Downsides of an AOM bridge on a Jazzmaster

[ainm]

While there are lots of reasons wouldn't want to put a TOM on anything with a vibrato, the radius mismatch is the least of them.

TOM saddles can easily be filed with a nut slotting file. You or your tech can set the radius to anything you like in about 5 minutes with the right tools. I didn't know this when I first read about the evils of AOMs, but I do now.

The least of the problems or yet another thing wrong? It's a game of perspectives. My own is why bother filing saddles down when you could replace them with something that goes some way to rectifying the bigger problems.

I've another perspective that comes from my Luxe Jag, which has an AOM. Being a string-through sans trem and having a 10-14 compound radius, the bridge is perfect. Purists may want barrel saddles there instead, but no purist would touch the Luxe anyway. The bridge is just yet another thing wrong to others, but as someone who loves the long-scale heavy sustain machine the Luxe turned out to be, the AOM bridge (or something similar) is fundamental to that.

The AOM as used on guitars with offset trem systems - the majority of its application - fundamentally breaks the design of thise instruments. Radius mismatch is just another thing to hate about it. If you wanted to design (steal) the worst bridge for such guitars, you'd design an AOM. Then you'd mismatch the radius too. Except Fender actually did that.

[Britfingersisback]

Leo designed the original bridge to rock with trem use. Which it does perfectly well when set up to have high string-saddle friction. So that the strings can rock the bridge consistently all the way forwards and back (to neutral) with trem use. That can be achieved by the opposite of the AOM mitigations above - shim the neck pocket with a tapered shim to raise the bridge and thus increase string break angle, and/or use slightly higher gauge strings. There are now good choices of Mustang-style rocking bridges from Fender and Staytrem for both common fretboard radii, with deep string grooves (that avoid the strings popping out of the original vintage-style bridge's shallow grooves with heavier playing).

You know, I hate to be disagreeable, but I keep seeing people writing about the design of the original bridges and while I can't argue that Leo designed it to rock back and forth, the fact is that the bridge was just a failure. The whole high friction/rocking concept was dumb, it was immediately corrected by Fender, and never repeated by Leo Fender in all his long years of designed guitars afterwards. In fact, his crowing achievement was the G&L bridge which emphatically all locks together in as close an interpretation of a single saddle bridge as you can get.

The original Jazzmaster bridge was designed to rock back and forth, sure, but whether or not "high friction" was part of the design is kind of something I am skeptical about, really it seems like a byproduct of the fact that they could not engineer all those saddle grooves with them all being machined smooth.

Later, of course, the Jazzmaster bridge was re-engineered into the much better Mustang bridge, a design that absolutely can be made to work with little friction. There's nothing inherently high friction about the single string groove Mustang bridge.

The whole rocking concept is lame and doesn't work. The rocking bridge Jazzmasters are not more tuning stable, I mean, how could they be? The idea that something rocks on a fixed point and is going to return to that fixed point even though you don't apply the same pressure to move it from the fixed point is really not logical.

When tremolos that stayed in tune were revisited in the Floyd Rose era- and those do stay in tune- they sure didn't resurrect the dumb rocking bridge idea, did they? No. No one ever did.

In fact, the only worse idea than the rocking bridge would be to bring over an even older and lamer idea from Gibson but do it on the cheap, which brings us to the AOM bridge.

But give up on the rocking bridge, people. Leo Fender sure did.

Iv heard about and read a lot of shit over the years about the design of the rocking bridge. Larry has summed my opinion so elegantly.

[JSett]

Later, of course, the Jazzmaster bridge was re-engineered into the much better Mustang bridge, a design that absolutely can be made to work with little friction. There's nothing inherently high friction about the single string groove Mustang bridge.

You're right that the bridge on a Mustang has no inherent high tension built-in, but the relationship to the natural break angle caused by the 'cigar' stoptail being significantly closer does make the tension placed on it much, much higher. Despite the other flaws in the Mustang vibrato, I've never had an issue with the bridge not returning to centre on them like I did with JMs/Jags. Before I got my first Mastery I used a Mustang bridge with the posts taped and set low to the body...the strings slid over the saddles pretty well and acted a bit like a poor-mans Mastery anyway.

Fenders recent RSD bridge design just goes to show how much of an influence Mastery has had on them as the entire concept of functionality is the same really.

[tammyw]

Fenders recent RSD bridge design just goes to show how much of an influence Mastery has had on them as the entire concept of functionality is the same really.

The RSD-J bridge is definitely a rocking, high-friction design; you really don't want the strings sliding over the small contact points on those brass saddles. The only vague influence that Mastery might have had on it was using two saddles instead of six or three.

[JSett]

Fenders recent RSD bridge design just goes to show how much of an influence Mastery has had on them as the entire concept of functionality is the same really.

The RSD-J bridge is definitely a rocking, high-friction design; you really don't want the strings sliding over the small contact points on those brass saddles. The only vague influence that Mastery might have had on it was using two saddles instead of six or three.

Do they rock? Jeez, my memory is shot...the one that came on my CS Jazzmaster I, for some reason, had logged in my head as being fixed. But I have had a bit of a fuzzy memory since the summer (brain issues/hospital/etc).

Apologies.

[Debaser]

There's lots of ways to get the job done. I have no hatred for AOM/TOMs anymore, they aren't quite 'shit'. Neither is the original offset rocking bridge. Things get 'shitty' when one has personal pref paradigms to satisfy. Light stings, heavy vibrato use, some kind of unplugged sound ideal, looks traditional vs someone who wants heavy strings, barely uses the vibrato but loves the option, only hears the amp/effects, and values function over looks.

IME, TOM/AOMs work with vibratos because of sloppy bridge post movement. Obviously, when a string moves on the saddle, it's a pop and it will not return to the original pitch position, that's issue number 1 with a TOM/AOM. Issue number 2 is the buzz from not having enough downward pressure on the individual saddles. Buzzes are common, and this is true for TOM/AOM pairings with Bigsby B3/B6/B11s.

That said, I avoid the TOM, and when stuck with it, I'll just use a roller bridge. I'm a heavy trem user, full range pusher, and like 10s over 11s on 25.5 scales. I also semi-care about dog ear issues like steel saddles vs phenolic.

The thing is, all bridges move understring pressure. I have a Classic Player Jag that I love, and I remedied the stock TOM by using an ABM 2400 roller bridge. Coming from a place where solid bar bridges are upgrades (Gretsch), I also like the fact the ABM is machined from solid brass. This is probably the best example of a 'locked' bridge not moving: all the rollers move and the bridge almost stays immobile when using the trem. The guitar came with a roller nut, so there's that factor too.

I'm saying this idea that strings 'slide' on something anything less than a lubed roller is not completely true. It's a combination of post flex/movement, then when strings are forced to keep moving, low friction saddle material comes into play. I've seen this with a Mastery 4.1 with Bigsby B5 Tele. Those saddles are moving all over the place with the string, but it still stays in tune when I let go of the bar.

With offsets, I'm a 'let it rock, but not too much rock' kinda of person. I have a Tele-saddle bridge that I made which I used nylon thimble inserts to limit movement and keep the posts more or less from ratcheting to one side. Works well. Now I use High Spirit Guitars version, which is my favorite, and it is designed to rock, but not too much. Rocking bridges work, even if they sometimes don't rock as intended. This is the case with the 'rocking bar bridge' by Tru-Arc, it's the posts and base rocking to keep my tuning stability, not the brass bar.

[Veitchy]

Fenders recent RSD bridge design just goes to show how much of an influence Mastery has had on them as the entire concept of functionality is the same really.

The RSD-J bridge is definitely a rocking, high-friction design; you really don't want the strings sliding over the small contact points on those brass saddles. The only vague influence that Mastery might have had on it was using two saddles instead of six or three.

Do they rock? Jeez, my memory is shot...the one that came on my CS Jazzmaster I, for some reason, had logged in my head as being fixed. But I have had a bit of a fuzzy memory since the summer (brain issues/hospital/etc).

Apologies.

Be great if someone with a recent CS Offset could chime in, but I'm 99% positive that the RSD-J bridge is non-rocking.

I think the dirty little secret for them existing was that artists and high dollar customers were buying fenders and then slapping Masterys straight on them. I think Fenders desire to tune up their bridges was secondary to them having 100% their own hardware

[tammyw]

The RSD-J bridge is definitely a rocking, high-friction design; you really don't want the strings sliding over the small contact points on those brass saddles. The only vague influence that Mastery might have had on it was using two saddles instead of six or three.

Do they rock? Jeez, my memory is shot...the one that came on my CS Jazzmaster I, for some reason, had logged in my head as being fixed. But I have had a bit of a fuzzy memory since the summer (brain issues/hospital/etc).

Apologies.

Be great if someone with a recent CS Offset could chime in, but I'm 99% positive that the RSD-J bridge is non-rocking.

I think the dirty little secret for them existing was that artists and high dollar customers were buying fenders and then slapping Masterys straight on them. I think Fenders desire to tune up their bridges was secondary to them having 100% their own hardware

I mean... I know I've been mistaken about some things sometimes, but I've got one literally within arm's reach, and I double checked and it's definitely freely rocking.

[mackerelmint]

Are we talking about the RSD bridge? That thing's ugly.

I heard from a little bird that they started working on it back in the 80s, and Jeff Healy went blind because it was so fucking hideous, so they shelved it for about 30 years or so out of guilt.

[Veitchy]

Do they rock? Jeez, my memory is shot...the one that came on my CS Jazzmaster I, for some reason, had logged in my head as being fixed. But I have had a bit of a fuzzy memory since the summer (brain issues/hospital/etc).

Apologies.

Be great if someone with a recent CS Offset could chime in, but I'm 99% positive that the RSD-J bridge is non-rocking.

I think the dirty little secret for them existing was that artists and high dollar customers were buying fenders and then slapping Masterys straight on them. I think Fenders desire to tune up their bridges was secondary to them having 100% their own hardware

I mean... I know I've been mistaken about some things sometimes, but I've got one literally within arm's reach, and I double checked and it's definitely freely rocking.

Welp, colour me mistaken. Thanks for clearing that up - I learned something today.

[Caddy65]

I’ve found all the JMs I’ve had (Squier VM, self-built partsmaster, currently an AO 60s) pretty good with the stock bridge setup. A shim in the neck was all it took for the first two, the AO didn’t need it because of the neck pocket angle.

Once the bridge is raised a little (with the shim or angled neck pocket), everything works fine. Great tuning stability, and no issues with strings jumping out of saddles. That’s even when playing pretty heavy handedly in a loud band.

I genuinely can’t see what all the fuss is about…..

I’ll second that. Been playing them since the spring of 1965 right after high school graduation when I bought a new Jazzmaster ( my lead player had a 1964 Jaguar). Never have had any issue with the stock bridges. I have always used 11’s on them.

[dandelor]

Staytrem used to make a bridge specifically for the AOM bridge on the JMascis but he wont do them any more.

I improvised by using a standard staytrem and buying some grub-screws with an allen-key socketed head to screw into the AOM's monting threads (8mm I think). You have to get them just long enough so they don't disappear into the body on adjustment but short enough to give you enough adjustment! You also want to get the largest hex-size you can - I found that the actual socket of each grub screw was curved at it's base giving the fulcrum needle-points of the Staytrem a decent centering seating with just enough space to rock back and forth.
I added springs to sit in the threaded holes under the grub screws to help with adjustment and reduce the risk of them dropping into the body.
Hard to expain without a picture ( I think I may have discussed this on here before a few years back) but I expect there's others who've done the same with pictures.
This solution was relatively cheap and works really well - giving me good tremelo action without losing tuning.
Hope this helps.