Tell me about bridge radius mismatch

[soul1]

I ask because I'm curious as to how big of a deal it is for an offset bridge to have a radius mismatch with the neck. It comes up a lot in discussions, but I also see Fender using mismatched bridges on certain guitars without any issues. For example, my JMJM and CP JMs with tuneomatic bridges have no issues at all, and play really well after a good setup. Not to mention countless pros who have put TOM bridges on offsets with vintage radius (Cobain, SY, etc.)

So I'm curious if this is just a matter of taste, or if the radius mismatch actually causes other issues?

[timtam]

Depends on how low you want your action. Will be hard to get it really low with a mismatch (bridge flatter than board). But for some people a small mismatch is no big deal.

[Embenny]

It causes a higher minimum action on the highest and lowest strings of the guitar than you could otherwise achieve.

If you like medium action or higher, this is unlikely to bother you. If you like super low action, that's when it can be noticeable (IMO), since you'll never get the high and low E as low as the D and G, for example.

Plenty of people "manage" just fine with a mismatch.

[soul1]

Depends on how low you want your action. Will be hard to get it really low with a mismatch (bridge flatter than board). But for some people a small mismatch is no big deal.

It causes a higher minimum action on the highest and lowest strings of the guitar than you could otherwise achieve.

If you like medium action or higher, this is unlikely to bother you. If you like super low action, that's when it can be noticeable (IMO), since you'll never get the high and low E as low as the D and G, for example.

Plenty of people "manage" just fine with a mismatch.

Would you say the opposite would be true if bridge/neck mismatch was reversed and the bridge had a vintage radius and the neck was a flatter radius, the low and high e strings would possibly be too low?

[Embenny]

Depends on how low you want your action. Will be hard to get it really low with a mismatch (bridge flatter than board). But for some people a small mismatch is no big deal.

It causes a higher minimum action on the highest and lowest strings of the guitar than you could otherwise achieve.

If you like medium action or higher, this is unlikely to bother you. If you like super low action, that's when it can be noticeable (IMO), since you'll never get the high and low E as low as the D and G, for example.

Plenty of people "manage" just fine with a mismatch.

Would you say the opposite would be true if bridge/neck mismatch was reversed and the bridge had a vintage radius and the neck was a flatter radius, the low and high e strings would possibly be too low?

That's exactly correct. A tighter bridge radius will bring the low and high e the closest, so when you set those for a given action, the d and g will be higher.

[soul1]

Depends on how low you want your action. Will be hard to get it really low with a mismatch (bridge flatter than board). But for some people a small mismatch is no big deal.

It causes a higher minimum action on the highest and lowest strings of the guitar than you could otherwise achieve.

If you like medium action or higher, this is unlikely to bother you. If you like super low action, that's when it can be noticeable (IMO), since you'll never get the high and low E as low as the D and G, for example.

Plenty of people "manage" just fine with a mismatch.

Would you say the opposite would be true if bridge/neck mismatch was reversed and the bridge had a vintage radius and the neck was a flatter radius, the low and high e strings would possibly be too low?

That's exactly correct. A tighter bridge radius will bring the low and high e the closest, so when you set those for a given action, the d and g will be higher.

I wonder if an easy/crude way to remedy this would be to shim both the E saddles and the A and B strings saddles as well, would that sort of mimic a flatter radius where the D and G strings wouldn't be so high.

[Embenny]

I wonder if an easy/crude way to remedy this would be to shim both the E saddles and the A and B strings saddles as well, would that sort of mimic a flatter radius where the D and G strings wouldn't be so high.

Shimming is exactly what some people do, and can absolutely adjust the radius to match, if you want to make the mismatched bridge fit the neck radius.

[timtam]

To my mind filing the saddle grooves (AOM/TOM/Mustang) or the underside of the saddles (Mustang) on those that need lowering to match the radius is the easier and more elegant way to address a radius mismatch. Setting the overall bridge height / action is then done mostly with the bridge height screws.

[JVG]

I agree with those who say it's not a big deal unless you're wanting a super low action. I actually prefer a flatter radius bridge with a 7.25 radius neck because I can set the middle strings lowish, and not have the high E fret out so easily on bends.

Unless the radius are really massively mismatched, it's really not much of an issue. Some people get way too hung up on it!

Cheers
J.

[Unicorn Warrior]

I think the bigger issue for most of us offset users is the functionality of the trem. The TOMs aren't ideal for that. Not saying they can't work, but I think the consensus is that traditional or boutique aftermarket bridges operate with fewer errors with trem use.

The radius mismatch is an issue, but really not the deal breaker for me when it comes to TOMs.

[TeenageShutdown!]

I bought a used JM awhile back that had a 7.25” Mustang bridge on it. All my other guitars are 9.5” radius & that’s what I am used to & have always played. Naturally the D & G strings sat higher than what I was used to & felt akward fretting barre chords. I ended filing the barrel slots in combination with an under string radius gauge to get a 9.5” radius. Problem solved.

[Peckhammer]

by timtam » Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:26 pm

To my mind filing the saddle grooves (AOM/TOM/Mustang) or the underside of the saddles (Mustang) on those that need lowering to match the radius is the easier and more elegant way to address a radius mismatch. Setting the overall bridge height / action is then done mostly with the bridge height screws.

This is exactly correct. It is common for a TOM to not match what it's stated radius is, and you adjust the radius with files. a 12" radius TOM can be pretty easily changed to 9.5." Nut files used in the slots. Schroeder bridges come with a 11" radius so that you can easily change them to a 10" or 12" radius. I've never changed one to 7.25" but I am certain it can be done.

[effmylife]

All depends how much the player bends. My rule of thumb is this: If the player doesn't plan on bending, I match bridge radius to neck, if the player bends on the high e then it's radiused flatter so the high e string notes don't choke out when bent a whole step. That is all.