I have two Charvels from `83 with brass vintage trems and have always preferred them over other bridges. Without question they have a lot of chime and sustain - they're neither shrill nor dull. Very hard to say how they compare with steel since other brands with steel bridges just don't feel as solid in other factors (e.g. my PRS), so I wouldn't be able to A/B compare the effect of the brass bridge. But I believe the difference is a lot more subtle then choice of wood, strings, and even setup. I use 10-52 strings and 5 springs tightened all the way in the trem, and the trem flat on the body - and yes I do use my trem with this setup.
Both my Charvels are very clear, ringing sound top-end, mids, and bottoms, that I've always attributed to the rock solid feel they have. One is Alder with 3 singles that really chimes. The other is a maple body with rosewood board and Duncan `59 in the bridge and Vintage Staggers SSL-1's in the middle and neck - very rich harmonics out of this one, bright but not shill. I also built a Charvel parts tele thinline with a Charvel brass hardtail, semi-hollow mahogany body, 1/4" quilt maple top, rosewood board, and Dimarzio PAF and two FS-1's. The last one simply sings both unplugged and amp'ed - very rich, fat sound while also clear and ringing chime.
I'd say if you found the 25th Anniversary too bright, then maybe try a mahogany body. Music Zoo has their stratheads with both floyds and v-trems. You can ask them how they sound different when compared side-by-side.
For me one-piece neck, mahogany body, thick maple cap, v-trem, and the right pickup combination would be my choice for a custom shop order. But I'm shut off on new guitars so it's not going to happen for me for a few decades.
pfrischmann wrote
----------------------
"Hi Guys,
I'm new to the board. This place is great. BTW, I own an 88 soloist (original owner) and a New EVH.
I'm working on either getting a custom shop model built or possible doing the parts thing. I have a question about the traditional bridge. How does it offect the tone compared to a standard strat bridge?
I wonder if people stopped using brass for a reason. I had a 25th anniversary Charvel for a couple of days. I found the guitar overly bright and even shrill.
I not a floyd fan (don't use trems much these days)
Can any body tell me how the bridges compare.
Thanks,
Paul"
----------------
Both my Charvels are very clear, ringing sound top-end, mids, and bottoms, that I've always attributed to the rock solid feel they have. One is Alder with 3 singles that really chimes. The other is a maple body with rosewood board and Duncan `59 in the bridge and Vintage Staggers SSL-1's in the middle and neck - very rich harmonics out of this one, bright but not shill. I also built a Charvel parts tele thinline with a Charvel brass hardtail, semi-hollow mahogany body, 1/4" quilt maple top, rosewood board, and Dimarzio PAF and two FS-1's. The last one simply sings both unplugged and amp'ed - very rich, fat sound while also clear and ringing chime.
I'd say if you found the 25th Anniversary too bright, then maybe try a mahogany body. Music Zoo has their stratheads with both floyds and v-trems. You can ask them how they sound different when compared side-by-side.
For me one-piece neck, mahogany body, thick maple cap, v-trem, and the right pickup combination would be my choice for a custom shop order. But I'm shut off on new guitars so it's not going to happen for me for a few decades.
pfrischmann wrote
----------------------
"Hi Guys,
I'm new to the board. This place is great. BTW, I own an 88 soloist (original owner) and a New EVH.
I'm working on either getting a custom shop model built or possible doing the parts thing. I have a question about the traditional bridge. How does it offect the tone compared to a standard strat bridge?
I wonder if people stopped using brass for a reason. I had a 25th anniversary Charvel for a couple of days. I found the guitar overly bright and even shrill.
I not a floyd fan (don't use trems much these days)
Can any body tell me how the bridges compare.
Thanks,
Paul"
----------------
Comment