Player Bridge = S##T

For help with setups and other technical issues.
User avatar
ChrisDesign
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Player Bridge = S##T

Post by ChrisDesign » Fri Sep 17, 2021 1:33 pm

I have a staytrem bridge and a JB Trembucker. After a few years I wondered if the stock Player bridge is that bad. I popped it in and OH MY GOD! The stock bridge sucks!

It won’t internate back far enough, but that’s just the start. Put the saddle a fraction too high and the string buzzes on the screw’s end. Put the saddle a fraction to low and the string buzzes on the tray. Getting that balance is impossible.

Having said that, the tone was pretty awesome, better than my Staytrem. Never mind. Back to the staytrem setup forever. That stock bridge is only going back on if I ever sell the guitar (which is unlikely)
"I own a '66 Jaguar. That's the guitar I polish, and baby - I refuse to let anyone touch it when I jump into the crowd." - Kurt Cobain

User avatar
timtam
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:42 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by timtam » Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:39 pm

If you mean the 0081239049 bridge, yes the intonation screws are too long. MIA offset bridges have screws 5/8" (15.9mm) long. But for some reason most of the metric bridges have 18mm screws (M3). Swap them out for 16mm and the string is much less likely to foul the front end of the screw.
"I just knew I wanted to make a sound that was the complete opposite of a Les Paul, and that’s pretty much a Jaguar." Rowland S. Howard.

User avatar
jorri
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3036
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 1:53 am
Location: bath, UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by jorri » Sat Sep 18, 2021 4:21 am

Its a great bridge.
I am pretty used to setting up Jazzmasters with this issue so it doesn't bother me, although it can take some back-and-forth between saddle vs plate height, it us currently set intonated, not hitting front screw nor screw head.
Loctite worked easily and it never moves.
Grooves are fine.
I have some shorter screws from a cheap chinese bridge (£5!) If ever need to replace. Also you can clip the spring shorter if thats preventing intonation.
I expccted to. I am in drop C though and didnt need to.

User avatar
alexpigment
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:02 pm

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by alexpigment » Sat Sep 18, 2021 6:24 am

The stock Player bridge has 55mm spacing rather than 52mm, right?

User avatar
jorri
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3036
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 1:53 am
Location: bath, UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by jorri » Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:25 am

alexpigment wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 6:24 am
The stock Player bridge has 55mm spacing rather than 52mm, right?
Yup. But for me i prefer the wider.

User avatar
alexpigment
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:02 pm

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by alexpigment » Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:51 am

Thanks for the confirmation. I don't see 55" as a problem really, I just wanted to know for future reference. The only downside I've seen is that sometimes it's a little easier for the high/low E strings to slide off the neck at the upper frets.

User avatar
ChrisDesign
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by ChrisDesign » Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:58 am

alexpigment wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:51 am
Thanks for the confirmation. I don't see 55" as a problem really, I just wanted to know for future reference. The only downside I've seen is that sometimes it's a little easier for the high/low E strings to slide off the neck at the upper frets.
The high e slips off all the time on the stock bridge. Seriously, the designer and management that let that crappy bridge through should be fired. How can a big name brand like fender release such as poorly designed bridge.

I teach design at university. If a student handed that bridge in I would give them 55/100. Good general idea but rubbish execution and overlooking serious floors that can be designed out with minimum effort:

1. Shorter screws
2. Lower tray front
3. Larger saddle barrels
4. 52mm spacing
5. Offset screw with the barrels to make the string go to the side and not over the top.

In short: the staytrem bridge
"I own a '66 Jaguar. That's the guitar I polish, and baby - I refuse to let anyone touch it when I jump into the crowd." - Kurt Cobain

User avatar
timtam
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:42 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by timtam » Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:26 pm

The 0081239049 bridge is really just the vintage bridge without the threading on the barrels ... with a single, deep string groove instead. You only go for a bridge with six sets of saddle height grub screws if you really need them for more precise control of action than a fixed-radius bridge (or Mastery's two 3-string shared saddles). The Staytrem doesn't have them. As we saw in another recent thread, there is no bridge that satisfies all the most desirable criteria for a fully adjustable-saddle-height bridge. Although a bit of filing and mix-and-match can get you there.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=120379

1. 52mm E-E
2. individual-string, height-adjustable saddles
3. single, deep string grooves
4. metal not tusq

Others ?
- large barrels
- offset (~16mm) intonation screws
- lower front/back plate edges
- circlips or nylon washers rather than springs (?)
- anti-sink nylon bushings on bottom of posts
"I just knew I wanted to make a sound that was the complete opposite of a Les Paul, and that’s pretty much a Jaguar." Rowland S. Howard.

User avatar
jorri
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3036
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 1:53 am
Location: bath, UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by jorri » Sun Sep 19, 2021 8:22 am

alexpigment wrote:
Sat Sep 18, 2021 10:51 am
Thanks for the confirmation. I don't see 55" as a problem really, I just wanted to know for future reference. The only downside I've seen is that sometimes it's a little easier for the high/low E strings to slide off the neck at the upper frets.
Its on a warmoth neck anyway, so that's probably why. I've never had a guitar that remotely came near that issue, perhaps due to particular fenders i dont own having thinner necks

I am also yet to see any particular bridge that would be top marks engineering its just the best available...i mean - if only! The Descendant catches my gaze though.

User avatar
ChrisDesign
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by ChrisDesign » Sun Sep 19, 2021 9:07 am

This thread makes me want to buy a Chinese bridge and apply the shorter screws, or get to work with a file and fix the rubbish Fender bridge.

Either way, I stand by my original point: Fender should never have let these bridges go out with a Fender logo on the headstock! It’s terrible design!
"I own a '66 Jaguar. That's the guitar I polish, and baby - I refuse to let anyone touch it when I jump into the crowd." - Kurt Cobain

User avatar
jorri
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 3036
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 1:53 am
Location: bath, UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by jorri » Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:47 pm

ChrisDesign wrote:
Sun Sep 19, 2021 9:07 am
This thread makes me want to buy a Chinese bridge and apply the shorter screws, or get to work with a file and fix the rubbish Fender bridge.

Either way, I stand by my original point: Fender should never have let these bridges go out with a Fender logo on the headstock! It’s terrible design!
Id opt for the shorter screws. Maybe you have a greater break angle than me.
Fender put out the stock slotted bridge for 60 years so no surprises. It doesnt seem like a hard task but no one, literally no one has done it for a reasonable price that a guitar bridge costs, so for reasonable prices i stand by that it may be the best for radiuses that arent covered by fixed saddles.

User avatar
ChrisDesign
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by ChrisDesign » Mon Sep 20, 2021 10:28 am

I disagree. The Mexican Fender bridge is a similar but different design to the Fender USA one of 60 years ago. Different moulds etc.

Shimming makes it worse because the chance of buzzing in the front tray is increased.

BTW, why are individual saddle adjustment screws so desirable? If the saddles are fixed at 9.5”, what is the problem?
"I own a '66 Jaguar. That's the guitar I polish, and baby - I refuse to let anyone touch it when I jump into the crowd." - Kurt Cobain

User avatar
alexpigment
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:02 pm

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by alexpigment » Mon Sep 20, 2021 5:15 pm

ChrisDesign wrote:
Mon Sep 20, 2021 10:28 am
If the saddles are fixed at 9.5”, what is the problem?
Getting a bridge at exactly 9.5” is a lot harder than getting a neck and all it’s frets at 9.5”. There are those than can address this on the fret side, but that’s outside of a lot of our skillsets and toolsets. Not to mention, a professional fret leveling is a nontrivial amount of time and therefore money.

On the other hand, adjustable saddles means that your fretboard can be as imperfect as most guitars are under a particular price point.

User avatar
ChrisDesign
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by ChrisDesign » Tue Sep 21, 2021 11:18 am

But you’re adjusting the saddles to a radius gauge and not the actual fretboard….
"I own a '66 Jaguar. That's the guitar I polish, and baby - I refuse to let anyone touch it when I jump into the crowd." - Kurt Cobain

User avatar
HarlowTheFish
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 806
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 7:09 pm

Re: Player Bridge = S##T

Post by HarlowTheFish » Tue Sep 21, 2021 1:54 pm

ChrisDesign wrote:
Tue Sep 21, 2021 11:18 am
But you’re adjusting the saddles to a radius gauge and not the actual fretboard….
Nah I adjust to the fretboard when I have adjustable saddles -- generally I'll have my low strings a little higher than my high strings, so it'll be a little flatter at the bridge than the actual fretboard radius.

Don't get me wrong, fixed saddle radius on bridges isn't a huge deal for me -- my Mustangs have them (7.25" and 9.5") and they play fine -- but if I had the option of getting height-adjustable saddles that worked well (i.e. with good string spacing, not the ~56mm on a lot of offset bridges) I'd go for it pretty much every time.

Post Reply