psw Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 G'day there I played a Les Paul, A beautiful black 1969 model (I think) for about 25 years. Over the last 5 years I've been messing about on strat copies so I never fully explored something that I have thought about, off and on, for many years... A tremolo that requires no structural modification to the instrument yet works! So I took out the Dremel and some aluminium stock and made up some ideas and I think there is potential...not only for stud tailpieces like on the gibsons but as an alternative to the strat/floyd as, for the project guitar builder, it would require no routing but be surface mounted to the top. Anyway, I was wondering what sort of interest there would be in the idea, so that I could get an idea of how strongly I should pursue it... Give me your thoughts psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AlexVDL Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 I would definately want to know if it can be done! I too want a les paul with tremolo, but without routing the body. There are trems which replaces the tailpiece, but first they're too ugly, and second they work like a bigsby, no floyd So I say yes, bring it on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 I think it will go over well in the market. Go for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushy the shroom Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 I know that some company (possibly Hipshot) makes non Bigsby style trems for Les Pauls, but I'm not sure about the Strat. Crazy idea: hook up a battery circuit with each string making a circuit. Next, have 6 buttons, knobs, or switches that control power flow through each string. So, you are essentially pumping a number of volts throuh a string, creating a short circuit with the battery. This warms up the string and causes the pitch to drop . You could have individual string trem controls, with rate adjustments if you were to control the voltage running through the string. You could probably even make a trem arm that controls it. I would like to see that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovekraft Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Kahler made a flat-mount trem that would retro-fit some Gibson-style guitars - you're gonna have to ask the Kahler experts for specific info, but I owned an early 80s BC Rich NJ Mockingbird that had one installed, and it worked pretty much as well as a contemporary Floyd, if memory serves. The feel was a bit heavier, like a Strat with all five springs, but it was smooth and accurate, and I liked it, although the guitar itself wasn't all that great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maiden69 Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Ok, I got the answer here, I e-mailed Neil Moser about this a few months ago, and the response is that for the Kahler you still have to rout a little bit. Now Floyd Rose had one that didn't need rout but it wasn't too good, but the good news is that they plan to bring one next year. here is a link to a Kahler and a wonderbar ithink on the SG. And here is a link to the F R attempt LP Floyd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted October 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Yeah I saw the floyd and that helped rekindle some of my ideas as F.R. is trying to reproduce his trademark product...springs and all. LK, the Khaler did need some routing (about 3/4") as it worked by a cam with small tight springs at about 45 degrees. The Wonderbar by Washburn (see link above), long since deleted, was the only trem of any worth that did not require routing. It used a springless design using some kind of torsion rod, but I've never gotten my hands on one to check it out and I can't find a patent. I'm proposing to tackle the problem with a modular design with a similar mechanism to the wonderbar, but that treats each string individually and compactly. The design needs to incorporate fine tuners as a locking nut of some type will probably be necessary because of the tilt back head and string splay to the tuners. These modular units can be used to assemble a range of different trem styles by using different baseplates. more latter...seems to be working...and have a notebook of different options to explore... psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeR Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 http://www.stetsbar.com/ Sorry Boys. psw- did you get that email i sent you- about circiut protection? Cheers guys, luke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 (edited) hmmmm I can't see many people doing massive dive bombs on that. it looks very much like the same as the old SG trems, when they were first realesed as les pauls, which moved from side to side rather than up and down. I suspect that it would act a bit like a sidewards acting bigsby, not much range and more of just a bit of a flutter. EDIT: ignor that! I should have read the FAQ on their page first Edited October 8, 2004 by rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeR Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Yeah, its supposed to be a VERY cool unit- I havent used one yet, but i am planning to get one for my guitar. I have heard a cool of guys at differnt forums have tryed thm and they raved about them. It uses ball bearings, apparently. Luke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maiden69 Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Luke that is a cool unit, I think it looks a bit like the Bigsby, which is a turn down for me and the price is ... a bit high, I will still wait for the FR. But if it doesn't come out thats a good alternative, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeR Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 yeah, its proably worth while waiting for the FR- I would think that the floyd would be better for metal type playing, being lockable and all. Being a 'traditionalist' myself, i like the bigsby type look, so i think thats the one for mwe. I hope you dont have to wait TOO long for the FR though! Luke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted October 9, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 I don't see the stetsbar staying in tune! I had a bigsby and had problems (and very little travel) and a Rocklinger style tailpiece (which was very bad). You've got the problem of the strings getting caught on the saddles...they don't even appear to be roller saddles (not to mention string wear)... and then on the other end the binding on the nut. Locking tuners won't really help as the strings on an LP splay out and are pulled back by the headstock angle. The only real solution to this is to lock the strings at the nut...but then you need fine tuners. That's where the floyd comes in. What I'm proposing/working on is something a bit more like a strat bridge with subtle fine tuners...top loaded without locks...locking nut...and very slim. This would be mounted on some kind of plate to fit on you Gibson style guitar using the tailpiece studs. Basically I have three unconventional "spring" designs that I'm trying...I can't promise Floyd style response...but it should be floating and have a travel similar to a strat. I'm using this as the benchmark anyway. I'm having a little problem making a good intonation and height adjustment system. Modern trems like the Floyd just lock them down to the bridge plate. I don't have experience with a Floyd so I'm not sure how you set these adjustments up...it looks a little tricky. The other thing I'm proposing is the use of reinforced epoxy resins for some of the parts...would people have a problem with that...crucial areas would use stainless steel...but I dont see there being any reason not to use it and it would make making them easier as some of the parts are quite complex shapes to make from metal. psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
litchfield Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 I'm gonna wait for floyd do re release that one, cus the man knows what he's doing. I dont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 I haven't given up on this idea...in fact I've pulled a few late nighters and its coming along quite nicely. It works on a principle I've not seen before and is truly floating, although the range and action (stiffness) is yet to be seen. Still no routing required and it's reversable, although my Les Paul, which was modified during the brass era of the 70-80's (what were we thinking) has a different bridge mounted on studs similar to the tailpiece, so that's what I'm working with. It's actually been an advantage. The whole thing is no larger than the combined bridge/tailpiece and has some unusual features not found on other trems so stay tuned....it might take a while. It certainly looks more Gibson though it tilts the saddles like a floyd or strat. It's certainly an improvement over a bigsby or anything Gibson has offered. Sticking a floyd on an LP, or even a Khaler seems to look just that....stuck on. I think mine is looking better already...it looks like it belongs at least! By the way, the only trem that I know of that just slotted onto an LP with no modification was the now gone, Washburn Wonderbar. It looked a lot like the Khaler but had a different type of spring system (torsion) so required no route. Could fit to a strat too! Shame it's not around. we'll I'll just go back to it then psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maiden69 Posted November 26, 2004 Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 I haven't gave up either. But I, like Litch, will be waitnig for the Floyd to be out... I just hope that it's not outrageously expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevan Posted November 26, 2004 Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 PSW- glad to see you got my email. :-) Sorry it took so long. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
litchfield Posted November 26, 2004 Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 It seems floyd will NOT be releasing it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted November 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2004 Thanks guys for your replys Especially thanks to Kevan...I'm trying to learn the meaning of circumspection... Now, the problem with Floyd's design for the Les Paul, as I see it, is that he's was trying to recreate the wonderfull piece of inginuity in a different form and I really didn't think that was going to fly. It's all in the springs, don't you know! The stud mounted bridge is quite different from the flat mount, back sprung syncronised Fender style (which is all the floyd really is - just hotted up!). And, it creates a different sound by the way its attached and transfers sound. That's interesting that he abandonded it...he must have a high degree of perfectionism and integrety. Lesser guys would have unleashed it on the public and it would have taken years before it was acknowledged as a dog! My esteem is rising for Floyd...good on ya mate Let you know how mine goes psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.