Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Discussion of newer designs, copies and reissue offset-waist instruments.
User avatar
Ceylon
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3279
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 8:27 am
Location: Middle of the Baltic Sea

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by Ceylon » Sun May 09, 2021 1:00 am

If you're dead set on sunburst, you can probably get one of the vintage-style Vinteras and a sunburst body off of eBay, transplant all the stuff to that one and then either keep or sell the Vintera body.
Science Friction burns my fingers
Electricity still lingers

User avatar
Lost In Autumn
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2020 3:01 am
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by Lost In Autumn » Sun May 09, 2021 3:40 am

mbene085 wrote:
Sat May 08, 2021 1:10 pm
I don't know why the radius mismatch myth persists, year after year, on a board dedicated to Offsets.

This was answered like 7 years ago and posted on this board.
Hello,
I’m sorry for the delay with this response, but I was waiting on assistance from my parts department about this. Below is their response and I hope it helps!
“The bridge has a 10.5",…which is a tighter radius than most of that style. Many have a 12” radius even when fingerboards have a 9.5” radius. Guitar builders have done that for many, many years. It preserves the ease of fretting with the left hand,…and makes picking easier with the right. Kind of a faux compound radius.

Thanks,
Brett
FMIC Consumer Relations
17600 N. Perimeter Dr. Ste. 100
Scottsdale, AZ 85255
The radius mismatch on AOMs is 1", and plenty of techs set the bridge radius slightly flatter than the fretboard radius on TOM style saddles, so if anything, it's wrong in the right direction, not that anybody would ever notice a 10.5" vs 9.5" mismatch. They're also TOM saddles, which can be filed into whatever radius you please.

I don't like knife edges on vibrato bridge personally, but lots of people get on with them just fine, and OP doesn't even use the vibrato much.

An AOM is just fine for their purposes. Maybe even better than a floating bridge.

I had one on a J Mascis Jazzmaster. The radius mismatch wasn't THAT bad, but I like to set my action really low and it slightly annoyed me. I mean, it was ok, but on top of the tuning stability issues, I couldn't get past it. I found the knife edge pivots of the AOM bridge, combined with the floating tremolo, to be pretty awful. I don't dive-bomb at all or use glide vibrato style extensively, but for even gentle vibrato accents of chords and notes, I found it annoying, especially when I knew that there were better options available and Fender opted not to use them. This was likely just a matter of me being really picky about tone and obsessing over the last .5% of function, as well as being an inveterate tinkerer, but I couldn't live with it and had to solve the issue before I decided to sell the guitar. I opted for a Mosrite roller bridge and i'm pretty pleased with the performance. Tuning stability is great, and it seems like it has better tone and sustain, although I can't entirely quantify that.

Image
Image

User avatar
gutter rock
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3129
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:39 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by gutter rock » Sun May 09, 2021 7:51 pm

I might have to take back my previous comment where I stated I put an AOM on my Squier and was fine with it. I didn’t have issues tbh, but I did find a tune-o-matic style roller bridge I forgot I had laying around. So, I popped it on the Squier instead and it does seem smoother and possibly more stable. It certainly makes more sense on paper, than the string on a sharp saddle edge for trem use.

User avatar
Cob
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:13 pm

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by Cob » Sun May 09, 2021 11:01 pm

I find it very difficult to get a consistent set-up with the AOM on any offset, even those that have an angled neck pocket. They're even worse on Fenders that don't have this feature. They're a bit better on the Contemporary Squiers that have a matching radius in the neck, but I still prefer the feel of the floating bridge or the Mastery with all things considered.

FMIC claiming that this is a design feature is hogwash -- if they wanted to they would manufacture their own AOM to a 9.5" spec, but they don't because that would cost money. "Faux compound radius" is especially BS when you look at the rest of their line and notice that all their other bridges are set-up and spec'd to match the radius of the fretboard.

User avatar
bessieboporbach
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 4:40 am

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by bessieboporbach » Mon May 10, 2021 8:49 am

Cob wrote:
Sun May 09, 2021 11:01 pm
FMIC claiming that this is a design feature is hogwash -- if they wanted to they would manufacture their own AOM to a 9.5" spec, but they don't because that would cost money. "Faux compound radius" is especially BS when you look at the rest of their line and notice that all their other bridges are set-up and spec'd to match the radius of the fretboard.
Except they literally do exactly that. Fender AOMs have a 10.5" radius, which matches the slight flattening at the bridge that many/most good luthiers build into their setups, regardless of bridge type. Anybody who has ever raised up the E strings on a Strat bridge to dial in a setup will understand why this is.

User avatar
Cob
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:13 pm

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by Cob » Mon May 10, 2021 11:21 am

Fender doesn't manufacture their own AOM bridges; they are simply TOM bridges made by an OEM manufacturer (most in Korea) with a different name so that they don't have to pay licenses to Gibson for the TOM trademark. TOMs commonly have inaccurate tolerances, from 11" to 12" and up to 12.5" in some cases. Neither of my 3 TOM equipped guitars have the exact same radius, for example. I find it unlikely that Fender is taking the time and effort to continuously measure the tolerances of their bridges everytime they slap them on a guitar.

The fact of the matter is players used to slap these on their offsets because there was no other real fixed bridge alternative at the time. FMIC is operating with the thought that it's best to replicate a mod from 30-40 years ago instead of developing a real alternative. The updated Mustang bridges tells us that they know its a problem but, well, fixing problems costs money.

User avatar
Cob
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:13 pm

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by Cob » Mon May 10, 2021 11:51 am

Image

Here's an example from a CP Jag that a tech friend of mine just worked on. This is a 14" radius bridge on a guitar with a 9.5" radius neck. I fully recognize that some might not care or find this to be a problem or even notice, which is absolutely fair! Speaking personally, however, I have more often than not found that such a contrasting radius makes it hard get a comfortable set up and thus a comfortably playing guitar. And so I stay away from the AOM.

User avatar
bessieboporbach
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 4:40 am

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by bessieboporbach » Mon May 10, 2021 12:21 pm

Cob wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 11:51 am
Image

Here's an example from a CP Jag that a tech friend of mine just worked on. This is a 14" radius bridge on a guitar with a 9.5" radius neck. I fully recognize that some might not care or find this to be a problem or even notice, which is absolutely fair! Speaking personally, however, I have more often than not found that such a contrasting radius makes it hard get a comfortable set up and thus a comfortably playing guitar. And so I stay away from the AOM.
To be fair, that bridge looks like it has collapsed (which is a common problem on TOM types) and when a TOM-type bridge collapses, its effective radius flattens out.

User avatar
adamrobertt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 am
Contact:

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by adamrobertt » Mon May 10, 2021 5:40 pm

bessieboporbach wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 12:21 pm
Cob wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 11:51 am
Image

Here's an example from a CP Jag that a tech friend of mine just worked on. This is a 14" radius bridge on a guitar with a 9.5" radius neck. I fully recognize that some might not care or find this to be a problem or even notice, which is absolutely fair! Speaking personally, however, I have more often than not found that such a contrasting radius makes it hard get a comfortable set up and thus a comfortably playing guitar. And so I stay away from the AOM.
To be fair, that bridge looks like it has collapsed (which is a common problem on TOM types) and when a TOM-type bridge collapses, its effective radius flattens out.
There's absolutely no way you can tell that from this angle, lol

User avatar
Puisheen
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:08 am

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by Puisheen » Mon May 10, 2021 5:41 pm

Hey, I'm the tech from above! This bridge is neither a 10.5" radius nor is it collapsed –– it's dead on 14". In all of my years of working on CPs, Mascis, Moores, anything with the AOM installed from the factory, not once have I encountered a bridge with a radius tighter than 12". Mostly 12s, some 14s, but never 10.5". And I do measure every single one as the first step of a setup.

If they're out there I haven't seen them, but if anyone can catch one in the wild I'd love to hear about it. Unsheathe those radius gauges!

Image

User avatar
adamrobertt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 am
Contact:

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by adamrobertt » Mon May 10, 2021 5:44 pm

Puisheen wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 5:41 pm
Hey, I'm the tech from above! This bridge is neither a 10.5" radius nor is it collapsed –– it's dead on 14". In all of my years of working on CPs, Mascis, Moores, anything with the AOM installed from the factory, not once have I encountered a bridge with a radius tighter than 12". Mostly 12s, some 14s, but never 10.5". And I do measure every single one as the first step of a setup.

If they're out there I haven't seen them, but if anyone can catch one in the wild I'd love to hear about it. Unsheathe those radius gauges!

Image
Thanks Mike! :ph34r:

User avatar
LVC
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1933
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 12:38 pm
Location: France

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by LVC » Tue May 11, 2021 3:43 am

bessieboporbach wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 12:21 pm
To be fair, that bridge looks like it has collapsed (which is a common problem on TOM types) and when a TOM-type bridge collapses, its effective radius flattens out.
Sorry about the off-topic, but can you tell me more about this? I've always thought one of the few merits of the TOM design is that it looks like it could survive being run over by a T35 tank.
Create art, not content

User avatar
601210
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1021
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:55 am

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by 601210 » Tue May 11, 2021 4:30 am

LVC wrote:
Tue May 11, 2021 3:43 am
bessieboporbach wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 12:21 pm
To be fair, that bridge looks like it has collapsed (which is a common problem on TOM types) and when a TOM-type bridge collapses, its effective radius flattens out.
Sorry about the off-topic, but can you tell me more about this? I've always thought one of the few merits of the TOM design is that it looks like it could survive being run over by a T35 tank.
It's definitely a thing that happens, especially on TOM setups with stoptails where people like to really crank down on the stoptail and create lots of downward pressure.

I do think whatever answer anyone's going to get on OSG is going to be heavily biased because it's a place filled with a very discerning minority. If it was a completely disastrous design Fender would have given up on it, but the fact that TOM-equipped Fenders sell perfectly fine and tons of people still request the mod means that even if it's far from ideal it's still something fine with a lot of people. Personally I strongly prefer the rocking bridge and having a radius that matches is nice, but I had my JMJM with the stock bridge for years and had zero issues playing it whatsoever.

That said, I always thought that fine tuning both the radius and the slots on a TOM with some nut slotting files should be part of a standard setup for a TOM guitar, but I understand that's not something that happens at Fender. That's what stewmac always recommends anyways.

User avatar
timiscott
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:38 am
Location: London

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by timiscott » Tue May 11, 2021 6:13 am

Baffled by a lot of this! My Classic Player Jag is the best-playing guitar I own!

User avatar
adamrobertt
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 am
Contact:

Re: Just how bad is the Adjusto-Matic bridge on a JM?

Post by adamrobertt » Tue May 11, 2021 2:07 pm

LVC wrote:
Tue May 11, 2021 3:43 am
bessieboporbach wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 12:21 pm
To be fair, that bridge looks like it has collapsed (which is a common problem on TOM types) and when a TOM-type bridge collapses, its effective radius flattens out.
Sorry about the off-topic, but can you tell me more about this? I've always thought one of the few merits of the TOM design is that it looks like it could survive being run over by a T35 tank.
They can collapse but it takes a long time, and is usually caused by a stop tail that is cranked down too low, causing too much downward pressure on the bridge. The only time I've dealt with it was on an SG from the 70s owned by a friend. I have to imagine it probably takes decades to happen, and is thus usually seen on older guitars.

Post Reply