]

You're right about the 1/16" perimater of the bridge that is not glued down, but. . . .

If the bridge is seated correctly you won't be able to slide a business card, or anything else, between the bridge and the top -- unless the bridge IS lifting.

Try putting a business card under the front side of the bridge, for instance, and you'll find there are no gaps. It should be the same behind the bridge.

The gap behind the bridge occurs -- almost invariably -- because there is some amount of bellying behind the bridge, and a flat surface (the bridge) won't fully adhere to a rounded one (the top).

It has a little to do with the way Guild constructed the guitar, but more to do with physics.

I've owned upwards of 70 old Guilds and I'd estimate that a quarter of them had some lifting behind the bridge when I got them, and the ones that did also had bellied tops.

I've often wondered: if Guild had fully glued down their bridges, as most other makers do, whether we'd see as much lifting behind the bridge on our vintage Guilds as we do.

Does anyone know if bridge lift occurs as frequently on vintage Martins and Gibsons as on Guilds?

I really don't think it's a dramatic difference. I had a slight lifting on my 65 Epiphone Texan when I bought it. The shop reglued it free a month later when their tech noticed it a month later while checking another issue. My 70 D 35 was solid, but shaved when I got it.

 

[adorshki]

You're right about the 1/16" perimater of the bridge that is not glued down, but. . . .

If the bridge is seated correctly you won't be able to slide a business card, or anything else, between the bridge and the top -- unless the bridge IS lifting.

Right. The issue is that even if there's glue squeeze to the edges of the bridge on installation, the stresses pulling the bridge towards the nut tend to lift the back of the bridge. So even though the glue may be in contact with NCL at the edges, its bond with the NCL is stronger than NCL's bond to the top wood, so it pulls up finish, creating that gap even though the bond is strong and durable in the primary unfinished area the bridge is glued to.

Try putting a business card under the front side of the bridge, for instance, and you'll find there are no gaps. It should be the same behind the bridge.

The gap behind the bridge occurs -- almost invariably -- because there is some amount of bellying behind the bridge, and a flat surface (the bridge) won't fully adhere to a rounded one (the top).

After my F65ce was assessed at CB Perkins (advised to "watch and wait") I made a template on a 4" square piece of note paper, only as thick as copier paper, it fitted under the edges and corners of the bridge snugly. Traced an outline of how far the bridge extended onto teh paper in a couple of different locations on each side, dated it. Every couple of years I'll remember to give it a spot check, and it's been stable for at least ten years.

In fact, when I checked it last year after running silk'nsteels and tuning down a whole step for over a year, the template wouldn't slide in quite as far as when I originally made it, the ink lines of the original outline were a little farther away from the bridge's edges. So yeah there's definitely a string tension issue contributing to the "problem".

Oh yeah, the other two? Still tight on both sides of the bridge since new. Both dreads. So also made me wonder if the bracing on an F-body might be another contributing factor.

 

[wileypickett]

The problem, when it happens, is usually one that occurs over time. A good way to test the theory is to see whether there are any gaps on recently made, or currently made, Guilds.

You'll find that Guilds fresh out of the factory will have their bridges tight to the top -- no bridge lift.