Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Discussion of newer designs, copies and reissue offset-waist instruments.
User avatar
DrippyReverbTremolo
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2023 12:39 pm

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by DrippyReverbTremolo » Fri Mar 15, 2024 6:12 am

adamrobertt wrote:
Fri May 22, 2020 4:04 pm
No JM "needs" modification. The idea that every JM needs a Mastery, new pickups, new wiring, etc. is really not true. It just depends on how you like your guitar. Offset fans also tend to be tinkerers.

Most Jazzmasters are perfectly fine with the stock bridge if you set it up properly.
Exactly.

Properly cut nut + sufficient neck angle to put downward pressure on the bridge +10 gauge strings or heavier.

User avatar
Mechanical Birds
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3624
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:24 pm

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by Mechanical Birds » Fri Mar 15, 2024 6:14 am

alexpigment wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2024 5:34 pm
Mechanical Birds wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2024 8:16 am
You don’t actually have to upgrade anything on them - maybe the bridge on the Squier ones because they’re potmetal trash, but otherwise it’s just FOMO and liking how things look and to taste. Like it’s not invalid to upgrade parts on a guitar, but even the cheapest variants are pretty serviceable.
The newer Squier bridges on the CV & 40th Anniversary models don't feel like potmetal trash to me. I have one from a 40th anniversary that I'm using (it looks more like aged nickel), and I actually like it better than the American Pro. It's not as solidly built as a Staytrem, but I have the exact same critique for the American Pro. I think GilmourD here on the forum actually keeps quite a few of the the Squier bridges on hand (or the equivalent OEM versions of them).
Oh yeah I forgot they made the switch for the CV ones - I’m stuck in the Vintage Modified realm. Never actually tried the CV one before

User avatar
GilmourD
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1773
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:11 pm
Location: Rutherford, NJ

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by GilmourD » Fri Mar 15, 2024 9:08 am

alexpigment wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2024 5:34 pm
I think GilmourD here on the forum actually keeps quite a few of the the Squier bridges on hand (or the equivalent OEM versions of them).
Indeed I do, but I try not to spam my Reverb store too hard on here. 😅

User avatar
rhythmjones
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3017
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: Peoria, Il
Contact:

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by rhythmjones » Sat Mar 16, 2024 7:56 am

Masteries and other high-end bridges are completely overrated. A $30 Mustang Bridge solves all the problems.
- Mitch

User avatar
GilmourD
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1773
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:11 pm
Location: Rutherford, NJ

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by GilmourD » Sat Mar 16, 2024 8:50 am

rhythmjones wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2024 7:56 am
Masteries and other high-end bridges are completely overrated. A $30 Mustang Bridge solves all the problems.
I think the world of the Mustang bridges that I get but a Staytrem bridge has some significant quality of life improvements built in, like the bushings that keep the height from falling, the offset intonation screws, and the E string screws going through the other side of the plate to keep saddles from shifting side-to-side. People overcharging on the used market shouldn't be part of the equation when evaluating a Staytrem.

A Mastery bridge is also an entirely different experience in that it doesn't rock and is designed to let the string glide over the saddles.

B.T.
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2023 9:24 pm

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by B.T. » Sat Mar 16, 2024 1:47 pm

GilmourD wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2024 8:50 am
like the bushings that keep the height from falling, the offset intonation screws, and the E string screws going through the other side of the plate to keep saddles from shifting side-to-side.
Great design. I only wish that they used standard Phillips head screws instead of Allen key. Would make it easier to intonate instead of having to move strings off the bridge or purchase a specialized set of long T handle wrenches.

User avatar
Rob
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:31 am
Location: Lexington, KY, US

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by Rob » Sat Mar 16, 2024 2:01 pm

andyman wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2024 8:12 am
Just bumping this to see if opinions have changed.
Everybody really wants a Jazzmaster, but nobody really wants a Jazzmaster.

User avatar
GilmourD
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1773
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:11 pm
Location: Rutherford, NJ

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by GilmourD » Sat Mar 16, 2024 5:51 pm

B.T. wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2024 1:47 pm
GilmourD wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2024 8:50 am
like the bushings that keep the height from falling, the offset intonation screws, and the E string screws going through the other side of the plate to keep saddles from shifting side-to-side.
Great design. I only wish that they used standard Phillips head screws instead of Allen key. Would make it easier to intonate instead of having to move strings off the bridge or purchase a specialized set of long T handle wrenches.
I have both an iFixit toolkit and an LTT ratcheting screwdriver with bits for that size hex head (I'm a computer tech by trade) so I guess I never thought about it.

User avatar
Larsongs
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 9:39 pm

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by Larsongs » Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:46 am

Curious… Did the OP ever find the Guitar he wanted?

User avatar
GilmourD
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1773
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:11 pm
Location: Rutherford, NJ

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by GilmourD » Sun Mar 17, 2024 8:26 am

Larsongs wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:46 am
Curious… Did the OP ever find the Guitar he wanted?
Seems it's been almost two years since his last login... So not sure.

User avatar
andyman
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:53 pm

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by andyman » Tue Mar 19, 2024 8:31 am

GilmourD wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2024 8:26 am
Larsongs wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2024 5:46 am
Curious… Did the OP ever find the Guitar he wanted?
Seems it's been almost two years since his last login... So not sure.
The quest probably killed him

User avatar
VealCutlet
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: Which version of a JM requires the least amount of modification?

Post by VealCutlet » Tue Mar 19, 2024 9:13 am

andyman wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2024 8:31 am

The quest probably killed him
The OP probably would have done well with a new AmPro II. Kind of has it all from a spec sheet point of view.

Leo Fender was a tweaker, and the Jazzmasters seem to be the ultimate tweaker's guitar. There's always a little something that can be adjusted or improved upon.

If you don't have that in you, then offset guitars may just not be up your alley.

A Classic Vibe JM often needs a little Loctite Blue in the bridge posts, an AVRI trem (if you are a trem user), and a nice setup - including a shim and fret-end dressing. You will have a great looking and playing guitar for around $500 if you fish for a used one.

I regularly gig with my Squier VM and CV JMs, as well as my MIM Classic player and AVRI Thinskin, which is a bit of a different beast, quality-wise. I bought it used, and it had a Staytrem installed. Didn't need to touch a thing with that.

Post Reply