F*ck an mastery

Thom · Post by **Thom** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:30 pm

I'm sorry but I just don't see the point of this...reduces the intonation capability even further, 3 strings on one saddle?
It doesn't seem like any sort of improvement to me, though no doubt some people will cream their pants over it.

The patented Mastery saddle system will soon be available for the Telecaster. There will be two options; brass saddles with brass swivels or hard chrome-plated brass saddles with stainless swivels. We hope to have them out in February. Please check our facebook page or http://www.masterybridge.com for updates and further details.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:09 pm

I have no idea how well this works so can't say owt about it but aesthetically it's out of synch with a classic tele's look. Like Terminator Knuckles on a barn door. Maybe on john5 type fnarr fnarr

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:45 pm

I do see an incredibly limited market for this

It's for people who want barrel saddles instead of individual strat-style ones, as few barrels as possible so they won't slip as sometimes inclined on 6-barrel tele bridges, and who haven't heard of the $30 Wilkinson compensated barrel bridges at all.

MO MONEY MO MONEY

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:46 pm

did you find this on offset?

Thom · Post by **Thom** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:50 pm

hotrodperlmutter wrote:did you find this on offset?

Where else?!

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:52 pm

i think we're all in this together, but i just don't understand. how is the mastery bridge a better design than anything available?

i'm not sure how two screws can pull one perpindicular bar in the same direction (for intonation)? threads can't really be torqued like that. what am i missing?

IS THIS SOME SORT OF SCAM?

Thom · Post by **Thom** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:56 pm

That's it, I just don't get it.
I understand the Jag/Jazz bridges and if they weren't so ridiculously expensive I would definitely try one.
But the Tele bridge, I just can't see any improvement or reason to try it.

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:11 pm

Masterybridge.com wrote:The Mastery Bridge's four individual intonation adjustment screws work independently for precise intonation; allowing the string to pass from the saddle to the vibrato sans interference.

what do they work "more independently" than?

THIS?

ARE YOU KIDDING? THAT IS, BY DEFINITION, LESS INDEPENDENT. THEY'RE DEPENDENT.

and on a mustang bridge, what interference does it have that the mastery supposedly alleviates?

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:13 pm

sorry to be so angry, but god dammit help me understand

Post by **Doog** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:17 pm

hotrodperlmutter wrote:
and on a mustang bridge, what interference does it have that the mastery supposedly alleviates?

The intonation screw is in-line with the string, so depending on your action, you can get some interplay between the two; a string just catching the screw and buzzing against it. Thee screws are in-between the strings on the Mastery in order to get past that, I guess.

I personally reckon those Mastery JM bridges are really well designed and don't understand the hate they get for anything other than the price. There's nowt wrong with improving on an old design, authenticity be damned.

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:36 pm

Doog wrote:I personally reckon those Mastery JM bridges are really well designed and don't understand the hate they get for anything other than the price. There's nowt wrong with improving on an old design, authenticity be damned.

This. A lot. Have heard enough people I trust sing their praises to make me interested. If they were a smidge cheaper, I'd try one. And I'm not keen on the Mustang bridge (perversely though, I rather love the standard one).

That all being said, that tele one is stupid and looks all wrong.

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:48 pm

Doog wrote: There's nowt wrong with improving on an old design, authenticity be damned.

+1
IN MY DAY WE HAD TO GO TO A REAL SHOP AND ARGUE WITH SOME HAIRMETAL DUDE ABOUT WHICH ALLPARTS BRIDGE WE WANTED FROM THE WALL BEHIND HIM AS HE SLOWLY AND RELUCTANTLY REACHED FOR EVERY SINGLE NON-FLOYD IN THE SHOP, SOMETIMES WE WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW IF WE HAD THE RIGHT ONE TIL WE GOT HOME, AND THE STRINGS WOULD STILL SLIP OUT OF THE GROOVES ON HIGH BENDS, AND WEEEE LIKED IT!!!

But the only bridge I've tried on my Jaguar that I haven't enjoyed in the slightest was the stock one. Epiphone tune-o-matic and Mustang bridge both worked far better without ANY other mods made to the instrument, just drop-in and boom. The mastery bridge back then would've been a godsend.

Also I think Mastery have gotten a bit carried away talking about "intonation" all the time, as it's tension/slippage issues that I reckon the Mastery bridge really tackles. The ultimate in adjustability is probably still the stock Jazzmaster/Jaguar bridge, as the saddles are adjustable for both height and individual string intonation. But it sucks, so what can you do.

Thom · Post by **Thom** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:57 pm

Agreed, the jag/jazz bridge is a really good design imo and solves some of the common complaints about the stock bridge.
But tension/slippage issues with a stock Tele bridge? Really?

othomas2 · Post by **othomas2** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:09 pm

The guitars were designed for the surfy jazzers with really heavy gauge strings... don't think the jag style bridge would have faulted them really.

The whole lack of sustain was part and parcel with it... they didn't need to play heavy and hold a bend.

The tele mastery bridge = $$$$$

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:58 pm

Pfffft. Fuck y'all. I'm waiting for the Mastery Rose floating tremolo system

Sloan · Post by **Sloan** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:30 am

hotrodperlmutter wrote:

This makes more sense, you can see that where the adjustment screw passes through swivels or something, allowing the saddle to be one huge piece instead of a bunch of smaller pieces. it also seems the string is pretty free in the 'slots' so it will not get choked as easily. Lots of people say more mass increases sustain/tone/mojo/cures the shits or whatever and this is a way to increase mass.

Basically it's more like an acoustic saddle that's one piece.

jcyphe · Post by **jcyphe** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:30 am

I dislike both the jaguar bridge and the mustang bridge so I'd be interested in trying the mastery although I'm pretty sure I've laughed at it because the name is kind of silly.

ultratwin · Post by **ultratwin** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:31 am

I really can only see this thing making sense for a Tele with B5, where the sharp brake angle invariably requires the tailpiece-side of the bridge to have contact with the strings prior to the saddles.

Hard for me to express any clearer, the drag-over is kinda visible here:

Post by **Mike** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:29 am

You're all missing the point. The Mastery is uggs.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:43 pm

To improve on the stock Jag/Jazzmaster bridge it would need to sit on legs that screw into the cups in the body, like a tunomatic, eliminating movement, and have proper string slots on the saddles. That's it. Height adjustable Mustang saddles are available for that particular problem (and while expensive, not quite as expensive as the Masturby bridge). Sealing the leg posts in wax eliminates forward/backward movement too, which takes care of the other problem. What the jag-Jazzy do not need is some bizarre Sketchup-designed spunkjizz 70s sci fi throwback satin metal replacement that makes minor changes while looking utterly gash for a small fortune. Bugger that.

It really does come down to the looks. I can understand wanting to make something visually distinctive, but the Masturby bridge is quite particularly ugly. It's like they want people to exclaim "OH WOW WHAT IS THAT STINKY PIECE OF SHIT IN PLACE OF THE BRIDGE ON YOUR GUITAR?" when they catch a whiff of it.