ShortScale.org

othomas2 wrote:I was surprised how much better (subjective) a modified tunomatic sounded after gauging my ear to the Jaguar nuances...

I reckon the mastery would be just the same albeit the price tag .... and the lesser degree of intonation.

Swings and round-a-bouts...

I'm glad they built it, would love to try one at some point but I'm not going to pay that on an instrument nurtured around generalised subpar (but fantastic) components. Haaa....

I'm drunk.... tried to see how many wanky words I could fit in there... & still trying to make sense.

Honestly, I wouldn't have tried this but for realizing that the cheap ABR-style Tune-O-Matic bridge on the Cobain Mustang had a (subjectively) better and versatile sound for the kind of music I was playing than the Mustang bridge. However, the ABR sucks balls with whammy, so I started looking for bridges for both guitars to try to make them perfect for me. The Wilkinson roller bridge on the Cobain and now the Mastery on the '73 RI, they both work great and I'm really happy now. I'm really not sure which one I prefer. The Tune-O-Matic gets that tight bridge spacing that makes it feel more Gibson-y but the height adjustment is limited, whereas Mastery keeps it more Fender-y and is more adjustable, but they both improve sound and sustain enough for me that my Strat looks less and less appealing every day.

Fran wrote:Aye, but people have been resolving the bridge issues for decades. Some dude designs a bridge forty years later, Thurston Moore uses one and half of OSG then its suddenly the bollocks at £120 a pop. I dont think so.
The mastery bridge epitomizes everything opposite to the reason offset guitars became popular again during the '80's. These guitars were affordable vintage Fenders that kids could rock out on, warts and all.

Resolving, yes, but I don't think anyone truly solved the problem. I love the Mustang as it is, but there's a difference between there being no problem at all with the design, and there being a quirk that you get used to, and I feel like with the Mustang, I definitely got used to the quirks more than I think it's perfect. After I did the electrical tape mod on my Mustang bridge, I honestly hated how "soft" it felt (hard to describe), and I just felt like I ruined the tuning stability even more.

Even with the Mastery bridge, I know that the tailpiece does not reliably return to the same spot after an upbend as it does a downbend, and I acknowledge as much. However, there's an easy fix for that. Always do a slight downbend manually at the end of an upbend instead of letting it return to rest by itself, but really, I've learned to do that on most trems (since I don't use locking trems at this point) so I'm fine with that. Having the Mastery bridge means that as long as I do this correctly, it's perfectly in tune every time. I think that's worth the price of good pickups for me.

As for the whole SY and OSG thing, people here and there largely like the same guitars. We probably agree about more things than we disagree about, it's just that the disagreements seem bigger when you have a few things you do agree with. Maybe the big philosophical difference (at least as I've seen) is SS likes dealing with problems, and OSG likes paying to fix it, and I find both approaches to be suitable for the right person. Regardless, how many people here are saying I tried the Mastery bridge and it sucked? It's usually more a case of disagreeing with it to the point of not even wanting to try it out, which is fine, but I don't think the cost argument is honestly a very good one, considering it's on par with what American made aftermarket upgrades generally cost.

honeyiscool wrote: I don't think the cost argument is honestly a very good one, considering it's on par with what American made aftermarket upgrades generally cost.

And I think that's bullshit. It's over priced. Period.

That bridge, probably cost $25, at most to make. And to charge someone over 5 times that amount is almost a scam. If they truly are in the business of making guitar bridges, then they've got to be able to make those things cheap. If it's some guy making these things in his free time, I get the cost but still don't get the appeal. Maybe I'm just frustrated because I know so little about the company. But one thing you can never convince me of, is that the difference in tone and playability is worth $180. People have been using the bridge/trem for 50 years without needing a $180 replacement.

I can't remember a single problem with the Mustang bridge on the Mustang I had. Took the Mustang bridge off my Jazzmaster, though and play with the stock bridge since two months. Nothing moves because it's all old and rusty. Works for me at the moment.

honeyiscool wrote:Resolving, yes, but I don't think anyone truly solved the problem.

Maybe i am from a different era, age group, mindset.. whatever to you.
You seem to feel the need to upgrade everything and have the money to do so. I am from a different school, we bought guitars and made them work to our benefit. Upgrades cost money, we gigged instruments to their strength. This was how it was with offset guitars but they have since been hijacked and become the trendy alternative blues lawyer guitar.
Its tragic and i hate it.

Fran wrote:

honeyiscool wrote:Resolving, yes, but I don't think anyone truly solved the problem.

Maybe i am from a different era, age group, mindset.. whatever to you.
You seem to feel the need to upgrade everything and have the money to do so. I am from a different school, we bought guitars and made them work to our benefit. Upgrades cost money, we gigged instruments to their strength...

Ditto; it's the nuances that make the guitar what it is.

Fran wrote:This was how it was with offset guitars but they have since been hijacked and become the trendy alternative blues lawyer guitar.
Its tragic and i hate it.

I know it's crazy, but all kind of strats are becoming that super cheap and really nice guitar now. I just got the one of the best guitars I've ever played for 3 bills. And it's crazy because it's vintage spec and right now a vintage spec jazzy is going to run you what, 9?

seriously, I think it's time to start buying strats again.

I personally wouldn't spend that kind of money on a bridge when i get by happily with a taped mustang bridge.

However i completely understand why others would; i've got the Stay-Trem trem upgrade on all 3 of my Jags because quite honestly, it works better than all the other makeshift solutions. Sure i could put a little kink in the short part of the arm so it stays put... but then you end up with the metal squeaking and so on.

So why shouldn't someone buy a bridge for the same reason? It's not like you're being forced to buy one. About the price, i don't think people are taking into account the other costs. Sure it may cost them $25 to make the bridge (same thing could be said about most hand made pedals) but then you have to factor in all the other expenses whatever they may be, web hosting, materials, labour, storage, packaging, etc...

The way i see these types of things (klon included) is, "Do you want it? Can you afford it?". The only time it should be a problem is when you want but can't afford... then you have an issue

Thats my 2p anyway.

A lot of the nay-saying is coming from people who haven't and won't try it either on ideological or cost grounds. If all those people are happy with whatever they're currently using bridge-wise then fine - they'll never know what they're missing. Don't see why they should want to talk someone out of buying a Mastery who obviously is willing to shell out for one.

And, as with magical pedals like Klons, there's not a lot of risk involved in trying out a Mastery, as it can be resold for about 90% of its new cost if you decide it's not for you.

Fran wrote:Maybe i am from a different era, age group, mindset.. whatever to you.
You seem to feel the need to upgrade everything and have the money to do so. I am from a different school, we bought guitars and made them work to our benefit. Upgrades cost money, we gigged instruments to their strength. This was how it was with offset guitars but they have since been hijacked and become the trendy alternative blues lawyer guitar.
Its tragic and i hate it.

I think it's a mindset thing. I read an interview with Eddie Van Halen and the dude was a tinkerer, even more of one than me, and that at a time and age when parts weren't easy to find. Some people have always been more interested in adapting to gear, others have always been more interested in adapting gear to them.

Maybe today, the aftermarket parts industry is so alive and well that it's easier to become a modder, but I mean it's not like I make mods for the sake of doing so. I'm not putting bindings and blocks on every guitar because that's the only way I can view a guitar. I like to take what I like from various guitars I've enjoyed, and I like to have them all in guitars that I love because why should I settle? Like my Mustang has a TBX tone control since I thought it'd be nice to get a Jaguar-like strangle tone from a tone pot and a series switch since I played a Tele that had it and liked it. These things solved specific problems I have with standard Mustang wiring, yet my Mustang doesn't look hot rodded from far away, and it more or less feels like a stock Mustang anyway.

Whenever I mod, it's to solve a deficiency. The Mastery bridge solves a specific problem, IMO. I normally am happy with just putting GraphTech saddles on all my other guitars, but the Mustang is a special case, and honestly, yeah, money isn't really an issue for me. Stock Mustangs are already some of my favorite guitars ever, and I don't think anything I do to them takes away from what makes them special.

In the end, I feel like offsets undeservedly got their cheap basher reputation anyway. Sure, Mustang was meant to be a cheap student guitar, but Jazz and Jag were meant to be high-end, top-shelf guitars that people strung with heavy flats and played jazz on, and the Stang takes a lot from their parents. It's a little sad seeing their prices skyrocket, but really, they should never have been cheap bashers to begin with. They were always kickass guitars.

if i had some spare money lying about i wouldn't mind trying a mastery bridge, but it's not high on my list of priorites. maybe they do only cost $25 to make, but that's not how business works. the shoes on your feet probably cost $1 to make but you'll pay $50 for them. if the guy's making a living from a small business in such a niche market, good on him.

i do agree with fran's point of view too, that offsets have simply become the new vintage strats for alternative lawyer types, but that's a separate issue.

stewart wrote:if i had some spare money lying about i wouldn't mind trying a mastery bridge, but it's not high on my list of priorites.

This. And disagree strongly with everyone trying to stop the bridge rocking - that's part of the beauty of it.

Timmy, what's beautiful about your intonation changing partway through a gig because you were a little heavy-handed with the tremolo arm and bridge didn't return to the same position? Come on now. Really.

I'm all for improving on designs; nothing is ever perfect and to think Leo et al. got it right the first time is unfathomably dumb. Okay, so maybe it's not ideal at that price point, but I appreciate that people are able to move forwards to solve problems that some people obviously have.

The whole "ohhh, offsets were the cool, affordable underdog, now they're mainstream" is siiiiiiilly, weren't Jazzmasters and Jaguars the fancy option originally? It's just a superimposed cyclical phenomenon, just like music. Let's all buy cheap-as-chips SuperStrats and get perms.

What are these "gigs" of which you speak?

I don't mean to sound like I'm implying you can't set a guitar up or aren't a real man or anything* but after a bit of work my Jazzmaster, my Jag, and even to a great extent my Mustang return to pitch with no intonation worries no matter what I throw at them.


* this is exactly what I'm implying.

I don't doubt you, but obviously a lot of people have had less luck with it- there's far too many variables involving playing style, tunings, string type and gauge, climate and so on to suggest one thing will work for every scenario.

Of course, this could be applied to the Mastery bridge, but the manufacturers have certainly considered more of these variables than Fender did with the OG bridge... albeit they did have 40 years' "R&D" on their side.

I get on fine with my Warmoth Stang-Bridge-But-It's-Got-Height-Adjustable-Saddles-An'-That, but it still needed some modifications to work with own Jazzmaster; the Mastery seems to have addressed the lot.

And I AM a man- my footy pyjamas are BLUE, not PINK.

The irony here is the original design does work fine if it is used and set up correctly. You can include the Strat trem here as well since it got mentioned. The only reason these aftermarket upgrades came about was because people want the hardware to perform beyond its capability, which is fair enough. Enter the new upgraded designs like the Classic Players.
In this case honeyiscool upgraded a Mustang, which to my knowledge Fender have not yet improved on its original design. Fair enough.

Lets get this straight, i suppose i come across as some purist dinosaur in this thread that is anti-progression but im not, i have modified and tinkered with nearly every guitar i have owned. My issue here is the cost to improvement ratio, i can understand why something like a Kahler or Floyd Rose is costly but not this. I know all about business but i still cannot see how something so basic with the marginal? improvement this achieves can cost so much money.

As for the Tele Mastery, can someone tell me why it even exists?

honeyiscool wrote:I read an interview with Eddie Van Halen and the dude was a tinkerer, even more of one than me,

I dunno, you seem to have opted for the costly quick fix here. How did you tinker with the original design? What did you try to make it work for you?
I'm not being a dick either, i am genuinely curious.

Fran wrote:As for the Tele Mastery, can someone tell me why it even exists?

It looks like the saddles are the same as on the offset bridge, so it makes sense to extend their potential customer base without designing and building a 100% new product.. but yeah, it seems like the features aren't really as suited to the Tele as much as a tremolo-based guitar.

I just don't understand what problem they are trying to 'fix' with the Tele mastery.

Thom wrote:I just don't understand what problem they are trying to 'fix' with the Tele mastery.

A lack of Tele-playing customers. Plain and simple.

Doog wrote:

Fran wrote:As for the Tele Mastery, can someone tell me why it even exists?

It looks like the saddles are the same as on the offset bridge, so it makes sense to extend their potential customer base without designing and building a 100% new product.. but yeah, it seems like the features aren't really as suited to the Tele as much as a tremolo-based guitar.

Isn't it designed for Teles with Bigsbys? If not, then I will gladly concede it's a pointless extravagance when a brass-saddle bridge is already available from Fender. I have an idea that I read about it when it came out and it said it was aimed at Bigsby users, which would make sense.