Advice on filing new saddles

[Wagster]

I have a new Faber ARBN on it's way to me. The sites states that there are "starter" notches in the saddles.

My normal modus operandi is to just dive into something and ask questions after I screw it up. Thought I'd shake things up a little and ask for advice BEFORE it arrives.

So, any experiences, thoughts or favorite vids you have found useful? I really DON'T want to have to replace brand-new saddles and I really DO want to get the most out of this bridge. Got a new tailpiece coming with it....

I do have access to a set of jewellers files, but no nut files. Seems obvious that I need to do any filing before setting action and intonation, but how much is too much? And how much beer is required to make sure the slots are straight?

[skynyrd67]

I usually just hit the saddle enough to make sure the string sets about half its thickness in the slot, all you need is enough to hold the string from popping out on a big bend. I have found getting that slot all the way around as smooth as poosible is as important as the slot itself, it will lessen string hang and the tuning pop or ting and help it stay in tune better. A radius gauge to make sure you keep the strings following the radius of the neck is key as well.

[Shawn Lutz]

I have a Faber w/Brass saddles. I also ordered a set of files from Stew-Mac to notch them deeper but upon installation the guide slots actually are dead nuts center and were deep enough to hold the string in place without any weird ghost notes of funky harmonics.

If I were you I would install it first to see if it works as is, a lot of Faber users dont notch them, you might too, If they do need it if you not comfortable in the process you should take it in for a set up as you only get one shot at notching the saddle, do it wrong then you'll need to buy new saddles for whatever ones you did improperly My guitar was plek'd and the nut did not need any additional filing,

[Ole'Lefty]

The little starters in the Faber will not need much deepening/enlarging. If those needle files have one with toothed edge only and also a triangular they are your best bet. If you were a little more "enmeshed" in the forum, I would loan you the S-Mc large double edged by mail. If you are not in a huge rush, email me at my personal address jetobeyatmsn.com with some bio and I'll consider it. Fabers are excellent and it would be a shame to mess up. Until the VIP member stiffed me on the George M guitar sale, I would not even hesitate. NO MATTER--do not let excitement lure you into wrecking your bridge.

[Wagster]

Originally Posted by skynyrd67

A radius gauge to make sure you keep the strings following the radius of the neck is key as well.

Now that you mention it (and I'm glad you did) I do recall reading something about that somewhere. I do have a set of StewMac radius gauges in my stash.

Originally Posted by Shawn Lutz

If I were you I would install it first to see if it works as is

I must admit that this idea went through my mind. I was like.. "Hey! Maybe the starter notches will hold my 11's and I won't need to do any filing?" And my evil twin is like... "Yea right. YOUR starter notches will be special!" (My evil twin can be SO sarcastic...)

I will definitely give it a shot. There's no downside to trying.

Originally Posted by Ole'Lefty

If you were a little more "enmeshed" in the forum, I would loan you the S-Mc large double edged by mail.

It is EXTREMELY generous of you to even entertain the idea of doing this. It's the few good folks that you find on these forums that make it worth putting up with all the idiots. I wouldn't feel comfortable borrowing your tools, but I really do appreciate the thought.

My file set does include a tooth edged and several triangular files. What's sad is, if you were to look at the shopping cart for my StewMac account right now, you would see a set of nut files that have been sitting in there for several months now. For some reason I just can't make myself click the checkout button. It's not really a money thing.... it's some kind of mental block I think!

Thanks for the help guys. I'm sure I'll be looking for more free advice real soon!

[spitfire]

I've notched my first two sets of saddles recently. So I'm no expert by any means, but something not mentioned is that dead center is not necessarily where you want them.

I position the outside high and low E-strings where I want, then space the other strings. There's enough little errors in the way a neck can be set that can tweak alignment. This, I believe, is why many (most?) saddles come with no notches.

As to notching itself, I have a set of nut files, so that's what I use. The last time I did this (2 days ago), I created starter notches by driving the strings into the saddles using a nail set. This is a very controlled way to do that as you can position the set right on the string, and it takes a pretty light tap of a hammer. Obviously, these strings will be damaged doing this.

As mentioned, you need to radius the strings and since TOM bridges don't have individual string height adjustment, you have to control this by notch depth.

[Ole'Lefty]

Hey there Wags--just email me the shipping info and I'll get the file set to you. They are not the premium ones that look like popsicle sticks( I have some of those in duplicate that are only for saddles)-they are the large ones with the color dipped handles. Then you can be confident that you are respecting the quality of that Faber. I can't change now at over 60 yoa and I would feel good if I knew I had helped. Mike

[onegoodtrick]

Originally Posted by Ole'Lefty

Hey there Wags--just email me the shipping info and I'll get the file set to you. They are not the premium ones that look like popsicle sticks( I have some of those in duplicate that are only for saddles)-they are the large ones with the color dipped handles. Then you can be confident that you are respecting the quality of that Faber. I can't change now at over 60 yoa and I would feel good if I knew I had helped. Mike

"It's the few good folks that you find on these forums that make it worth putting up with all the idiots" Yes sir,what he said.

Good for you Mike.Well done.

[Wagster]

Originally Posted by Ole'Lefty

I can't change now at over 60 you and I would feel good if I knew I had helped. Mike

Thanks again, Mike. You have already helped more than you know! You got me past my mental block and I ordered that set of nut files today. So if I do screw this bridge up, I will be using the correct tools to do it. (And now I can learn to make my own nuts too, which was the reason I wanted them in the first place)

Originally Posted by spitfire

As mentioned, you need to radius the strings and since TOM bridges don't have individual string height adjustment, you have to control this by notch depth.

My new bridge arrived today. I had never paid much attention to the details of a TOM bridge before, but after looking closely I realized that the saddles are set in a radius within the bridge. So I'm going to try making the shallowest notch I can get by with and check them with my radius gauge.

Hopefully between my usual set-up tools and my new file set I can get this bridge installed correctly with minimal fuss.

[spitfire]

Wagster,

With a set of files, your going to do fine. It's always a bit scary to do these things for the first time, but the worst you can really do is F-up a saddle and they are pretty cheap. I think you'll find that it is no big deal. Just take your time.

Aside for the saddle, pay attention to what else your file may run into. Since you have to work the radius, you really do need to file them with the bridge installed. Though I suppose you could do the initial cuts with it off the guitar after marking the slot locations.

You do want to angle the slots towards the tail piece. The idea being you want the string to touch the saddle at the edge of the saddle facing your pups etc. If the slots slopes the wrong way, the string may vibrate a bit against the saddle and you'll get that sitar type sound.

Point being, when you angle the file, watch out not to angle it so much you hit the edge of the bridge body and mark it up. Or of course angle it down and run it so far it hits your guitar body.

Just go slow, measure twice, cut once. And very likely, you'll do just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

[Wagster]

Originally Posted by spitfire

Just go slow, measure twice, cut once. And very likely, you'll do just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

Followed this advice to the letter. And you're right...no fuss about it!
Popped the bridge in place. Gave each saddle a few easy strokes with my new files and put the new strings on. It could not have been easier...

I want to thank Mike (Ole Lefty) yet again. Your concern for assuring that I treated this bridge with due respect hit the bulls eye!

And to anyone thinking about swapping out their Nashville bridge for an ABR-1, this Faber ABRN is a great option. I had no desire to replace my Nashville posts and this bridge fit them perfectly. No additional parts. No drilling. No fuss! And the quality is top shelf. I'm a satisfied customer to be sure....

[spitfire]

Wagster,

You mention swapping out a Nashville for an ABR. While I've not looked into the merits of either bridge, I have gained a sense that the ABR is preferred over the Nashville. However, I recently bought an LP studio that has a nashville bridge, and it seems like an improvement over an ABR (which I have on several other guitars).

For example, I like that the Nashville has a greater adjustment range on the saddles. No need to flip saddles around if you run up against the end of the travel.

If the ABR is considered better, why is that?

[Ole'Lefty]

Some claim that the small posts, 6-32 SAE UNC transmit better tone. If the ABR is a true vintage one, the saddles do have a very rattlefree fit to the bridge body--OR--'It was vintage, so it must be better!"

It should be noted that the Nashville identifier is now being used with many configurations that were not within the earliest ones. In its traditional configuration, post spacing was 2.930 +-. "Standard" post spacing is in the 2.850 +- range. As I have commented, one can sometimes cram a 2.930 +- Nashville onto standard spaced setup if the diameter of the "post in body" is compatible. Actual 6-32 SAE UNC posts are rare in modern guitars; they are replaced with 4 mm which is close.

The benefit that is consistently present with the Nashville bridge body is the extra saddle range of adjustment. The new saddle screw arrangement with glued on nuts opposite the slotted or Phillips head is more secure. As I experienced, a Bigsby can yank the screws out of the earlier ones-even with super-polish on saddle notches.

[Ole'Lefty]

I would further comment to Wagster that it is great to read of the success instead of the "How do I fix this mess I made?" And, having those dedicated files will always be an asset if you find you enjoy the detailing of a guitar.

I do realize that they are expensive and not everyone can afford them and I respect those who do a good job with lesser tools/assets.

[Wagster]

Originally Posted by spitfire

Wagster,

You mention swapping out a Nashville for an ABR. While I've not looked into the merits of either bridge, I have gained a sense that the ABR is preferred over the Nashville. However, I recently bought an LP studio that has a nashville bridge, and it seems like an improvement over an ABR (which I have on several other guitars).

For example, I like that the Nashville has a greater adjustment range on the saddles. No need to flip saddles around if you run up against the end of the travel.

If the ABR is considered better, why is that?

Be aware that I'm far from a knowledgeable source of information when it comes to Les Pauls. I bought my first LP (a 60's tribute) just over a year ago, so I'm just a rookie. However, I can tell you what motivated me.

As Mike suggested, I think a lot of people are in the "it's vintage so it must be better" camp. My concerns were (I hope) a little more valid. The two main reasons I wanted an ABR were:

1) The Gibson bridge and tail piece are made of Zamak. As mentioned, I'm no expert but I'm guessing (hoping?) that the materials/construction of the Faber bridge and tail piece will be a step up. Of course, this is not exclusive to ABR's.

2) Because of the extra width of the Nashville bridge, I ran into the problem of the strings contacting the back of the bridge if my tailpiece was too low. It really restricted the the amount of adjustment I had. This might be more attributable to my setup skills (or lack there of) than design characteristics. I'm not one of those hard core "the tail piece must be slammed to the body to get the most sustain" people, but I can say that the setup I now have with the new bridge/tailpiece is much more to my liking. As for the smaller travel on the saddles, it's a moot point for me, thankfully. I dialed the intonation in with room to spare.

And, if I may be allowed a small vanity, I do prefer the appearance and smaller footprint of the ABR.

How much I gain from this upgrade vs the costs is certainly debatable, but after months of consideration I decided to take a chance. After all, I only have ONE Les Paul and I do want to get the most out of it, within reason...

[spitfire]

Wagster, I was just curious what the reasoning might be. Thanks for your perspective.

Heck, "cuz I think it looks better", is as good a reason as any.

[strat]

Seriously I'd try it first as is. You can always take more out, you can't put it back..... no matter how much you want to rewind those last 15 seconds. -____-

[Wagster]

Originally Posted by spitfire

Heck, "cuz I think it looks better", is as good a reason as any.

You speak true. I would wager a years salary... that PARTICULAR reason sells more guitar paraphernalia than all other reasons COMBINED! These Faber parts are among the very few items that I've attached my LP that are not purely cosmetic.

Originally Posted by strat

Seriously I'd try it first as is. You can always take more out, you can't put it back..... no matter how much you want to rewind those last 15 seconds. -____-

More truth.

While I did not load strings onto the bridge before filing it, I did use the strings I removed to molest the starter notches. And I agree that they did have a considerable amount of grip.

I have had 9's on this guitar at times and the starter notches would likely have kept them secure without issue. And considering that my playing style is somewhat conservative, even my 11's might have stayed seated as well.
But when I said I made a "few easy strokes", I probably did not spend a total of 15 seconds (actual filing time) on any one saddle. I vowed not to practice making nut slots in my new bridge!

After getting the bridge installed late last night, I did get to spend a few hours today jerking the strings around. I'm happy to say that at present the bridge is very stable. No issues at all...

[spitfire]

Originally Posted by Wagster

You speak true. I would wager a years salary... that PARTICULAR reason sells more guitar paraphernalia than all other reasons COMBINED! These Faber parts are among the very few items that I've attached my LP that are not purely cosmetic.

I agree, but no one will every hear me put them down for what they do for looks alone. Nor will I judge someone for whatever snake-oil like tone mojo upgrades they make. But I will call into question someone who starts making claims about tone mods that would seemingly defy the laws of physics.

While ultimately guitars are tools for making music, they have an aesthetic quality as well. And it is fun to personalize them. And no one has to defend their choices in what they think looks good.

I recently bought a new LP Studio and within days added $270 worth of new pickups alone, just for the look of the pups (a bit unique for an LP). I'm still waiting on some other hardware on that one. Once done, I'll post pics.

[Wagster]

Well, after all the discussion I thought y'all might want to see the end result. So here it is with the new Faber ABRN Bridge and TP-59 tailpiece!

[Shawn Lutz]

looks great and yeah the Faber is a better bridge than the stock Zamak bridge.