Maplifiers http://maplifiers.net/forum/ |
|
Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... http://maplifiers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2642 |
Page 2 of 2 |
Author: | torgeot [ Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:13 pm ] | ||||||||||||||||||
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... | ||||||||||||||||||
Yeah the first two time I did my own FR intonation I realized that paying my luthier $35 to do it once a year was fully worth the investment. I would pickup one of these doohickeys and do it though. I like to tinkeer with my guitars when I have time, just lately not had time. |
Author: | Devtron [ Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:24 pm ] | |||||||||
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... | |||||||||
Yep the screws are just about stripped to uselessness. They are also getting really rough looking. Allen keys slip in them a bit and they just feel really soft. The knife edges themselves look a bit worn but the way it is right now I can't get a good look at the contact points. The screws I would need to get to replace it are only available from some random Dutch supplier IIRC. Maybe a stabilizer will relieve that softish feel I am getting. Honestly the studs themselves are the most worn looking bits so that may be the real culprit; they seem to be made of the same shitmetal the screws are. My best option might be just to replace everything made of this black probably-shit metal. |
Author: | chris_d [ Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... |
In that case(the bolts and allenheads being roundy and sketch) yarr, the GFS(or the Floyd Rose Special) might be a good option. Before you buy anything, make sure that you note the dimensions they list, especially for the post spacing, there is some variance out there, and i don't know how close to OFR measurements the Jackson trems were. As long as you don't need to modify the guitar and can just drop the new Floyd in, $85 is not too bad. I just don't really expect it to last as long as a real floyd, or even some of the older nicer licensed floyds from the 80s, which seem to have used nicer metal in the backplates than what folks use now. Even the single locking licensed floyd that came on my Charvette is made out of much nicer metal than any of the bridges i have bought from GFS or wherever more recently. If it wasn't single locking, and with totally odd and uncommon thumbscrews for the fine tuners(which i would need to replace one of), i would just put it back in this thing. The backplate is still solid as hell and the edges are still clean and sharp. And it saw wayyy more use and abuse than the "deluxe" GFS bridge that basically suicided itself in less than a half year. |
Author: | Snaxocaster [ Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:30 am ] | |||||||||
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... | |||||||||
This is now officially what it's called, because I say so. There's no better term. It strips so easily, especially on the parts of a Floyd that get manipulated regularly. |
Author: | chris_d [ Thu Oct 11, 2012 3:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... |
As i wait for my ghettofloyd to leave China, i must ponder the second question. Namely, how to mount the thing when it gets here. Basically, going between two main options, properly inset, or mounted up on the surface. Inset like the standard big route floyd guitars, the backplate sits basically flush to the guitar top surface: Or sitting tall surface mounted like the Charvels, where the baseplate sits maybe 1/8" to 1/4" above the guitar surface: Though really, i suppose this will come down to what the bridge looks like and how tall the fretboard sits from the body level. I believe that current;y the height is ideally suited for the bridge to be set taller like the Charvel. Which kind of suits me, because i like the looks of that, kind of makes the Floyd stick out like a sore thumb in a pleasantly obnoxious manner. I won't know for sure until the thing gets here though, what it will work best with. Anyone have preferences? I personally have tended to like tune-o-matics and whatnot which are pretty tall, but i also rather enjoy the telecaster which is pretty short. I would also assume that the inset might provide a bit more upwards bend travel, simply because the bit under the string locks is deeper than the level at which the studs are mounted. I don't know how far up i really need to go though, there are certain mechanical realities one runs into when pitching a guitar up... |
Author: | Zozobra [ Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... |
I've always preferred floyds recessed but then again I've owned an RG550 for 50% of my life. |
Author: | Unstrung [ Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... |
I think recessed just seems more structurally sound. I mean look how everything is practically hanging out of the guitar because of that bridge height. And then them tweaky bits will get all up on your finish if you bend up enough. |
Author: | woyaochuan22qunzi [ Wed May 08, 2013 3:07 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... |
Author: | torgeot [ Wed May 08, 2013 8:27 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Let's talk about Floyd Roses a bit... |
I totally agree, Chinabot. Also, may I add, bicycle in Helsinki. |
Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |