| Subject: | [RESOGUIT-L] Re: Tailpieces and Strings | | Date: | Thursday, December 15, 2005 07:19:46 (EST) | | From: | DeweySlideWell <DeweySlideWell @...com>
|
First of all, lets give credit where it is due. Stringing underneath the
tailpiece is Tut Taylor Style. He came up with that particular gem.
It can improve the tone and or volume, it depends on the situation.
All tailpieces are not created equal. Some are not stiff enough to cause any
additional downward pressure when strung up Tut Style.
Additional downward pressure is not always what is needed. There is a point
of diminished return from pressure alone.
Stringing up Tut Taylor Style can also add a different quality to the sound
because it can allow the strings and tailpiece to vibrate all the way back to
the tail end of the guitar, the way the old Trapeze tailpieces used to do.
Sometimes this helps, sometimes not.
The length of the tailpiece can make a huge difference.
That is, the length of the string between the point where it leaves the back
of the insert to the point where it touches the tailpiece. In general, shorter
length there gives more punch, longer more tone.( Not exactly, but sort of...)
There is a point of diminished return in both directions. A good length is
around three inches.
I like the sound you get with the bass strings longer and than the treble
strings in this area.
A "perfect" tailpiece would be slanted, with the first and second string
being about two and a half to three inches long, the third and fourth being
three
to three and a quarter, the fifth and sixth being three and a quarter to three
and a half.
Also, the HOLES for the strings should be slanted from top to bottom, with
the treble strings being lower to the coverplate ( so they would have a little
more downward pressure to the bridge).
Now, this is my opinion of a "perfect" tailpiece. Others may have different
ideas. I have made one or two this way, and I liked the way they sounded.
Good luck,
D - S - W
|
Re: Tailpieces and
Reply to this message