Mastery Bridges

[Meme Library]

Hey guys! What experience do you have with Mastery Bridges? What are the benefits to using them as opposed to the stock bridges?

[Fuzzbuzz]

There isn’t one. People use them because they can’t figure out how to properly setup their guitars with the stock bridges...... geez. That ought to draw some fire.

[adamrobertt]

There isn’t one. People use them because they can’t figure out how to properly setup their guitars with the stock bridges...... geez. That ought to draw some fire.

You're not entirely wrong. They're overkill for most people IMO and they can cause problems that are just as annoying as the stock bridge's issues. The best bridge for offsets is a good quality Mustang bridge or the Staytrem bridge.

[Unicorn Warrior]

Here we go again

[adamrobertt]

Here we go again

The real answer is that the best bridge is the one that works for you. If you're turned off by the Mastery or have doubts, get something else. If you love the Mastery, then cool.

[andy_tchp]

There's a 100+ page thread in the Tech/Setup section discussing this ad nauseum.

[Larry Mal]

Only poor people use stock bridges.

[Larry Mal]

Like, if you shit in the same outhouse you were born in, the stock bridge is for you.

[andy_tchp]

I like the stock bridge.

[Larry Mal]

Another good use for the stock bridge would be prying the black and rotten teeth out of your mouth that you've destroyed with methamphetamine use.

[Fuzzbuzz]

Another good use for the stock bridge would be prying the black and rotten teeth out of your mouth that you've destroyed with methamphetamine use.

[Deed_Poll]

My 2p...

We can broadly split offset bridge designs (and to an extent all bridges with a separate vibrato tailpiece) into two camps -

1) High friction, rocking bridges

2) low friction, fixed bridges (including roller bridges)

Gibson's Maestro vibrola design never really worked properly because it was always effectively retrofitted at the factory onto guitars with either a high friction fixed bridge (the Tune-o-matic) or onto the "lightning bolt" style zinc wraparound bridge (a fixed low friction bridge, but which depended on string tension to hold it against the studs).

They tried to turn the TOM first into a high friction rocking bridge with the earliest '67 Flying V reissues by reshaping the underside of the bridge to allow it to rock, but it did so only within the tolerance of the bridge post threads - obviously a terrible design. But I've got them to work well for small amounts of wobble by very precisely filing much deeper string notches into the saddles, and I actually love many things about the Maestro including the quality of the sound and the ergonomics of the handle assembly. Though the range is poor and if you push it slightly too far either way, you get string pinching (that high pitched pinging noise) and it can fall out of tune.

Later, Gibson decided to go with the fixed, low friction design by replacing the saddles with bone-coloured nylon and using a standard TOM chassis. These didn't work any better and had issues with sustain especially when using the vibrato.

Enough digression into Gibson stuff! Back to the Fender offset vibrato.

So the original design is absolutely and clearly a high friction rocking design, albeit a flawed one, especially when lighter strings became popular with players.

Because of the lack of break angle and the shallowness of the threaded string grooves (designed to be adjustable for string spacing) there wasn't a great deal of force keeping each string in the groove the player had intended, and the strings would wander into adjacent slots. This problem is exacerbated by the grub screw intonation adjustment which presents an inviting gully for your wayward strings to fall into.

Other problems with the design include:

- interference with the intonation adjustment screw heads which could catch on the strings behind the saddle. This is a flaw in the design regardless of what string gauge you use.

- a general over-complexity with many small parts that have a tendency to rattle or even come loose and offer little or no benefit (two height adjustment screws per saddle, for instance).

- a tendency to corrode and rust, moreover for that rust to affect the functionality of the bridge with its complex and delicate workings

Many of these problems were addressed with the development of the Mustang bridge, but for whatever reason Fender did not update the Jazzmaster to incorporate the Mustang bridge design - perhaps because they didn't want to backtrack on the 'premium' features they'd used to market the offsets (string spacing adjustment, individual height adjustment etc). Remember that the Jaguar and Jazzmaster were top-of-the-line at the time, and the Mustang was only one rung off the bottom and still solidly a student-grade instrument.

The Mustang bridge had problems of its own - the string spacing was perhaps too wide, for example.

Anyway, John at StayTrem basically took the exact ethos of the Offset and later Mustang bridge and fixed everything that was a problem. He used the Mustang design for the most part because that was mostly ironed-out, offset the intonation adjustment screws a bit to let the strings pass, sorted out the spacing and generally made it to closer tolerances and with clever nylon collars etc. to eliminate rattle and make it a bit more resilient.

The Stay Trem is, in its DNA, the same thing as the original offset bridge. A high (or medium) friction, rocking bridge design. And, for some, there's the rub when it comes to the Mastery...

Now there's a big caveat here that bears mentioning. First of all, whatever you like or works for you - wonderful. We all have different tastes, use different technique and want different things out of our instruments, and at the end of the day, that's what makes this whole "thing" we do so rewarding and so much fun. But for me, I have convinced myself (rightly or wrongly) that I can feel and maybe hear the difference between a high friction, rocking design and a low friction, fixed design. And I much prefer the former.

My feeling is (and I might be crazy) is that you keep more of the power in the string and more energy potential behind the bridge when using the vibrato if the string is fixed at the saddle (high friction) and free to rock back and forth on the posts - instead of a miniscule section of the string sliding or rolling over the break angle of the saddle, maintaining a fixed speaking-length of the string. I just find the sound way more rubbery and wobbly, I don't know how to describe it, but it's what made me fall in love with Jazzmasters in the first place.

The Mastery bridges I've played have performed very well indeed, but to me the sound and feel is more like a Gretsch with a Bigsby. It feels like a roller bridge, not that there's anything in the world that's wrong with that. It's just not what I, personally, look for in a Jazzmaster. Hell I'm no purist - I can do completely without the rhythm circuit, the vibrato lock etc. It's just that one thing that I know I don't want to mess with!

A final reprise on the Maestro, it feels and sounds very much like a JM to me, it has that same quality to it albeit a bit more highly strung and with less range (I do quite admire the simplicity of the Maestro design though and I've been busy designing a vibrato of my own that uses a carbon steel tape spring inside a body cavity that should look and function a bit more like a JM and give a better range and break angle than the Maestro).

[thomas2508]

That was very well thought out and eloquently put deed_poll. Very insightful! Definitely interested to see your vibrato design.

[blimpage]

+1 to that! That is the clearest, most useful description I've heard of the differences between those bridges, and of vibrato bridges in general. Bravo and thank you!

[Trout]

Another good use for the stock bridge would be prying the black and rotten teeth out of your mouth that you've destroyed with methamphetamine use.

Laugh of the day, thx Larry