Do you top-wrap your TOM?

[RVA]

People who top-wrap their tune-o-matic bridge seem to really believe in its benefits. From what I understand, this includes tuning stability and less stress on the bridge. However, there must be more to this, since I do not think that these are major issue with TOM bridges.

So, do you top-wrap and why?

 

[Gahr]

I top-wrap my Lester goldtop. The reason is simple. When I got it the stop tailpiece was screwed tight to the body and I need to top-wrap for the strings to run clear of the edge of the Nashville bridge.

 

[RVA]

I top-wrap my Lester goldtop. The reason is simple. When I got it the stop tailpiece was screwed tight to the body and I need to top-wrap for the strings to run clear of the edge of the Nashville bridge.

Did you consider raising the stop bar, or do you feel that having it at the body is beneficial?

 

[iblive]

Like Gahr I did the top wrap on my G400. Same reason. Don’t know if it makes a difference or not if the tailpiece is screwed down right to the body or not. But in my mind (no science here. Only opinion) it should. As to playing. Some suggest there’s less tension on the stings so bending is easier. Maybe. Maybe not.

 

[Gahr]

Did you consider raising the stop bar, or do you feel that having it at the body is beneficial?

I thought about it at first, but the screws were kind of stuck (I tried it with the strings on), so I just left it. I read that it is supposed to increse sustain (I doubt it matters in a practical setting) and allow for easier string bending. I can’t say l notice a whole lot of difference from what I’m used to. So I left things the way they were and top-wrapped when I put on new strings. Just for simplicity’s sake.

 

[RVA]

Some suggest there’s less tension on the stings so bending is easier. Maybe. Maybe not.

This is inaccurate. A certain degree of tension is required to tune to a certain pitch. That magic happens between the nut and the bridge. Any less tension would mean that it would be flat.

Many subscribe to the theory (me included) that the stop-bar to bridge angle should be the same or close to the angle of the strings from off the nut toward the headstock. This way there is equal downward pressure on both points of contact.

 

[smitty_p]

Many subscribe to the theory (me included) that the stop-bar to bridge angle should be the same or close to the angle of the strings from off the nut toward the headstock. This way there is equal downward pressure on both points of contact.

I’ve read this, too.

But, I haven’t seen anyone explain why it’s important to have the same downward pressure.

What about guitars that don’t have a stop tail?

My 2014 SG has a Maestro that has a much flatter angle than at the headstock. It plays fine.

What about a Strat with a relatively flat angle at the headstock, but a much sharper angle where the strings pass over the saddle down into the block?

Then, there is the Floyd Rose that simply clamps the string behind the saddle and uses a locknut to exert a much greater pressure at the nut than you would have across the top of the saddle.

I understand the symmetry of the same angle and equal down pressure, but no one has explained why it’s so important.

 

[RVA]

I’ve read this, too.

But, I haven’t seen anyone explain why it’s important to have the same downward pressure.

What about guitars that don’t have a stop tail?

My 2014 SG has a Maestro that has a much flatter angle than at the headstock. It plays fine.

What about a Strat with a relatively flat angle at the headstock, but a much sharper angle where the strings pass over the saddle down into the block?

Then, there is the Floyd Rose that simply clamps the string behind the saddle and uses a locknut to exert a much greater pressure at the nut than you would have across the top of the saddle.

I understand the symmetry of the same angle and equal down pressure, but no one has explained why it’s so important.

To my understanding, it is to prevent the bridge from being pulled forward or backward, which could cause issues over time

 

[Hackmaster]

Being an incurable Bigsby addict, I have eliminated the stop tailpiece on many of my guitars.
But an added bonus to Bigsby use is that if you use the Vibramate mounting kit it raises the Bigsby up quite a bit, thereby increasing the string clearance over the bridge and reducing the break angle at the bridge.

Have I ever top wrapped a stoptail? Yes. Did I notice any difference? Not really but like most everyone else, I like to have my stoptails
screwed down tight. In my little pea brain it just makes more sense to me that it will transfer more vibration to the body if it's down tight,
than if it's rocking around on the threads. Even with a stoptail that locks to the posts.

 

[RVA]

...it just makes more sense to me that it will transfer more vibration to the body if it's down tight,
than if it's rocking around on the threads. Even with a stoptail that locks to the posts.

I agree that more vibration is better for sustain,and having the tailpiece down toward the body may accomplish this. However, I think it is important only if the strings vibrate longer over the pickups and there is less transfer energy into the body, since I do not feel that wood vibration is relevant for electrics.

 

[Hackmaster]

I agree that more vibration is better for sustain,and having the tailpiece down toward the body may accomplish this. However, I think it is important only if the strings vibrate longer over the pickups and there is less transfer energy into the body, since I do not feel that wood vibration is relevant for electrics.

Interesting.
This is where Don needs to come in with a scientific explanation and enlighten all of us.

 

[jtcnj]

I dont, but if I had an issue and top wrapping was a viable solution, I would.

 

[RVA]

Interesting.
This is where Don needs to come in with a scientific explanation and enlighten all of us.

So, in the interest of full disclosure, I learned of the bridge angle between the stop bar and bridge from one of Don's post. I am curious to hear what he has to say about the vibration transfer, but I think it boils down to whether you are a tonewood believer or not.

 

[RVA]

I dont, but if I had an issue and top wrapping was a viable solution, I would.

Agreed

 

[gball]

I haven’t liked it when I’ve tried it. Makes the strings feel somewhat “sloppy” to me, and something doesn’t feel right when palm-muting. Looks cool though!

 

[JohnnyGoo]

Your post title is a little misleading there RVA. Should be Tailpiece not TOM

 

[smitty_p]

To my understanding, it is to prevent the bridge from being pulled forward or backward, which could cause issues over time

If that’s the case, the direction in which the bridge will tend to be pulled will be affected by the direction of the bisection of the string angle over the saddle, as compared to the vertical bridge posts.

Neither the string angle over the bridge nor the bisection of that angle is affected by the angle of the string behind the nut.

 

[syscokid]

To my understanding, it is to prevent the bridge from being pulled forward or backward, which could cause issues over time

Especially with ABR bridges. There is less mass to this type of bridge, and then there are those skinny bridge posts that are directly screwed into the wood. The string angle needs to be equal at the bridge. Otherwise, the ABR bridges will eventually collapse, and the posts will bend. More so, if you're a big time bender.

I do not like top wrapping the tailpiece. Don't like how it feels. Don't like how it looks. Tried it, and didn't feel or hear any difference. I'll gladly raise it to achieve proper string angle.

 

[smitty_p]

If that’s the case, the direction in which the bridge will tend to be pulled will be affected by the direction of the bisection of the string angle over the saddle, as compared to the vertical bridge posts.

Neither the string angle over the bridge nor the bisection of that angle is affected by the angle of the string behind the nut.

Here's a little illustration I made to illustrate my point.

Angle AB shows the string angle as it passes over the bridge. The angle shown is 166^ which equates to a 14^ break angle (180 - 14 = 166). This angle is bisected by ray CD. The bisector indicates the direction of force exerted by the string at the point of it's bend.

The angle of this bisection relative to the vertical line of the bridge posts (Line CE) gives some indication as to how much tendency there will be for the bridge to be pulled forward.

The point is, the angle of the string on the other side of the nut will not affect these angles, thus the tendency to exert a forward pull on the bridge.

 

[syscokid]

Here's a little illustration I made to illustrate my point.

Angle AB shows the string angle as it passes over the bridge. The angle shown is 166^ which equates to a 14^ break angle (180 - 14 = 166). This angle is bisected by ray CD. The bisector indicates the direction of force exerted by the string at the point of it's bend.

The angle of this bisection relative to the vertical line of the bridge posts (Line CE) gives some indication as to how much tendency there will be for the bridge to be pulled forward.

The point is, the angle of the string on the other side of the nut will not affect these angles, thus the tendency to exert a forward pull on the bridge.


View attachment 12325

Nice...