TELECASTER BRIDGE : "Modern" vs Classic

[Magnatoner]

I bought a Fender "Elite" Telecaster last year, and truthfully I am extremely happy with it. It was my first american made guitar purchase (I had a PRS CE 24 for a long time before that, please forgive me) and everything about it just says quality. Tonally, I can't get over how diverse it is paired with my Magnatone M15a. You can go from blues to funk to hard rock to country seamlessly.

BUT.....

I was told recently that a tele isn't a tele if it doesn't have the three brass saddles.

Is it worth it for me to make the switch? What differences should I expect?

I appreciate any informed opinions on the matter!

[marqueemoon]

Nothing wrong with playing a modern approximation of a Tele if you like the way it sounds, feels, and looks.

I wouldn't swap the bridge just for historical reenactment purposes.

[Magnatoner]

Nothing wrong with playing a modern approximation of a Tele if you like the way it sounds, feels, and looks.

I wouldn't swap the bridge just for historical reenactment purposes.

I wasn't thinking for historical purposes, more curious if there is an effect to the sound/dynamics of the guitar
"Approximation" would suggest mine isn't a real tele after all? lol

[DesmondWafers]

The people who would say that your guitar isn't a "real tele" would also probably say that no poly finished guitar will ever sound as good as a "real" nitro tele. Is there a difference? Yeah. Is there a difference when you use different picks/cables/amp settings/setups/microphones? Yup. If you like it as it is, I wouldn't worry about it.

[Ursa Minor]

Yeah - a tele is a tele, imo. I'd be more curious just as an experiment on your individual guitar. A lot of folks try out different bridges, saddles etc as you well know. Only way to find out is to try. You may find you like it just the way it is. Get used to the way it plays and sounds (and sets up - which I imagine is easier with a modern bridge). Then after you're used to the way it sounds, try a new bridge. See what you find. Its a cheap enough endeavor, especially if you're doing the work yourself.

[Embenny]

Just be super careful if you try to swap bridges. There are actually two different sizes of Telecaster bridges. The vintage-style ones have the pickup a bit closer to the saddles than the newer, larger "modern" one does. If you pick up a 3-saddle bridge, make sure it's the right plate size, or else the pickup rout won't line up.

To me, any improvement in tone with three saddles is counteracted by the intonation tradeoff. Yes, there are compensated 3-barrel bridges, but those are just compromises. I'd rather listen to a mildly-less-sustaining chord that is in tune with itself than a really righteous Tele tone whose intonation is a bit off.

TDPRI would have me tarred and feathered for saying that, though.

[Despot]

I bought a Fender "Elite" Telecaster last year, and truthfully I am extremely happy with it. It was my first american made guitar purchase (I had a PRS CE 24 for a long time before that, please forgive me) and everything about it just says quality. Tonally, I can't get over how diverse it is paired with my Magnatone M15a. You can go from blues to funk to hard rock to country seamlessly.

BUT.....

I was told recently that a tele isn't a tele if it doesn't have the three brass saddles.

Is it worth it for me to make the switch? What differences should I expect?

I appreciate any informed opinions on the matter!

By that rationale any telecaster with steel barrels (whether it's a '60s or '70s Tele with three saddles or a later one with 6) isn't a real telecaster. By that logic my '66 Telecaster, with the threaded steel saddles (three of them) isn't a telecaster. Given how my next door neighbours suffer ear bleed from all the treble whenever I use it I would tend to disagree!

Think as well that a lot of music from the '60s would have been played on 'new' (at the time) instruments - so '60s Telecasters with steel/threaded saddle bridges. I'd argue those were 'real' telecasters... no brass saddles though.

What the saddles do change is the overall sound - I always find that brass saddles have a different sound than steel. But consider as well that saddle material tends to align to historic specs - by that I mean that if you've a brass saddle guitar, more likely than not you've a '52 reissue which has pickups that are wound (and sound) different to ... say ... a '62 or '64 reissue, which will have steel saddles.

Personally I prefer brass - but more because I find that the threaded steel saddles sometimes get a sort of 'sitar-ing' thing going on with the treble strings. That can't happen with solid saddles (like brass). But when people talk about "my guitar has brass saddles and it sounds a bit deeper/darker than your telecaster" they often don't take the different pickups into account. Saddles will alter the sound to a degree - but pickup wind/output and type will have a much bigger influence.

[Despot]

Sorry ... an additional point ... if you're happy with the guitar, play it.

I went down a rabbit hole with my Tele - I wanted to restore it as much as possible to vintage spec - that meant that I replaced a really nice bridge pickup (wound to blackguard/50s output) with first a pretty duff sounding vintage rewind, and then a really nice sounding '60s pickup. The proper period correct '60s pickup sounds very different to the blackguard type - it's extremely bright. It made the guitar a fundamentally different guitar. If I'm honest I think I preferred the less vintage correct modern blackguard type pickup to the proper vintage pickup ... but I've learned how to use it now that it's restored to vintage spec and a lot of it had to do with me not fully understanding that Telecasters are made to be bright ... and that this brightness is not something to try to tame, but to use!

I would encourage you to listen to every opinion (even these) and then make your own decision about what works best for you. If you ask for an opinion on offset bridges you'll get a dozen folk saying 'mastery' or 'staytrem' or 'rock that vintage' ... none of that matters. What matters is what works for you. I use a mastery even though I think they look like a terminator's knuckles (I thank Shadowplay for that one) because I've tried the other options and I know that a Mastery is 100% what works for me.

So it doesn't matter what any of us say - if you're happy with the Telecaster then it is right. If it works, it's right. That's it. Doesn't matter what others think or opine - if you can get the noise that you want out of the amp then it's right ... if you can't ... change stuff. I'd start with pickups before I'd mess with the bridge if it's a sound you're chasing.

[Con-Tiki!]

i'm not really one to try and describe sonic differences, so here's some info regarding a swap.
I had to look at the fender site to see what an 'elite' was. It looks to me that it's the replacement for the American Standard. Those guitars, as was mentioned earlier, used a different bridgeplate. At least, the models that i remember from the 90's and early 2000's..

I have an Esquire that started out as an Am Std, and would have had the same bridge as yours.
I'm not a fan of the big flat, 6-saddle bridges. I bought a Glendale replacement, with compensated saddles. There are a ton of options on their site, plates with clipped sides, different saddle materials..

they are not cheap, but it was a drop-in, intonation is perfect.
Joe Barden also makes something for the Am Std teles, i think they are cheaper. I am a total Glendale convert, though, and would spend the extra $.
if you order just saddles from them, you need to specify "for an Am Std", they'll send longer screws.

this pic shows my guitar, with a 70's ashtray next to it so you can see the difference. The mounting and string-thru holes are the giveaway, if you're trying to figure out what you have.

[Larry Mal]

So, I will be the contrarian voice as usual, I guess.

I hate six saddle bridges in general, and only tolerate them when there's no better choice. Anything is better than them, Telecaster or no.

For one, the six saddles are just a weak link, any screw that isn't perfectly set on the saddles will lead to instability. The saddles themselves can shift as you play the guitar, leading to tuning problems. They are a hassle.

But even if you deal with all of that, do six saddles sound better than three? I don't believe so. I think the acoustic resonance of an electric guitar is important and experience has taught me that the more string pressure on the fewest saddles is how to get there. People sometimes don't agree with me- well, they say things like "I haven't had a problem with my six saddle bridge". You decide for yourself, this is just one man's opinion.

I always tell people think of what would work on an acoustic guitar. You never, ever see a six saddle bridge on there and the reason it it wouldn't sound good, you need the strings to have contact with the bridge and saddle in order to make the top resonate, and anything that reduced that resonance would be to the detriment of the guitar. That's why, other than Gibson's failed and repudiated attempts to put a Tuna-matic bridge on their acoustics in the 60's, you don't see that stuff (there are some two saddle bridges out there for improved intonation).

Again, take those thoughts as you will.

Someone once told me on a forum that a Telecaster is all about contact, the strings run through the body, over saddles that really anchor that heavy plate to the body also. That always made sense to me.

One last thought, the brass saddles can reduce some of the piercing highs of the Telecaster, but I've had great success with steel and what I have currently is one Telecaster with brass saddles and one Tele with a Mastery bridge. Make of that what you will. I would never tolerate a six saddle Stratocaster bridge on my Telecasters.

[Despot]

I always tell people think of what would work on an acoustic guitar. You never, ever see a six saddle bridge on there and the reason it it wouldn't sound good, you need the strings to have contact with the bridge and saddle in order to make the top resonate, and anything that reduced that resonance would be to the detriment of the guitar. That's why, other than Gibson's failed and repudiated attempts to put a Tuna-matic bridge on their acoustics in the 60's, you don't see that stuff (there are some two saddle bridges out there for improved intonation).

Funnily enough I've just come back from going for a walk up to my friendly neighbourhood guitar shop this lunch time and they have a bloody immaculate 1963 Gibson J200 that has just come in ... complete with gold plated/nylon saddle tuneomatic bridge!! I'd never seen that on an acoustic before.

Also +1 on what you've said about three saddle bridges - and also on people figuring out what works for them.

[Larry Mal]

Damn, with nylon saddles no less! I don't actually have any experience with those Gibson acoustics that have the TOM bridges on them, I just know they exist (and the marketplace didn't reward that innovation).

Frankly, I view six saddle bridges as kind of being like McDonald's. You know you go to McDonald's, and you pay a little less, and then you clean up your seating area. You put your tray on the shelf and clean up your own place.

The acoustic guitar shows us that, done properly, a single saddle is all one needs for good intonation. So why do electric guitars, for the most part, have six adjustable saddles?

Well, they made intonation be your job. They used to do it at the factory like acoustic guitar makers do today, but it was a hassle of, like, measuring shit and getting it accurate, and once the electric guitar exploded they literally could not keep up with demand so they just pumped product out. Since they couldn't be bothered to get it right, they at least gave you the tools so you could do it if you really wanted.

That's not the situation any more, with CNC machines, but people still expect a bunch of saddles and so folks are conditioned to not accept anything less. And I'll admit that I tried a single saddle bridge on my '83 Gibson Challenger and no, that bridge was never going to work without re-drilling the post holes. But for the most part, the six saddle adjustable bridge is for the guitar maker's benefit, and not yours.

Like, if Fender put on a single saddle compensated bridge, it would be just as accurate regarding intonation as any Martin or Taylor guitar is, and those sound wonderful (you might make a case for the Telecaster having more playable notes, though).

Clearly that's not going to happen, what I'm trying to do is to establish the idea that you can get absolutely great sounds out of a guitar with less than six saddles, which a lot of people find hard to believe.

[leokula]

The acoustic guitar shows us that, done properly, a single saddle is all one needs for good intonation. So why do electric guitars, for the most part, have six adjustable saddles?

Well, they made intonation be your job. They used to do it at the factory like acoustic guitar makers do today, but it was a hassle of, like, measuring shit and getting it accurate, and once the electric guitar exploded they literally could not keep up with demand so they just pumped product out. Since they couldn't be bothered to get it right, they at least gave you the tools so you could do it if you really wanted.

That's not the situation any more, with CNC machines, but people still expect a bunch of saddles and so folks are conditioned to not accept anything less. And I'll admit that I tried a single saddle bridge on my '83 Gibson Challenger and no, that bridge was never going to work without re-drilling the post holes. But for the most part, the six saddle adjustable bridge is for the guitar maker's benefit, and not yours.

Hey Larry you make very good points about saddles and intonation. I totally agree with the multiple saddles being kind of sloppy work, but would like to discuss further on the CNC machines and intonation topic.

I'm not an expert on it, I've sometimes adjusted my own TOM's and it worked, and sometimes it didn't and I just took it to a guy. But even tho most modern guitars are made with CNC machines, isn't intonation still beyond the precision of CNC? I mean, there's still manual labor on a guitar after it's all cut, doesn't that make every guitar slightly different to the point that intonation would still be an issue that CNC can't handle?

[Larry Mal]

Yeah, I mean, it can depend on a lot of factors. And sure, CNC machines will give you a tremendously homogenous product, but there still can be factors that it can't change. I'm getting beyond what I can really speak to intelligently here, but let's say that the Les Paul guitar body is perfectly drilled and set up by the machine with absolute precision, and then the neck that is put on makes it be a quarter of an inch higher or lower than is ideal, and maybe that's well within tolerance at the factory.

Well, that'll change your intonation. I'm not saying that's necessarily something that happens, or that I know this, I'm just making conjecture and conversation.

I began to notice this as I looked at the history of the Tune-O-Matic bridge, it went from the narrow ABR bridge, which doesn't have a lot of travel length on the saddles, so it can only handle so much adjustment. Gibson then decided to come up with the "harmonica" bridge, which features a very long travel length per saddle, and they came up with this at a time when they were not known for accuracy in manufacturing and yet wanted to make sure the product that went out the door stayed out the door.

Immediately after that, Gibson came up with the Nashville bridge, which has longer travel length than the ABR but less than the harmonica, it's also cheaper than the harmonica though and they probably felt confident that the CNC process had gotten better and they could be more accurate (they were probably right).

Fender, though, initially basically didn't give a shit about intonation on the Telecaster, the first Tele bridges weren't compensated and would not have given proper intonation. Well, not perfect intonation.

They decided to fix this with what they thought would completely replace the Telecaster, the Stratocaster, at which point they went to the six saddle bridges that they used mostly after that, and Leo Fender didn't really bother fixing the Telecaster bridge because he didn't think he had to, he thought it was going to be a discontinued model.

And of course after that, Fender has done like a dozen different Telecaster bridges, trying to find the perfect compromise between vintage specs that folks demand and modern intonation requirements. There are a lot of solutions out there, I prefer two or three barrels that are compensated personally, but if intonation is your goal, then the six saddle bridge works very well (although it has drawbacks as well as discussed).

[Con-Tiki!]

not to run this off the rails completely, but there are a lot of factors that will throw your intonation off.
String guage, wound vs plain (i use sets with a wound 'g' on some of my old, weird guitars which seems to help), and string height, esp if you've put a big shim in the pocket or something...
I've experimented with different string sets, and had to adjust things a little.

i do agree with Larry about mass and contact.
that 6-saddle bridge in my photo is the only one I've ever been happy with, and it's due to the Fender Bullet saddles i used. They are solid brass (chromed) and as big around as a .38 cartridge.
something you'll notice with both bridges, is that the saddles contact one another, which i think makes a difference. Stability is good, no weird vibrations.