Does the stock Jazzmaster/Jaguar bridge work for you?

[DesmondWafers]

I would check out the "how to pronounce Jaguar" thread if you want something several magnitudes worse.

[aliendawg]

It works for sure! Increase the break angle, put on some heavy gauge strings and you're ready to go...

it could've been better of course. But I think the fact you can make fine adjustments to the strings placement it's brilliant and very useful. Also, people always talking about how the Jag's brisge sucks discouraged me to get one. but then I found out that it's perfectly possible to use the stock bridge with the right adjustment

[daysleeperjeff]

How about this option?
The original design is fine as long as you know how it works but Staytrem and Mastery are way better bridges

Haha! Perfect.

[daysleeperjeff]

My newly purchased American Original JM is the first Jazzmaster I’ve owned where I swapped the bridge for a Staytrem and noticed a bigger tonal change. The guitar lost some of it’s bright end which I liked. I may go back to the original.

[spacecadet]

Stock bridges have a lot of variation. I've owned 5 Jazzmasters. Their bridges have ranged from 100% fine to utter garbage in need of replacement, and several levels in between.

The one that needed replacing got a Staytrem instead. It's not "better", it just works properly whereas the original bridge didn't. It has no noticeable advantage over my other stock bridges that all work fine now, even if I needed to do a little work on a couple of them.

I'd have no problem buying a stock bridge if I knew it wasn't going to buzz from 8 different places. But there's a better chance of getting that from one of the aftermarket bridges if you're not able to confirm a stock bridge is good before buying.

[Beyer160]

The goalposts keep shifting.

Not in the slightest, your half-baked attacks notwithstanding. The purpose of the poll was clear from the very beginning, it's kind of sad how you've taken this so personally and dedicated yourself to muddying the waters. Unless you have a financial or intellectual interest in one of the leading offset bridge alternatives yourself anyway, in which case it would make sense. Otherwise... just kind of sad.

This is like some sort of fox news offset poll. You imply that it's impossible for someone to understand how the bridge works AND think that it should be replaced.

That's some serious Trumpian logic. The language of the poll in no way precludes a negative response- it's entirely possible to respond "yeah I know all about break angles and loctite, but it's worth $200 to me not to have to fuck with it."

I have explained earlier why I chose the language for the first response, but for the slow kids in the class, I'll do it again.

A lot of people don't like the stock bridge because they don't understand how to use it. For the purposes of this poll I don't care what these people think, any more than I'd care what someone who can't drive thinks of the handling characteristics of a Testarossa. I was curious to know what the great brain trust of OSG thinks of the traditional bridge design, and what conclusion those who understand the merits and drawbacks of the different options have come to. The assumption I have made is that OSG members are, on average, more familiar with the stock bridge than the general population.


I think the poll YOU want is, "Does the stock offset bridge suck, Y/N." This would be of less interest to me, because it's the equivalent of asking the general population what they think of Ferraris. You may get a sense of how popular something is in popular cuture, but not how experienced drivers rate them vs other automobiles. And, I think we already know the general population's opinion of the stock offset bridge anyway.

It's a bad bridge and is directly responsible for the instrument's relative lack of popularity in years past. There's no getting around that.

I have to disagree with you on both points. First, the stock bridge works perfectly fine as long as you understand how it works, and how to modify it if you want to use it in a way it wasn't designed to be used. As to the second point, the "thin, plinky" pickups and legendary lack of sustain are often cited as reasons people don't dig offsets, but I agree that a lot of folks don't like the bridge either. But, this dislike often has less to do with the quality of the bridge itself, and more to do with the ignorance of those trying to use it.

The big strike against the bridge is that it's unfamiliar to people, and a depressingly high percentage of guitar players lack either the basic mechanical aptitude to figure it out, or the basic problem solving skills to Google it. Now, the Staytrem or Mastery are certainly well made pieces of kit, and I can understand if a player like Nils Cline doesn't want to have to screw with the bridge while he's travelling and gigging 300+ nights a year. Would it have been nice if Leo invented the Mastery in 1959? Sure, but that doesn't mean the bridge he gave us is unusable.

Though I am told the issue has now been resolved, all three of the new Fender AmPro Jazzmasters I tried had high E strings practically hanging over the edge of the fretboard bue to the Staytrem clone bridge being mis-spaced. On the stock bridge, you can adjust the string spacing yourself. On the AmPro, you're stuck with what the factory gave you. I don't see that as an improvement.

How about this option?
The original design is fine as long as you know how it works but Staytrem and Mastery are way better bridges

This really gets to the heart of the matter. I think most of us agree that the Staytrem and Mastery are better designed bridges... but the question is how much better, and how much does it matter? That's why the question is "Does it work for YOU?"

[DesmondWafers]

"The language of the poll in no way precludes a negative response"

I'm not the only one who thought it was biased. Furthermore, almost every post you've made has been condescending towards people who don't like the stock bridge. If you can't see how biased the OP is, I don't know what to tell you. There are two options. The first is that the bridge needs to be replaced. The second is that it doesn't need to be replaced if you understand it. You're saying that you cannot understand the bridge, while simultaneously believing that it should be replaced.

You claim I have this huge emotional investment, yet you're the one using petty insults instead of trying to make an argument. But fuck, I guess I'm just one of the "slow kids" that doesn't understand the mechanical complexity of the stock offset bridge.

[aliendawg]

Whoa. Never thought people would actually rage over guitar bridges

[Larry Mal]

I have to disagree with you on both points. First, the stock bridge works perfectly fine as long as you understand how it works, and how to modify it if you want to use it in a way it wasn't designed to be used. ..the big strike against the bridge is that it's unfamiliar to people, and a depressingly high percentage of guitar players lack either the basic mechanical aptitude to figure it out, or the basic problem solving skills to Google it.

Maybe I can learn how it works someday.

Fuck this thread. I'm out.

[andy_tchp]

If we're just talking raw-dog out of the box it's impossible to say the Fender is better. After you've modded it and done your own tech on it to get it going, yeah it can be quite suitable.

Impossible...

I switched back from Mastery to the stock (AVRI) bridge on all offsets, and have never regretted it.

(I don't consider basic thread-locking compound being applied to the fasteners as 'modding').

[marqueemoon]

Shimming a neck is not "modding" either.

[aliendawg]

true! That's just setting your guitar up

[spacecadet]

I don't really know on what basis people say the Staytrem and Mastery are "way better bridges". The Staytrem is basically a Mustang bridge with a narrower string spacing and width that I actually consider a *disadvantage* over the stock bridge. It just doesn't buzz, that's all. (Actually, mine does a little bit, maybe even moreso than my AV65's stock bridge that I haven't even touched.) That doesn't make it "way better".

The Mastery I have no real experience with but it just looks more like a brake caliper or a set of dental grills than a guitar bridge. Given that there are two other options that work fine and look better, I just can't see why I'd ever want to use a Mastery. It's kind of the Pontiac Aztek of offset bridges IMO - I'm sure it's perfectly functional, but why the heck would anyone willingly drive one when there is literally any other car model on the market?

[mynameisjonas]

It doesn’t work for me, I guess I’m too heavy handed/too wimpy to use .013s. I know exactly how the bridge works, and how it was intended to be used, but I can’t get the strings to stay in the grooves without sacrificing playability/sound in some way. A mustang bridge works just fine though.

That said, I've put TOMs on all the JMs I've owned, and they offer exactly the sound and performance I want out of my guitars. Sue me.

[soggy mittens]

thread/answers are fine and true. Original design is great, not perfect but it works, with a good set up. But as mynameisjonas pointed out, if you have a heavy playing style* then even the tightest of break angles could be problematic. But generally speaking the original design works, with a good set-up.
*a playing style that was unfamiliar at the time these bridges were first designed.