• From: N.Wales, UK
  • Registered: 2009-03-06
  • Posts: 2,183

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

Chrisuk wrote:
helrazr84 wrote:
AD3THREE wrote:

Has anybody got any opinions about this?
http://www.acmeguitarworks.com/Callaham … 1C282.aspx

Not to hijack the thread, but I've seen those types of bridge conversion kits before. I read the article briefly, bit of a hurry at the moment, but I never thought the bridge would be much of a difference in tone should it be "upgraded". Does anyone on here have any actual personal experience with this? Even the lightweight tail piece argument. But I am interested to hear what people have to say, as I've never actually tried this type of upgrade.

I run a Callaham bridge - it looks killer and the tonal change is subtle - probably the same magnitude that running Joe's nylon saddles gives.

It makes me laugh that there are people who will tell you it is too bright and your guitar won't sound like a LP anymore who eventually admit that they have never heard one in a guitar.

And you paid how much for one?

  • From: West Sussex
  • Registered: 2011-05-17
  • Posts: 307

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

helrazr84 wrote:

My biggest issue is trying to keep my guitar's sound even across the strings without being too bright on top or too muffled on the bottom end.

Both the Callaham and the 3 nylon saddles trick are supposed to achieve that - I can't say my guitar sounded unbalanced before though - the wound strings definately sound clear with the Callaham bridge.

  • Registered: 2009-03-06
  • Posts: 135

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

I like the top wrapped because it makes 11's easier to bend.  Also, I think 11's are much warmer sounding.  Not quite sold on nylon saddles, that's why I asked the question.

  • From: West Sussex
  • Registered: 2011-05-17
  • Posts: 307

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

DaveWammbarro wrote:
Chrisuk wrote:

I run a Callaham bridge - it looks killer and the tonal change is subtle - probably the same magnitude that running Joe's nylon saddles gives.

It makes me laugh that there are people who will tell you it is too bright and your guitar won't sound like a LP anymore who eventually admit that they have never heard one in a guitar.

And you paid how much for one?

Yeah Dave - you're right they aren't cheap.

Probably more than its objectively worth but I've had my '91 standard since new, its been with me my entire adult life being one of the first things I bought when I started working.  I was swapping out the hardware to all nickel to match the lightweight tailpiece, BKP Mules and original tuners (and having the frets plek'd after 20 years of use) so it was between this and the Faber and in the end I went with the one the tech was familliar with.

My Mules made much more impact on the sound but I'm really happy with the overall results and since this guitar has sentimental value I'll be taking it to the grave with me.

  • From: N.Wales, UK
  • Registered: 2009-03-06
  • Posts: 2,183

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

Chrisuk wrote:
DaveWammbarro wrote:
Chrisuk wrote:

I run a Callaham bridge - it looks killer and the tonal change is subtle - probably the same magnitude that running Joe's nylon saddles gives.

It makes me laugh that there are people who will tell you it is too bright and your guitar won't sound like a LP anymore who eventually admit that they have never heard one in a guitar.

And you paid how much for one?

Yeah Dave - you're right they aren't cheap.

Probably more than its objectively worth but I've had my '91 standard since new, its been with me my entire adult life being one of the first things I bought when I started working.  I was swapping out the hardware to all nickel to match the lightweight tailpiece, BKP Mules and original tuners (and having the frets plek'd after 20 years of use) so it was between this and the Faber and in the end I went with the one the tech was familliar with.

My Mules made much more impact on the sound but I'm really happy with the overall results and since this guitar has sentimental value I'll be taking it to the grave with me.

Mine is a similar story. A 95 with Mules, paper in oil caps, grovers etc. I have been thinking about - different nut (brass or similar fancy material), bridge and tailpiece and saddles. I'm never going to sell it...so...hmm...thinking required. Definitely the best things it has are Mules with those particular caps.

  • From: North Carolina
  • Registered: 2008-10-26
  • Posts: 2,926

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

I really like the idea they have though.  For years everything has been potted metal even the aluminum stop tail pieces are potted aluminum.  The idea is simple more mass = more tone.  Pot metal is heavy but very porous metal.  1080 cold rolled steel on the other had is about as solid as metal gets.  Yes $150 is steep for a TOM bridge, but if you look at the fact that, that is a 1080 cold rolled SOLID steel TOM bridge that a man had to use a mill or a CNC router then yeah that is going to cost you a bit more the potting a piece of metal in a mold.  I've got access to a mill and want to make a Stop tail piece out of 1080 Steel for my SG Standard (2001) that is coming home in April.  I want one of these Callaham Bridges to go with it.

That guitar was my first Gibson and I sold it a few years ago when money was tight, to a friend.  Now the friend's son is in college and never plays it I asked her if I could buy it back which she agreed to.

AD3THREE's Website

  • From: West Sussex
  • Registered: 2011-05-17
  • Posts: 307

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

It's actually the elasticity of the steel that makes the diference over zinc, not the mass. Much less of the energy is absorbed by the bridge body.

  • From: North Carolina
  • Registered: 2008-10-26
  • Posts: 2,926

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

Regarless I like 1080 steel!  I made a solid bridge block for my Strat that filled up the entire trem opening.  I wanted a block and I was going to block it like the clapton strats and my friend told me why do that when you can just make the whole block take up that space.  It was a very heavy strat to begin with and its around 9 to 10 lbs with the block we made.  If I did it for an sg maybe the guitar wouldn't be so head stock heavy!

AD3THREE's Website

  • From: Santa Barbara, CA
  • Registered: 2011-09-02
  • Posts: 110

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

I top wrap my SG with Ernie Ball 12-56 or 11-54. For me it really enhances the tone and playability. You get the sound of heavy strings but the feel of lighter gauge strings.

  • From: Andorra
  • Registered: 2012-03-07
  • Posts: 26

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

is better to do the thing like joe does his les paul

look at the bridge, joe put something, as you can see is plastic on the sadles.
[img]http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/5495/regioncapturer.png[/img]

Anyway here's the video, take a look at the video 1.57 minutes and you'll see what I mean.
http://youtu.be/Ce1fiU31MFU

  • From: East Lancashire, UK
  • Registered: 2011-06-24
  • Posts: 3,019

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

Those are the nylon saddles on the top three strings he has on all his guitars. If you look at the bursts on the adverts you can see them. There is a thread on here at the moment on that very topic. They stop the higher strings sounding too bright.

Come on the Blades (sorry Idolbone just had to borrow your line)
  • From: New Hampshire, USA
  • Registered: 2010-12-21
  • Posts: 3,650

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

helrazr84 wrote:
Chrisuk wrote:

It makes me laugh that there are people who will tell you it is too bright and your guitar won't sound like a LP anymore who eventually admit that they have never heard one in a guitar.

I think there are a lot of people out there who only go off of what they have read, or hear say information!

Wharris: Thanks, I'll look into it. Some brightness does help I think, especially when you can't hear your solos above the rest of the band. Usually brighter strings does the trick for me without going overboard. I'd like to look into the ABR style bridge and try the nylon saddles. My biggest issue is trying to keep my guitar's sound even across the strings without being too bright on top or too muffled on the bottom end.

sounds like your looking for ABR and nylon on E B G

"Joe B saved my soul, forever grateful Ron"
"Some people dream of worthy accomplishments while others stay awake and do them"
Skinner #1,JBLP 145(aged),252, (unaged),#285HM, Bburst #026, Joes 052 BCC black LP, Strat> RT,EC Gilmour,Beck,Lenny LP> PK 83,CC#2,3,4,9,Amps>Carol Ann RAH JB-100 SN 001,JB100 Red SN02,OD2, OD3,Tucana 2&3 Triptix,Twinkle land, Plexi ,JB Jub, Jubs,Plexi,Satch,Two Rock>others
  • From: York, PA
  • Registered: 2010-08-27
  • Posts: 1,749

Re: Top-wrapped Les Paul

cindyron wrote:

sounds like your looking for ABR and nylon on E B G

Yeah been thinking about picking up a conversion kit for the Nashville and trying the nylons on one of my LP's but not sure I buy into the hype. I'm not one to do whatever someone else does just because, but I don't know if they will really make much of a difference. Obviously the only way is to try it, and it won't be a super expensive mod nor will it be non reversible. Then again, I'm sure it won't make a change for the worse either even if I don't detect much of a difference.