Let's talk bridges :)

[anxious mo-fo]

First time poster with a question....

I have a mid 70's M-85 with a bridge plate that's snapped in two. The saddles, etc. are all fine though, but it's still slightly horrific. So, knowing that spare original bridges are few and far between, I have been looking around at aftermarket bridges hoping to find something that didn't require much modification. Lo and behold I found this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=400228852448&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

Anyone have this bridge? I am waiting to hear from the seller if the 2 mounting holes line up exactly with the existing ones. They look like they do, but I don't feel like wasting 25 bones just to find out they don't.

Your thoughts? Thanks.

 

[fronobulax]

Welcome. That looks like the bridge from the reissue Starfire of the '90's. I'm afraid I have no idea whether the holes have the same spacing or not.

 

[mellowgerman]

Welcome!
That is one of the Guild/Dearmond reissue bridges. The string spacing is wider, though the bridge may still work. Sometimes the original bridge base plates come up on ebay... I always wondered why in the world anyone would need just the bridge plate... now we know why :mrgreen:

 

[anxious mo-fo]

This may sound like a dumb question (especially by me who has been playing over 20 years), but when I measure the broken bridge - from the center of the G saddle to the center of E saddle, I am really close, say within 1/32" of this eBay bridge's spacing of 2 1/16".

That's how you typically measure string spacing, no?

EDIT: the seller tells me the spacing between the 2 mounting holes are 1 3/8" so this could work after all...

Thanks for the replies.

 

[Happy Face]

I once bought a D'A Starfire tailpiece/bridge assembly, thinking I'd try it on my 71 JS-II (which I believe has the same tailpiece as a SF and M-85).

The holes did not match.

 

[anxious mo-fo]

I once bought a D'A Starfire tailpiece/bridge assembly, thinking I'd try it on my 71 JS-II (which I believe has the same tailpiece as a SF and M-85).

The holes did not match.

Do you remember if they were close or how far off they were?

 

[mellowgerman]

This may sound like a dumb question (especially by me who has been playing over 20 years), but when I measure the broken bridge - from the center of the G saddle to the center of E saddle, I am really close, say within 1/32" of this eBay bridge's spacing of 2 1/16".

That's how you typically measure string spacing, no?

EDIT: the seller tells me the spacing between the 2 mounting holes are 1 3/8" so this could work after all...

Thanks for the replies.

hmmm... I bought my Dearmond Starfire right after selling my 66 guild and it felt noticably wider... I kept missing strings.
Also, on old starfires, the bisonics (neck and bridge) had the same string spacing. For Dearmond reissues you need a wider pole spacing in the bridge (see the ordering info section of fred hammon's Dark Star page http://www.hammoneng.com/ordering1.htm for confirmation on this). Wouldn't that logically support my thought of wider bridge spacing too?

EDIT: is it possible that someone maybe made new saddles for your bridge before you got it? this scenario isn't unheard of and it could account for wider string spacing

 

[Happy Face]

[quote="Happy Face":2cvx27ne]I once bought a D'A Starfire tailpiece/bridge assembly, thinking I'd try it on my 71 JS-II (which I believe has the same tailpiece as a SF and M-85).

The holes did not match.

Do you remember if they were close or how far off they were?[/quote:2cvx27ne]

Not very well. Sorry. But different enough that I figured I'd have to fill the old holes and bore new ones. Too risky for what was only an experiment.

Maybe someone with a D'A Starfire will speak up with some precise measurements for you.

 

[bassmyf]

[quote="anxious mo-fo":18moeuqb][quote="Happy Face":18moeuqb]I once bought a D'A Starfire tailpiece/bridge assembly, thinking I'd try it on my 71 JS-II (which I believe has the same tailpiece as a SF and M-85).

The holes did not match.

Do you remember if they were close or how far off they were?[/quote:18moeuqb]

Not very well. Sorry. But different enough that I figured I'd have to fill the old holes and bore new ones. Too risky for what was only an experiment.

Maybe someone with a D'A Starfire will speak up with some precise measurements for you.[/quote:18moeuqb]

I have the bridge mounting holes at 1 1/8" on my 67 Starfires and 1 3/8" on the DeArmonds , center to center.

 

[anxious mo-fo]

I have the bridge mounting holes at 1 1/8" on my 67 Starfires and 1 3/8" on the DeArmonds , center to center.

Great, thanks for that info. I went ahead and got one of those eBay DeArmond bridges...once it arrives I may post a pic or 2 to show differences in fitment or however it is ultimately retrofitted. The bass needs to go into the shop anyway, so if it requires more work than I'm comfortable with doing, I'll get them to do it.

Stay tuned....

 

[Happy Face]

Is that a solid body M-85? Hope so....

 

[fronobulax]

If it is mid-70's then it almost certainly is a solid body M-85.

Folks have been talking as if the Guild Starfires reissued in the 90's and the DeArmond Starfires of some unknown to me time but probably late 90's as well, used an identical bridge. Can someone confirm that? Or are there really four similar bridges floating around?

• The straight harp with wooden saddles found through mid-67[/*:m:236ohshj]
• The curved harp with wooden saddles found roughly from '67 to '77[/*:m:236ohshj]
• The curved reissue Starfire bridge with metal saddles and intonation screws[/*:m:236ohshj]
• The curved DeArmond bridge with metal saddles and intonation screws[/*:m:236ohshj]

 

[mellowgerman]

If it is mid-70's then it almost certainly is a solid body M-85.

Folks have been talking as if the Guild Starfires reissued in the 90's and the DeArmond Starfires of some unknown to me time but probably late 90's as well, used an identical bridge. Can someone confirm that? Or are there really four similar bridges floating around?

• The straight harp with wooden saddles found through mid-67[/*:m:3ryi97um]
• The curved harp with wooden saddles found roughly from '67 to '77[/*:m:3ryi97um]
• The curved reissue Starfire bridge with metal saddles and intonation screws[/*:m:3ryi97um]
• The curved DeArmond bridge with metal saddles and intonation screws[/*:m:3ryi97um]

Interesting inquiry. This quote from Fred's DS page seems to contain the answer:

"DS-2 has a wider pole spacing of .680 (17.25mm) for Guild and DeArmond reissue bridge position pickups. This model will fit most other short scale four string basses as well."

Also, it has been my understanding that the straight harp bridges were most commonly (if not always) fitted with black plastic saddles. My '66 was and I remember reading the same about other straight harp bridges

 

[fronobulax]

Fred is saying the the string spacing for the DeArmond and the reissue are the same, or close enough, but alas, he is silent on whether they could use the same mounting holes.

Hans and I have discussed the saddles. My recollection of the discussion is that the straight bridge came with plastic saddles until some time in 1966 or perhaps 1967. The straight bridge then had wooden saddles until some time in 1967 when it was replaced by the curved bridge with wooden saddles. See this and read captions :wink: BA-663 may have had plastic saddles, in which case I don't have an example a '66 with wooden saddles. There are, however, numerous examples of '67's with straight bridges and wooden saddles, one of which is in my sig. The usual caveats about relating Guild serial numbers to particular times and assuming serial number applies to construction sequence apply.

 

[anxious mo-fo]

Is that a solid body M-85? Hope so....

Yes it is....here is some eye candy for everyone so you can see what happened before this gets fixed.

 

[fronobulax]

Thanks for that picture. It really was worth 1000 words explaining where the split was. I'm not a metals person, but I presume there is no way the two pieces could be rejoined? Welding?

Those saddles are worth something. If you decide to get rid of them, let me know. This guy gets $60 which is more than I am likely to pay but...

 

[anxious mo-fo]

I'm sure a good machinist/welder could work their voodoo on it, and it could remain original. I just don't have a lot of faith in the adjustability of the stock bridge. I like to have my instruments intonate as accurately as possible.

Will I be missing out on some nuances by forgoing the use of the old bridge for the reissue one with the metal saddles? I can imagine that metal saddles wouldn't sound as woody/dark but they would sustain better. And the metal saddles would wear better and last longer. I haven't had much experience with wooden saddles. Maybe flatwounds would help compensate.

Either way, I don't foresee parting with the stock bridge....yet.

 

[fronobulax]

If you search there are a couple of comments about tone differences based on the saddle material. It's not an experiment I have tried.

As for intonation, the stock bridges work just fine for me. I have no reason to believe the end result would be different with the newer bridge, although the process of getting there might be different. My standards may be lower than yours in this case, however :wink:

 

[mgod]

Wow, that's really some break. I've never seen anything like it.

 

[Happy Face]

But then... you may well end up with better intonation on your E string with another bridge. Isn't it the sorta little dirty secret that our beloved harp bridge is a little off on the open E string?

Before you jump on me, I recall Fred mumbling that he's love to see us all put on Badasses in a thread over on the old Pit. Or perhaps i was just imagining that...