JackTheRipper wrote:I decided against installing the BA II.
I removed the stock bridge to get a look at the route and the work that I thought would be needed to install the BA II. It seems like the route would need to be filled, or partially filled, to get the BA II to have full contact with the body. Either that or install it further back. I don't want to do either of those things.
--jack
20211126_131519_Resized.jpg
20211126_131555_Resized.jpg
20211126_131621_Resized.jpg
It does look like there is plenty of saddle travel on the BA II, how does it look width wise?
That sounds like a good idea to me. The BA bridges are nice. I have never put one on a ric, but i have swapped two of my stock ric bridges (1976 and 2016) for Schaller rollers (my favourite) and they turned out better than i could have hoped. Instead of covering the hole with a surround, i like to fill the hole with a block of wood from an old cutting board to give the bridge a bit more of a contact surface and skip the surround. It's tue, they look pretty "custom" (visible ground wire, "wood coloured" block sitting in a "not wood coloured" surface, black bridge on instruments with chrome hardware) but i'm not one to mind, especially considering the improvement in function on those two. One had major saddle rattle and burrs in places that would eat my flatwounds. The other had wonky string spacing and too flat a radius. The sound on both those instruments came noticeably more solid/less "hollow" with the replacement, too. I don't think you'd be disappointed, but if you are, it's easy to switch back. Good luck if you decide to do it and make sure to let us know how you like it!
