boomerlu

Anybody have any idea where to purchase a Floyd with a built in piezo? The only one I can recall is the one made by Ibanez, the double edge, and I assume that's not available for retail/standard purchase.... In the absence of knowledge of retail Floyds with piezos, any other ideas how I could get this kind of functionality? Any workarounds short of actually changing the bridge? (which would be entirely inefficient because there's a ton of wood cut out for a recessed Floyd).

Greg: In response to your LONG post... Yes, that's basically what I was saying with my little thought experiment. I agree wholeheartedly, you just put it into more detail than I could. The tension is always distributed evenly. The post does NOT exert force, the string is what exerts force on the nut. So you have to search for another explanation. Of course, my "real world" rant part was simply because it seemed like you were implying that the break angle has no effect at all. You proved me wrong, no harm no foul. Again, I would wager the break angle effect is because of the string acting like a spring, which is what tirapop proposed. He quoted Hooke's law, just as I was doing. Re: Friction. Consider a few things: the contact between the string and the nut is extremely small. Also, nuts are designed to minimize friction (think roller nuts, graphite, smooth bone etc). Also, in a well made nut, the string is not supposed to move horizontally at all, because essentially the nut would "kink" the string more or less perfectly. Horizontal movement would be necessary for friction to matter.

I thought that 'phenomenon' had more to do with scale length? --That is, a shorter scale length is easier to bend, because presumably less tension is required to bring the string to pitch. But you'd think there'd be other variables involved -- personally, I'm more comfortable playing a thin, narrow neck -- bend definitely feel easier on my Melody Maker's pencil neck. Maybe someone else needs a fat neck for bending. And then there's radius...so a lot of that 'phenomenon' is subjective, and has to do with the player's hand and preferences. True, it is an incredibly complex issue. First let me address that what WE have been concerned with in this debate thus far is whether the string angle has any effect or not on the bendability. I've tried to isolate this issue, and of course there have been some efforts on the experimental end to verify once and for all what is or is not the case. As far as other variables, I'll mention a few things: Scale length: Erik mentioned somewhere that he felt for example that his Strat was easier to bend on than his Les Paul. He attributes this to the angles. Scientifically you are right about scales, but perhaps the angle difference is more significant than the difference in scale? I may do the calculations/further analysis next weekend. As far as fat vs thin, this is of course because of the difference in each player's hands...what the optimal size so that you have the most leverage advantage. I personally do not have enough experience with enough guitars to say anything specific...but I know enough about mechanics to offer explanations. Indeed, my high E string is a 12 gauge! My peculiar preferences diverge pretty far from the norm. Anyways, the main point is that good experimental evidence is always the FINAL word in science. No matter how beautiful a theory is or however advanced/simple the mathematics are, if it doesn't match up to the real world, it's worthless. Of course, in our case one needs to pay special care in designing the experiment to isolate the variables in question. While science is concerned with finding out first principles, engineering (in our case lutherie) is concerned with using those principles to accomplish a specific task. If we don't know the first principles, we're essentially wandering blind. And from the very name of this thread "myth/science in lutherie", we always are to some extent. Of course by nature, the making of music/musical instruments IS subjective, so you can't determine from first principles what sounds good or not. Well actually we could theoretically, but we haven't discovered the first principles of what sounds good (ie the subjectiveness of good vs bad tone)! And that's probably a good thing to some extent.

Let's all try a little thought experiment. First: Basic physics problem. You have a wall, a horizontal surface, and a vertical drop. A string is anchored to the wall by means of a tension gauge, which measures tension. The string goes horizontally over the horizontal surface, goes over a pully at the vertical drop, and then goes straight down, with an object that ways X newtons on the end of it. What tension does the spring gauge read? Answer: For a string, tension is the same on all parts of the string, therefore the gauge should read X newtons. Now, from here, how can we modify this to be more relevant? BTW, I think the above is essentially Greg's argument...correct me if I'm wrong. Now, the phenomenon of certain guitars being easier or harder to bend on IS true. Any physical model is either FALSE or INCOMPLETE if it fails to describe what IS KNOWN TO BE TRUE. In other words, no matter how good Greg's argument is, if it doesn't conform to the real world, it's not correct. So...the question is....what are we missing here? Consider: what if a string could be approximated by a spring? IE, the more it is disturbed from its equilibrium length, the more force it will exert. Now in this analysis there are two forces we are primarily concerned with: 1) The force that we exert on the string (tension, to bring it up to pitch). 2) The force the string exerts in order to get back to its equilibrium position. My guess is that 2) is what's responsible for the perception of more or less bendability. Think about it, the string wants to be STRAIGHT and at a certain natural equilibrium length. If you put an angle into the headstock, the string is in a non-equilibrium position and will thus exert force (in this case on the nut). In the case of an angled headstock, fretting or bending will put the string FURTHER from its equilibrium length. And from high school physics, the force the string exerts is directly proportional to the displacement from equilibrium length. Shoot me down if I missed something. Cheers Yike

When I took some of my superstrat type guitars, I found out how they mounted the single coils. They basically take a compressible, but relatively tough, piece of foam, and stick it under the pickup. Then the screws go directly into the guitar body. Loosening the screws increases pickup height and vice versa. i dont want to buy pickup rings, but if i use screws would i also need to insert springs so that the height remains adjustable (the screws currently thread through the pickups)

Not sure, but depending on the neck pocket, you could just stick a Floyd onto it, topmounted. The neck pocket would need a straight angle from what I hear and be relatively precise. If not, you could try something akin to a Fender American standard. Anything with two posts instead of 6 screws. It should be easy to tell.

Yes, IF one has the proper tools like planer/router. About how much do such tools cost anyways?

By MIM you mean Made in Mexico? Along the same lines: how would you modify a Vintage type bridge set up to a Floyd set up, in terms of filling in the 6 screws which are in there? Do you just use some correct radius wooden dowels and glue them in?

Edit: N/m about what I last posted, I searched here and found some good results. Although nobody has piped up about flying guitars necks? I'd like to hear something about them at least. Thanks all

Hey guys, I was looking around and "flying guitars" is a lot different than what I saw on the previous thread. Mainly now, I'm tempted to order their after-market necks: 24 fret, nice inlays, cheap. (BTW, they are doing direct selling via ebay now). Anybody have any experience with them? I've heard that the guitars at least were marginal at best, but again I'm simply looking at the aftermarket necks. I'll get my body/floyd/pickups some other avenue. Edit: Oh, also, how interchangeable are 22 fret necks and 24 fret necks? Specifically can I retrofit a 24 fret neck onto a body that was originally designed to take a 22 fret neck? Bolt-on 25.5 scale in all cases. If there is actually no way for a "normal" retrofit, is there any workaround? Just rout out more body? Thanks Guys

Seems like the links are dead. The zip links.

Hey guys Thanks for the suggestions and insight. Personally I'm going to have to go with a Trem-setter because my Floyd is finicky with tuning when I whammy. Unless of course somebody has advice/experience otherwise? The "just use the fine tuner" suggestion is awesome. So simple, yet I completely overlooked it. Anyways, I'll try things out and let you know how it goes.

Hey guys, I'm new around here and have a quick question. I have one guitar with a D-tuna installed, so I am familiar with the mechanism by which it works. I've done a search on topics for using the D-tuna on a Low-pro bridge, and the consensus is that it will not install. I understand this, but is there any way at all to modify the bridge so that it will take the D-tuna? Has anybody attempted this? I realize I will have to install some kind of trem stabilization whether it be trem-setter or block (I am thinking trem-setter regardless). Or alternatively, is there any way to get convenient drop tunings off a Floyd (ie no undoing the locking nut)? Or am I just stuck with buying an original model and going from there? Thanks guys