Why are non-recessed OFRs not more available? (Jackson/Charvel or other makers)

[Number Of The Priest]

I started off playing an Ibanez RG560 and Jackson KE3 that had fully-recessed trems, 32mm sustain block, neck parallel with the guitar body.

When I got my Jackson SHS1 and Edwards Les Paul, I fell in love with the 4° angled neck joint and the bridge situated high above the guitar body. In the case of the Soloist, it has a non-recessed OFR, 42mm sustain block. (I can pull up on the bar for a while before the bridge collides with the body.)

I also understand there is a semi-recessed option with a 37mm sustain block, but I'm not aware if it allows pullups.

Is Steve Vai to thank for digging cavities under his Floyded guitars so that he can do bigger pullups? Memory is fuzzy but I seem to recall he also put a pad on the forearm portion of the body so that his arm would rest at the height of the bridge. Did this lead to manufacturers and designers sinking the Floyd deeper into the body so that the fretboard is parallel with the body and guys like Steve could rest their arms on the guitar body?

If so, screw that. For guys like me who prefer the bridge way up high, guitars with a high trem and a 42mm sustain block are VERY difficult to find for affordable prices, because the 32mm blocked guitars are now "the standard".

Come on, I just want a simple and affordable one-hum (or two-hum) Strat with a 42mm sustain block and 4° angled neck joint.

[Aso]

I have two non-recessed floyd guitars. My 87 charvel model 5 with a 42mm brass block and my soloist with a 37mm brass block
.

I don't really have a preference on recessed or non-recessed but single hum is where it's at for me.

[Newc]

Vai is credited with the first recessed Floyd-style bridge, the Lion's Claw he carved into Green Meanie, which later was done on his JEMs. He's also credited with the scooped out lower front horn.

The guitar has to be built around the concept of a non-recessed Floyd, so if you like that setup, just get the non-Floyded version and have a Floyd added. Greater neck angles to accommodate top-mounted Floyds that also have enough room to pull way up also have a greater risk of headstock trauma and require thicker cases, so there's a cost-savings consideration for manufacturers.

Recessed Floyds do take some getting used to, and on some body shapes it's actually more work to play the guitar than it should be due to the bridge being so low.

[mr426]

How high is the fret board above the body on a non recess? My fear would be it's too high.

[xenophobe]

How high is the fret board above the body on a non recess? My fear would be it's too high.

The fretboard isn't actually higher, it's just angled whereas a recessed Floyd does not have an angled neck.

[Catharpin]

The fretboard isn't actually higher, it's just angled whereas a recessed Floyd does not have an angled neck.

Example RR. See where it looks as though the binding is lifting from the body. That is the neck angle.

[Axewielder]

I'm a NR guy all the way as far as playability and appearance and vintage mojo goes, but everything is just a bit cocked on a NR trem guitar. The neck is cocked relative to the body, the bridge is cocked relative to the posts, the strings are cocked relative to the pickups, etc etc. Everything is nice and square on a recessed trem guitar, so I can see why guitar builders would migrate towards that design.

[neilli]

The easy way to think of it is that non recessed works well for LP players, recessed for strats..

[xenophobe]

Example RR. See where it looks as though the binding is lifting from the body. That is the neck angle.

That's the angle I'm talking about, but that's not really higher, the neck is actually lower if you want to count a few frets the other direction. lol

[mr426]

Got ya. Thanks

[Number Of The Priest]

I'm a NR guy all the way as far as playability and appearance and vintage mojo goes, but everything is just a bit cocked on a NR trem guitar. The neck is cocked relative to the body, the bridge is cocked relative to the posts, the strings are cocked relative to the pickups, etc etc. Everything is nice and square on a recessed trem guitar, so I can see why guitar builders would migrate towards that design.

Crooked works. Just ask archtop jazz guitar builders. I bet the tip of the headstock is touching the floor in this picture.

[Banjowarrior]

My EVH Stripe Series and EVH Star both have unrecessed Floyd's's's.
My Soloist doesn't really count as it's an '88

[mantis]

It's a feel thing. I hated the Top mounted Floyd's the first time I played one. I felt I was playing on top of the guitar instead of play it. It was a strange feeling for me. I'm a X Les Paul owner and I went totally Super Strat guitars. All my Floyd's are recessed and I prefer it that way.
I have played the New EVH still and the top mounts don't bother me as they did. I find it fine now and not as bad as before but I don't think I would be searching out a guitar that had a top mount unless I feel in love with the way it played and sounded.

[Force]

I've preferred recessed for most of my playing life, mostly an aesthetics thing but since I got the SDX I swing both ways. If the guitar is good, it doesn't matter how the bridge is attached. As long as it does it's job, I'm sold.

[JCB RR1]

Hard tail guitars also have an angled neck as far as I know.

I've always had recessed FR guitars until I got the SL2HT...it didn't bother me at all getting used to it, I really don't tell the difference in my playing position between the two construction styles.