Rocking bridge or not?

[littlericky]

I've had a few Jags and a Tele with a factory Bigsby. The first thing I always did was modify the bridges so they wouldn't rock. I just picked up a Squier Jag and I thought I'd give the rocking bridge a try. Just sitting in the house noodling around the intonation keeps going out because the bridge doesn't stay centered.

I'm not sold on the guitar yet so I'm just setting it up as well as possible with the factory strings (10's?)I shimmed the neck so there is decent tension on the bridge. I'll eventually run 11's or 12's on it but I don't think that is going to help with the bridge shifting.

What's the common consensus here? Let it rock or not? Thanks

[shoule79]

I tried to like the stock/mustang bridge for years, but for the reasons you mentioned I ended up going to a mastery bridge. It's stable and stays in tune perfectly. Larger strings never solved that problem for me.

I did prefer the vibrato steel when it was rocking though.

[soggy mittens]

y'all need to dress the nut on yo guitars, that is the issue here. The plastic nuts on squiers are cut for cheap light gauge strings, sound shit anyway, upgrade to bone and advance your tone to nxt lvl status.

[Larry Mal]

It would be hard to argue with that!

[soggy mittens]

grandiose confidence in full flight, quick someone shoot me down!!!!!111

[Larry Mal]

Nah, this could be a complete turnaround for you. You got motherfuckers sorting out their nuts, you are feeling good and confident, careful you don't end up Kanye West.

[littlericky]

The composite nut is is cut fine, not and issue. Fender and Gibson have been using different types of plastic nuts for 50 years so I'm good with it on the Squier for now.
Going out of tune isn't the issue, the intonation going out is because the bridge doesn't stay/return to the same position.

[Larry Mal]

Well, for the record, I hate the bridge shifting around and am pretty convinced that it does not help with tuning. A bridge of sufficient quality should not need to rock back and forth.

[spacecadet]

Going out of tune isn't the issue, the intonation going out is because the bridge doesn't stay/return to the same position.

That seems impossible, to start out with good tuning and good intonation and end up with good tuning and bad intonation, resulting from the bridge not returning to center. I could see ending up with bad tuning and intonation, but I can't see how you'd stay in tune with a bridge that's moved.

Anyway if your bridge isn't staying centered, the problem is either your tremolo or your nut, not your bridge. People who cement the bridge down are putting a band aid on and ignoring the real problem. The point of the rocking bridge is actually to remove it as a point of resistance from the system. It's not doing anything, other than suspending the strings. The tremolo is doing all the work. The nut isn't supposed to do anything either but until we have rocking nuts, you can end up with binding there.

[SummerLeftMe]

Non rocking bridge all the way.
I have tried the steps on how to set a Jag bridge up so it floats. Heavy flatwounds and all that. Nut cut correctly. Guitar still goes out of tune, intonation goes out, without even using the trem, on all 4 offsets I have. I use paper thin picks, play very very softly, and I couldn't stand it anymore and so just stopped the bridge from rocking.
I love it this way. Others can get it to work floating, and I'd love to try a guitar that can actually do that without going out of tune.

[andy_tchp]

Mine are both set to rock and stay centered in the thimbles even with tremolo use. I use .011 gauge strings these days (both Jaguar and Jazzmaster). Tuning stability is almost as good as my Tele with a fixed bridge.

[Larry Mal]

Anyway if your bridge isn't staying centered, the problem is either your tremolo or your nut, not your bridge. People who cement the bridge down are putting a band aid on and ignoring the real problem. The point of the rocking bridge is actually to remove it as a point of resistance from the system.

But: there are other ways to remove the point of contact, the saddles, from adding enough resistance to make tuning be a problem now.

[itstooloudMike]

I've got my CIJ Jag set up for the bridge to rock (guitar is completely stock), and have been pleasantly surprised by how good it works. I'm using 11s on it, and did shim the neck. I am also not a heavy tremolo user. I only use the trem for subtle flutter. But I do use the trem, and don't play particularly softly. I use heavy picks, and really haven't babied the Jag. I play it like all my other guitars. But the smooth feel of the trem is wonderful, and I've not had any tuning or intonation issues. This has really surprised me, because I fully expected to have to change lots of components to actually live with the Jag (my first offset). When I got the guitar, the previous owner had taped the bridge posts. Actually, when I got the guitar it was pretty much un-playable. The action was very high and the bridge was very low. After a careful and thorough setup, including truss rod adjustment and neck shimming, I was able to get the action quite low and very comfortable. I did un-tape the bridge posts, to give the original design a fair trial. So far, I have not had problems with the stock saddles. I've never had a string jump out of the groove. And I bend strings all the time, by quite a bit. So for now, I haven't found a reason to not use Leo's design as originally intended. I love the trem feel. For me, it's the perfect tremolo system. And the bridge floating with the trem action makes total sense to me. Seems to me that asking the strings to slide across the tops of the saddles when you use the tremolo would be somewhat of a friction problem. I think this is why people used to recommend roller saddles on a Bigsby equipped guitar? And that never worked well, because most of the time roller saddles would not actually roll under string pressure. So, the rocking bridge seems like a pretty great idea in theory. So far, it seems to be working for me.

[littlericky]

I've researched this online and gotten the answers here. Seems like there is no common consensus. Some swear by letting the bridge rock, some by locking it. At the same time I see that many folks raise the bridge and add a shim to the neck while others don't shim the neck which would require them to have the bridge set relatively low.

Perhaps there is a correlation between the two? If the bridge is set high it's going to pivot to a greater degree than if the bridge is set low. If it rocks more there is greater chance that it won't return to the same position when it's settled. I just tried it and that seems to be the case.

[soggy mittens]

hmmm I've found the bridge to rock more when there is less break angle. Good sized shim and a bone nut fixed all my issues. Is strange how we can get different results from trying the same things! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯