Another offset bridge option from Babicz

[alexpigment]

Pictures aren't everything, but I suspect this bridge works under the assumption of a steep neck angle due to a shim or angled neck pocket. I do not like my bridges that high at all. Same reason I don't like Les Pauls. How the hell can you have good picking technique with your hand up that high?

[HarlowTheFish]

How the hell can you have good picking technique with your hand up that high?

Honestly, I find it a lot more finicky with a low bridge - my Kiesel works because the body's super thin, my Ibanez has great contours, and my Strandberg has a bit more height so it works. With a low bridge, I need the body shaping and top to line the saddles up just right for my hand otherwise I'm angling it in weird ways that give me nasty cramps and stresses my tendonitis. All the low-profile axes I have fit super well, but when I pick up like a random Tele or Strat I don't usually have a great time. I need great contours, a thin/small body, bevels, or some combination of all of the above to really get settled with a low bridge.

A higher bridge (not like a jazz archtop floating bridge, that's a bit much, but like a ToM or a rocking bridge) keeps my wrist lined up better with my forearm and gives me a bit of support off the top for my picking hand. I find that if I have to curl my hand inward (like I do with a lot of low bridges), I have to stop because of cramps/joint pain within two hours tops, while with a straight angle or slightly up/out, I can play for hours.

[jorri]

The full contact marketing thing has always seemed dubious to me. If the idea is that it transfers vibrations to the body then all that means is it's reducing the sustain in the strings, right? The ideal string would be supported at each end by rigid points floating in space with nothing to vibrate against and transfer energy into, wouldn't it?

That said, I don't think you all are giving this thing the credit it deserves for appearing to have the same footprint as a real offset bridge plate.

Yup. Transferring vibrations to the bridge is actually a bad thing. You don't want a big massive bridge if sustain is your goal. You're just losing energy to the bridge that would otherwise be vibrating the strings.

Edit: I think the confusion is because it's the opposite for acoustic instruments. You need transfer of energy to the top of an acoustic guitar, for example. But for a solid body electric, you're not trying to vibrate the body. You just need the strings to move so that the pickups can get a signal.

Not all acoustic instruments which is why i am dubious myself!
Bowed instrument luthiers tune the bridge mass to an ideal state. Its full of holes. Its planed down thinner and the holes may be carved until it sings. You happen to have nothing happening with sustain however, since there is a bow and the pizz sound is meant to be a quick decay.

I like my highmass bass bridge. It has less twang and a tighter low end compared to stock j-bass.

But lets just say i like stock JM for the SAME reason, only that the different instruments require alternate sonic qualities.

Am rarely considering sustain at all!

[jorri]

With the cello thing. I mean its a trade-off. Sweet spot. Goldilocks zone. Not "more is better" of one. I am sure some physics of resonating bodies i do not know, but these kinds of energy curves are common in physics. E.g. more mass mean more vibrations tranferred, but also requires more energy to be vibrated significantly.

And depends where the mass is, since if energy is going upward away from body (deep nut slots for example) it isnt going anywhere and sounds dead.

[Stratelejazzuar]

Well, without knowing much about it, I like what I see. It looks like a building in a business park. Overengineered and super expensive? Yeah, that's babicz, all right, but I'd put money on it being an excellent sounding and performing bridge.

It wouldn't surprise me if it required additional routing underneath it to make space for extra bridge mass. Just a guess.

looks like there are 2 set screws on the side... I'd guess for alignment and post lock?

[mackerelmint]

Well, without knowing much about it, I like what I see. It looks like a building in a business park. Overengineered and super expensive? Yeah, that's babicz, all right, but I'd put money on it being an excellent sounding and performing bridge.

It wouldn't surprise me if it required additional routing underneath it to make space for extra bridge mass. Just a guess.

looks like there are 2 set screws on the side... I'd guess for alignment and post lock?

yeah, that checks out. That's definitely a thing they've done in other bridges.

[Larry Mal]

It looks like a nice bridge. The saddle lock is a plus.

Really, I've come to conclude over the years that less is more with guitar bridges, that a single saddle properly compensated and held onto the instrument as strongly as possible is best. Like what you find with an acoustic guitar, basically.

This thing is the exact opposite of that. Still, it's easy to see that all this machinery takes a different path to the same thing in the end, a rock solid piece of kit.

I would consider it. I have a fretless Jazz bass that I put a Hipshot high mass bridge on, it's never really pleased me, and I've considered a Babicz on that.

[s_mcsleazy]

ok. i recently bought a guitar with one of their bridges on it and i've got to say...... the saddles annoy me. it's like needlessly complicated imho and i found palm muting to be counter intuitive

[Steadyriot.]

I can't be the only one that sees a more complicated Coronado bridge in this:


Can't say I hate it either, looks like a decent piece of kit if slightly over engineered maybe.

[SignoftheDragon]

I like it- but I have a bit of a soft spot for anything Steinberger-adjacent.

I'd give it a whirl if it fit for a project, but don't think I'd actively seek it out unless it was solving a problem I ran into.

It doesn't look like those are roller saddles- there's an expanded/isolated view of the saddle adjustment on the linked IG page that shows some wacky rotation adjustment device to get the string height just right.

The complexity brings me to worries about phantom rattles being impossible to track down- just so many moving parts!

[loveinathens]

I don't want to mess with my pickguard but I totally see myself using one of these suckers.

[jorri]

It looks like a nice bridge. The saddle lock is a plus.

Really, I've come to conclude over the years that less is more with guitar bridges, that a single saddle properly compensated and held onto the instrument as strongly as possible is best. Like what you find with an acoustic guitar, basically.

This thing is the exact opposite of that. Still, it's easy to see that all this machinery takes a different path to the same thing in the end, a rock solid piece of kit.

I would consider it. I have a fretless Jazz bass that I put a Hipshot high mass bridge on, it's never really pleased me, and I've considered a Babicz on that.

Is too much to ask for just a modified mustang type that doesn't have the really obvious design flaws. Do that and we're done basically. Thats why staytrem is most favoured, although perhaps it can be done without bushing, and with individual height adjust