1966 Fender Jaguar

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:25 pm

Stop prodding around with it Stewart and just play the damn thing.

stewart · Post by **stewart** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:41 pm

i've been playing it!!

it's just taken me a bit of tinkering to get it set up properly. i had to tape the bridge posts because the damn thing just pivoted back and forth, which didn't affect the tuning as such but the intonation went scatty on both positions. i know it's 'supposed' to move with the trem, and i'm sure that shit was fine in the days when peoples' hearing was in black & white or whatever... but i'd rather it was a bit more solid. truss rod needed tightening too...

i'm just laying everything out here for future generations of noobs, fran!

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:43 pm

You taped the bridge posts?

Dead to me...

stewart · Post by **stewart** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:08 pm

piss off! it wouldn't intonate otherwise. last resort, trust me.

Mages · Post by **Mages** » Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 am

stewart wrote:just looked at one of the '78 tuners i stuck on the jag- they're the same as above.

crazy.

those are the fender made ones. these came from your musicmaster? I think I have a theory now about what the fuck is up with these tuners. I have a '77 musicmaster neck with the same tuners. I also have a '78 mustang with definitely schaller tuners. I now think that the schaller tuners were used for only the mustang and "above". the rest of the student models continued to use the fender tuners.

66blonde · Post by **66blonde** » Sat Sep 11, 2010 12:53 pm

sp3k wrote:WOW! i don't really like car, but that one aged to a great color!

I HEARTILY AGREE!

stewart · Post by **stewart** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:00 pm

stuck a mute on...

then took it off again. the bridge was a bit higher with it fitted, because of the raised mounting screws. that meant the action was higher than i find comfortable. i think for it to work and be set up the way i want it, i'd have to shim the neck (it currently doesn't have one). i'll no doubt have a bash at some point, but for now i'm really happy with how it's playing so can live without 100% aesthetic completeness.

thanks to sven for being the mute postage middle man, he's a good lad!

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:06 pm

Found a similar thing with mine (although I always use a shim on Jags and JMs) - made the bridge feel all teetery, and the bloody thing would still activate at random when I didn't want it to.

stewart · Post by **stewart** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:19 pm

*i think* this is the only vintage fender i've had without a shim. i'm going to leave it for a while, it's taken a wee bit of buggering about to get it playing nicely, and i'm tired of pissing around with it. i like the way it looks with the mute, but i'll openly admit that i'd never use it. it seemed to raise the pitch of the notes too when engaged, unless my ears deceived me.

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:36 pm

stewart wrote: it seemed to raise the pitch of the notes too when engaged, unless my ears deceived me.

They did not sir; that's a persistent drag with the mute. It happened on Gretsches with pre-Fender mutes on them too, it's because it's further forward than where a palm-mute would be.

stewart · Post by **stewart** » Sun Sep 12, 2010 11:03 pm

yeah, it seems ill thought out.

stewart · Post by **stewart** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:24 pm

klusons!

the F tuners just weren't holding up as well as i'd like them to- i don't mind tuning a couple of times through a set, but any more than that gets annoying. i'll see how i get on with these.