software

Ok there has been a small argument with a friend of mine over this.

What bridge type gives the best sustain?

a) Tunomatic w/ stoptail (ie - Les Paul)

b) String through body

My argument was that the LP has more wood and sustains better because of this.
His argument was that the string resonated inside the body hence giving more sustain.
My counter-argument was that at the bridge saddle the string is set in a way which means that the piece of string in the body is not actually resonating.

Please settle this debacle.
I dont even care if I'm wrong. I just want to know.

What kind of String thru??? Also Tune O Matic style or tele/ strat style?

The ToM may work better on thick laminated tops, and carved top guitars, because the mounting posts are set deep into the back wood, and not just screwed mainly to the top wood.

I voted string through, on the asumption that this was the strat/tele hard tail system. I think these work best on most guitars, and by using long screws you can still go deep into the back wood on a laminated top. I have used the strat/tele string through on both a one peice body and a laminated top with a 6mm thick maple top over a 38mm mahogony back. Sustain on both are great. I think the strings being anchored right into the wood is a good idea.

We also have the Jackson/Schecter system of using a tune o matic bridge but passing the string though the body in lue of the stop tail peice.

What about tune-o-matic string through?

That's an impossible question to answer because a string through bridge is usually going to be on a guitar where there are a multitude of other differences. You can't really compare a string through Tele with a Les Paul because the two guitars are so differant. I can tell you this: comparing a wrap around bridge tailpiece with a Tune-o-matic/stop tailpiece, I much, much prefer the tone and sustain of the Tune-o-matic/stop tailpiece.


Originally Posted by LewguitarThat's an impossible question to answer because a string through bridge is usually going to be on a guitar where there are a multitude of other differences. You can't really compare a string through Tele with a Les Paul because the two guitars are so differant. I can tell you this: comparing a wrap around bridge tailpiece with a Tune-o-matic/stop tailpiece, I much, much prefer the tone and sustain of the Tune-o-matic/stop tailpiece.

Lew, I'm sure you've had experience with the late 50's early 60's Tele bridges that were drilled in the back wall of the bridge to be the quot;top loadingquot; bridges. I've only played a few, but I didn't notice any difference in sustain or tone between either one.


Originally Posted by The Golden BoyLew, I'm sure you've had experience with the late 50's early 60's Tele bridges that were drilled in the back wall of the bridge to be the quot;top loadingquot; bridges. I've only played a few, but I didn't notice any difference in sustain or tone between either one.

I do! The string through body version results in a steeper string angle behind the bridge saddles and that presses the strings down more firmly against the saddles. I prefer the tone of the string through bodyTele bridge. Better/deeper tone and better sustain, IMO. Lew

The comment my friend made was 'not any of them with a trem system. Just a string thru.
I dont know what that meant...

i always thought the string thru was responsible for super-sustain. I see some of the tele Gamp;Ls don't have it! But that maketh the tele! Overall id say ToM is more sustain. My Ibanez LesPaul has one, yet the body is plywood, and neck is bolt on...still sustains for ages!

TonePros' AVRII Bridge and Locking TailPiece is the most resonant contraption on the planet with my Les Paul.

im winning bruz!!!

-
-
- Just wanna hear your final thoughts before the poll closes...