Move the G saddle almost all the way forwards (looks like it is in the picture). Measure with a metal ruler from the G nut slot to the point on the saddle where the string will leave the saddle going towards the neck. This will be about 2mm back from the front of the saddle. Move the bridge so this distance is 34" /863.7mm. I'd put masking tape on the top of the bass and mark the front and back bridge position on it.
Then you can use ordinary string or thread running from the E saddle up to the E nut slot, through the tuner holes and back down from the G nut slot to the G saddle to position the bridge so the strings run an equal distance from the edges of the neck. Get the bridge sitting square to the neck and mark the edge positions. You now know where the bridge wants to go.
You shouldn't need ferrules on the top of the body. But your bridge is a bit different to normal as the string holes are normally round and probably a bit smaller. Your holes appear to be keyhole shaped (unless they are 'racetrack' shaped and it's the saddles that make the hole look narrower at one end), almost as if the string ball-ends are expected to be pushed into a hole beneath the bridge and pulled forward to keep them in place.
Could you confirm the string hole shape, maybe with a photo of the underside? The bridge itself should act as the support for the string when it leaves the body, but with an elongated hole, there is no definitive point to drill a hole through the body from. You'd want to put it at the front of the bridge hole, but with the E string saddle sitting further back than the G, the string may end up being too vertical or even come out backwards.
So I'd probably drill the through holes in the large part at the rear of the bridge hole, and maybe file at an angle with a round needle file at the front of the hole, so the string can angle forwards if necessary. You'll just have to accept that the string may cut into the wood a bit over time, but it will be stopped by the front of the bridge hole.
I don't know if this was an expensive bridge but if not, and you don't like the thought of an elongated hole in the wood, it might be worth looking for a different one, or just use this one for top loading.
Thank you Simon! I will use the steps to place the bridge, the description is very helpful.
The string through is a bit more challenging...The holes are really in a straight key hole shape. There is no angle, they are just drilled in the metal with sharp edges (it costs about 35€). So you think ignoring the narrow part (red) and make regular holes in the bigger round part (green)? That seems really the only option in this case. I am just thinking of adding some ferrules, to avoid the inwood cutting, but on the other side, strings working into the woodedge gives them a smooth base. And normally they do not move much at this point.
I found some ESP Ltd Bass, that seem to have similar bridges.
I was searching for some other bridges. And came along this cheap one. Not sure if this is a copy of a higher priced bridge. Somehow I like the shape and the 6 screw mounting. What affection you think has the price on such parts? Poor Metal, poor adjustments?
Not sure this will solve the problem, but I have never liked those barrel jacks. They have a tendency to break, or to develop a bad connection over time and require replacement. If it were me, I would be tempted at least to do this sort of a mod to use an open frame (preferably a Pure Tone) jack and a mounting plate (referred to in the US as a "football."
I did this on a G&L bass after having problems with a Switchcraft barrel jack. I also just noticed that Pure Tone makes a Barrel jack now...which might also be a better option than the stock jack. But the football+open frame jack would be lower profile between the pots as well as more reliable. Just a thought FWIW.
It's hard to know exactly what affects the price and by how much. Certainly the location does, so its a lot cheaper to build things in China than it is in Germany. A lot of the Chinese-made bridges are simply copies of European- or US-designed and built bridges, so there's been minimal research and development costs to make back.
The construction methods and materials are often very different on the copies than the originals. A bridge by ABM (very good quality but high-cost German bridges) will probably be machined from a solid block of quality metal, whilst a copy bridge will normally use all die-cast components of an unknown alloy. Screws will often be alloy rather than stainless steel. Sometimes the full functionality of the original bridge isn't incorporated into the copy. The 12-string bridge often used by Pit Bull kits is a case in point, It's basically a copy of a Kluson bridge, but the threaded holes allowing the bridge to be used for both left and right-handed guitars aren't threaded in the copy, so it's not actually much good for right-hand use!
The bridge you picked appears to incorporate saddles of a type used by Hipshot (the whole bridge design may well be a Hipshot copy) where the rear hex-key screw adjusts the side-to-side position of the roller saddle so you can adjust the string spacing. This feature isn't mentioned in the description, so the saddle positions may or may not be fixed. You'd have to buy one to find out.
Tolerances in the cheap versions may be greater than the originals, so assuming the bridge above is a copy of another one, the saddles may fit very snugly in their channels on the original, whilst from the picture it looks like there's a bit of a gap either side. I have no idea whether something like this affects the sound at all, but the ability for the saddles to move sideways may affect the accuracy of the string spacing very slightly. It may not have any practical effect, but it might affect how you feel about the bass in terms of overall quality.
It's a Korean made Sung Il model BB404. It is cast, non milled. But I have had three Sung Il bridges and the chrome finish has been great on all three of them. It can be mounted string-on-top or string-through. String spacing is 19mm and not adjustable. One thing I like is that once you get the saddle height and length set, you can lock the saddle in place so that it does not move. You can get these in gold or black as well as chrome. I have only used chrome so I can't say anything about the quality of the others.
Except that bridge has the same ‘keyhole’ string-through holes that the original bridge had and gives the same ‘where do I drill’ problem. Fine for top loading, but I’m not seeing any benefit in the keyhole shape for string-through body mounting, only a drawback.
Thank you guys for the input, I really appreciate it!
The jack is a hard thing to deal with, for I wanted to keep it as small as possible. Even now it is visually moving too much into the frontview (for it was drilled wrong) and I think every other jackshape would make it even worse. The rounding of the bodyline is very strong and it is not much depth of the bass body there. Actually I wanted to use one of this, but the hole would get enormous.
About the bridge. That is often a problem with cheap quality (in many ways). You are right Simon, the details matter, and usually it is not enogh space for that in cheap products. Looking similar, but not the same... Having the compromise of something good looking and not too expensive is always difficult. But installing a bridge that has almost the price of the whole kit is also not the best way and too expensive for my purpose. Of course ordering two cheap bridges is also not great...
I want to try the ebay bridge that could be the copy of a Hipshot (they look really good), for I want to compare it on the bass. I think you have to see it in real life to get the right feeling. But this could take some time till the shipping arrives...
And I still can go for the bridge I have now (very similar to the one fender3x posted).
I didn't find it that hard to do the drilling. I did mine this way:
You need three bits that will completely fill the "big" hole in the keyhole. I think it is actually a little easier on a bass, because the big bits don't wander as much as small bits do, so easier to get things in a good line.
I used long ferrules on the back, like these:
The keyhole shape is beneficial, I think, because the string breaks over the wood rather than over the metal. It digs into the wood a bit so so the curve to 90 degrees is not as sharp as it would be with a round hole.
I would worry most about the sharp edges of the hole, particularly on the narrow part of the keyhole. That's not really a problem on the one I used which is pretty smooth, however.
In the video the guy uses a drill press, but I have seen others using a drill guide instead.
I'm not convinced about the keyhole shape being beneficial. To me, a lot would depend on how soft or hard the wood is. In a softer wood, the strings would tend to dig in more over time, enlarging the string-through hole. I'd much prefer a well-engineered circular exit hole with rounded edges, but I doubt whether anyone goes into such detail, even on the really high-end bridges. I did have an ABS bridge I fitted to a Precision (£200 when new, but bought on eBay for £60), but it was a top-loading only type.
The keyhole shape only makes sense to me as a quick-loading method for a greater string break angle over the saddles if there is a sizeable hole under the bridge for the ball-end to fit in to (but no rear ferrules). Maybe there was an original bridge made for this type of installation whose features then got copied and misapplied? To me the smaller slot is far too elongated to simply encourage a less acute string break angle leaving the body. A much shorter slot, fine.
But if coming up through bare wood is OK for strings, why do applicable guitars and basses have top-mounted ferrules rather then none at all? I do feel that the keyhole shape is probably a good idea for a certain application that's simply been copied without thinking. I don't know at all, but the engineer in me isn't happy with the concept.
Reply With Quote
