tele questions

william · Post by **william** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:01 am

do 5 hole pickguards fit 8 hole teles without drilling?

i prefer the look of them, and to me the fewer screws to unscrew to get the PG off the better. and callaham makes a winner, nitro laquered black bakelite pickguard that would look super on my nat. ash tele.

im also thinking about getting some of their stamped saddles, for more of a vintage fender style without having to convert to true tele vintage, and be up to speed with the newer AMSTD teles.

does anyone else think they sound/feel better than the blocky new ones, or is that just mojo in my ears?

they are kind of pricey, maybe i can find a deal. the pg really isnt that bad at 45 bucks tho.

BobArsecake · Post by **BobArsecake** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:06 am

I find those saddles uncomfortable sometimes, but it's all about personal preference etc. I changed the six saddle modern tele bridge on mine to a three brass saddle vintage one with the ash tray lips a while ago and I absolutely love it, and would really recommend it.

James · Post by **James** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:11 am

I think you can be 98% certain the mojo talk about that style of saddle is directly related to it being how Fender used to do it and zero to do with the sound.

Mages · Post by **Mages** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:31 am

william wrote:im also thinking about getting some of their stamped saddles, for more of a vintage fender style without having to convert to true tele vintage, and be up to speed with the newer AMSTD teles.

in my opinion those saddles have no place on a tele. I think it's completely moronic that they've gone to using them on the american standards.

what do you have against the "true tele vintage" saddles?

$26 at GuitarFetish (^^^ link)

mellowlogic · Post by **mellowlogic** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:43 am

3xbrass is way hotter :p

leaved teh stamped saddles to a strat

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:52 am

i dont even think they should have the new bridge on teles'.
i've always prefered 3 brass saddle bridges they look, feel, and sound better in my opinion.

william · Post by **william** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:07 am

oh, i def. prefer troo vintage 3 saddle loveliness, but the holez dont line up. the modern 6 saddle bridges are way longer than the vintage, and they have 4 screws instead of 3.

bob, how did you manage? id really like to know. refinishing isnt an option, either.

the only thing i could think of as far as a sound difference is that the material may be harder, and the design has less mass, both of which could change the sound.

i agree that strat saddles on a tele aren't ideal, but id rather they be stamped saddles at least. the boxy modern saddles are easily my least favorite thing about the guitar.

there are conversion bridges on the market, but they are way pricey:

► Show Spoiler

if somebody made one for 40 bucks, i believe theyd make a killing.

if anyone knows of any other amstd > vintage conversion plates, please let me know!

James · Post by **James** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:14 am

the_dude wrote:i've always prefered 3 brass saddle bridges they look, feel, and sound better in my opinion.

The looks are obviously opinion, the feel I imagine is neglible but I can believe it. The sound? I still doubt this very very much. I believe the following things about bridges...

- Different materials can make big differences. Put a wooden bridge on an archtop and it will be miles different from a metal one.
- Break angles make big differences. The difference in a wraparound bridge compared to say a jag style setup is massive. There's also plenty of difference between a top loading tele and a string through.

The 3 vs 6 saddle thing? I just don't buy it. The brass part of it might make a small difference over whatever other material is used, but I think that's about the size of it. I'd love to see some proper A/B tests done on it but it seems very unlikely to be done.

The whole thing strikes me as that same sort of attitude that has left the electric guitar incredibly under-developed in the last 40 years. I love me some vintage stuff, but seriously, new balls please.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:25 am

Well its all preference. But its just some new designs are bad like the 6 saddle tele bridge i prefer the 3 saddle, and i tried the 6 saddle next to the 3 saddle and just prefer the vintage. Your right though about the attitude though so many people prefer vintage specs and what not which is holding back so many great designs.

mellowlogic · Post by **mellowlogic** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:27 am

william wrote: i agree that strat saddles on a tele aren't ideal, but id rather they be stamped saddles at least. the boxy modern saddles are easily my least favorite thing about the guitar.

couldn't agree more. I see your point and I'm on board with this.

James · Post by **James** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:33 am

the_dude wrote:Well its all preference. But its just some new designs are bad like the 6 saddle tele bridge i prefer the 3 saddle, and i tried the 6 saddle next to the 3 saddle and just prefer the vintage. Your right though about the attitude though so many people prefer vintage specs and what not which is holding back so many great designs.

Saying 'it's all preference' doesn't justify anything. If it's simply a case of the 3 saddle being more comfortable or just feeling better when you play and as a result you sound better, that's still a playability issue rather than a sound one.

In what way would you describe the sound as difference and how is it better?

william · Post by **william** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:33 am

the_dude wrote:Well its all preference. But its just some new designs are bad like the 6 saddle tele bridge i prefer the 3 saddle, and i tried the 6 saddle next to the 3 saddle and just prefer the vintage. Your right though about the attitude though so many people prefer vintage specs and what not which is holding back so many great designs.

its hard to say that the 6 saddle is "just bad."

for one thing, it intonates properly.

james, id say the combo of the mass of the saddles, and the difference in material could make a difference between the 6 and 3 saddle designs.

i will also say that when someone "wises up" and "improves" guitars, usually what comes out is some shit like:

► Show Spoiler

avert your eyes, if you are a sensitive type.

James · Post by **James** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:41 am

I actually like parker fly guitars. They look very good anyway, I've never played a proper one.

I'm not trying to belittle the 3 saddle brigade, I would just like to hear something concrete about the sound of them that doesn't sound like vintage snobbery. The feel is a whole different matter.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:42 am

James wrote:
the_dude wrote:Well its all preference. But its just some new designs are bad like the 6 saddle tele bridge i prefer the 3 saddle, and i tried the 6 saddle next to the 3 saddle and just prefer the vintage. Your right though about the attitude though so many people prefer vintage specs and what not which is holding back so many great designs.
Saying 'it's all preference' doesn't justify anything. If it's simply a case of the 3 saddle being more comfortable or just feeling better when you play and as a result you sound better, that's still a playability issue rather than a sound one.

In what way would you describe the sound as difference and how is it better?

for me the brass saddles ring better maybe not for you or anyone else, but for me (which is the sound and playability reference).

willam i shouldn't of said it was a bad design because it does intonate the strings perfectlly.
and strangely i like that white tele.

aen · Post by **aen** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:43 am

Well if anybody has any of those "rubbish" six saddle MIM bridges, I've got a 50's and a 60's 3 saddle style bridge to swap.

william · Post by **william** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:45 am

haha, to each his own, i guess, regarding modern guitar designs.

James · Post by **James** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:45 am

Oh FFS.

Red guitars sound better than blue ones. I'm not going to justify it in anyway because it's all 'personal preference'.

Put some balls in your argument and explain yourself.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:51 am

Man, I have balls in my argument and I am explaining myself.
I like the Look of the 3 saddle, The sound(brass sounds better to me), and the feel.
and my statements have been personal preferences its like saying you prefer strats over teles and you really dont have much of an arguement but for some reason you like the strat more even if you have no reason to hate the tele.
(i don't think this post made any sense.)

James · Post by **James** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:55 am

As I said in my first post on the topic, the looks thing is a given the feel thing I can buy. I don't recall ever hearing anything specifically about the sound. Many people say they sound better and when pressed will give no details and eventually resort to something like 'well they definitely feel better'.

I'm not trying to break your balls here, I just want someone who is quite definite about prefering the sound of the 3 saddle to give some solid info as to why. You don't have to explain the science behind it, just as accurately as possible describe the tonal differences that you see as being superior.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:03 am

oh. ok. sorry about that.
like even though a 6 saddle will be more in tune than a 3 saddle, the 3 saddle rings more under the brass than the 6 saddle (i think its like steel or alumium or something like that). Plus the pickup is not around the bridge piece like on a 3 saddle.

another alternative is to track one of those 6 saddle bridges in the, i guess casing, of a 3 saddle which will intonate properly and (i believe their brass too) have the sound that a 3 saddle gives off.

tele questions

tele questions

Re: tele questions