So you'd prefer to be sarcastic than infer that fiddling round a bit means adjusting the saddles with allen keys. Genius! Adjusting it the way I said is not compromise because it actually works and works better than a standard bridge. Like I said once you have it all adjusted right it is easy to tweak with an allen key. The reason they work is that the saddle doesn't just move up and down it also tilts to create the desired angle, which is what takes some time to work out the first time.aceonbass wrote:So let me get this straight...Once the intonation has been set on the 1st and 3rd string in each trio, you "fiddle around a little until the A and B are right". Would you please explain what you mean by this, because if by "fiddling around a little" you mean moving either end of the saddle in any way, you will throw the intonation off for the strings you've just set the intonation on. Now it is just possible that once the intonation is set at either end of a saddle that the intonation will be right on for the middle string, but this is dependent on string gauge (among other things), so it may or may not be right. To have the intonation for the A and B strings dependent on the intonation for their adjacent strings is a compromise.
So you're against this because the technogoly was used on a Fender first??? I wonder what you do when you find a Bigsby on a Rickenbacker. If you check out the fourth page of the link that lfoc posted, you'll actually see that the set up isn't too different from a regular Rick bridge. The main differences are that the saddles form a slight radius, one set is angled back slightly and the other set, for the lower strings has slightly forward lean. Being able to tilt the saddles back and forth is not a problem in my book, it's an advantage. Again there is no problem with setting radius because of the way the bridge is designed to adjust to the radius. It is completely different approach to bridge design and for that reason you may not be seeing its true potential.aceonbass wrote: Each saddle on a Rick roller bridge is individually adjustable for each string, but the saddles are all the same height, so that is a compromise. Each saddle trio on the Mastery bridge for Ricks is apparently machined and then bent to a 7.5" radius. I'm inferring this based on the bridge Mastery makes for Fenders. To adjust a saddle made for a 7.5" radius to accommodate a 10" radius, you would first have to either lower the saddle on the inner end, or raise the saddle at the outer end. Once this is done, the inner and outer strings are now on the correct radius, but the center strings in each saddle will be slightly higher than the outer strings because, remember, the saddle was made on a 7.5" radius. Now if each saddle were straight, the middle string would end up slightly closer to the fretboard than the outer strings, and that wouldn't be right either. The best thing to have done concerning fret board radius, would been to have made the saddle on a 10" radius in the first place, then you wouldn't need any height adjustment at all for the saddles. Whatever tooling that is required to make the saddles for a Fender has been used to make these saddles, and that is what I mean by compromise. I know there are more Fenders in the world, but do you want a part made for a Fender adapted to fit your Rickenbacker?
Thank you for at least agreeing with one point. Most things are a compromise, that is why people keep building and improving upon things. If this were set up as a two saddle job it wouldn't work, as it wouldn't exert the downward pressure needed to create the greater string to body energy transfer that the system is designed for. Therefore, as it is set out to do what it is supposed to do and does it well, than it is not a compromise.aceonbass wrote:I'll give you this one. As I've said previously, the base plate is a great idea, and should be available separately. In conclusion, as I've said before, I'm not commenting on the tone the piece imparts to your guitar. I'm saying that each string cannot be adjusted precisely and independently of other strings, and that is a compromise I wouldn't be willing to live with. Now if the same saddle design were applied to saddles designed to accommodate two strings each, all of it's design compromises would have been eliminated. You would then be able to adjust intonation for each string, and set them on any radius you wanted, without compromise. If all of the components were then chrome plated, you could put a cover on it, and then it would look stock, eliminating any aesthetic concerns.
If someone had been as negative as you have been about a product of mine and basically talking it down for six or seven pages I wouldn't bother talking to you either. What has John got left to say to you that other people haven't said.aceonbass wrote: Now if none of my "nitpicking" matters to you, and the tone really does it for you, then that's fine, but it's not more adjustable than the stock part. It just does some things better. Since the designer decided to post on this thread, I asked him to clear up my assumptions based on my observations, but he's chosen not to, so infer what you will from that. I have.[/i][/b]
