Hi all,
Like others, I am not a fan of the Muller bridge on my 1979 Starfire IV. I get the "banjo-like" tones on the high strings noted by others (see: http://www.letstalkguild.com/ltg/showthread.php?186060-Tone-the-Muller-roller-bridge-and-armchair-physics&highlight=muller+banjo). I started looking into replacing the Muller with a Tune-o-matic (dowel old holes, drill new ones...etc). I was concerned, however, that my SF IV fingerboard radius might be lower than the 12" standard Tune-o-matic. So, yesterday, I downloaded and printed a radius diagram (search this site for link). Long story short, my fingerboard radius is indeed somewhat less than 12"....but here is the big surprise: the Muller bridge radius is clearly much LARGER than 12"! I could see this lining up the Muller saddles or the bottom of the Muller base to the 12" radius curve figure. The Tune-o-matic lined up perfectly with the 12" curve. Both bridge bases are curved to the radius on their bottoms. When placed directly on a fret, both could rock side-side, as expected for a larger radius sitting on a smaller radius fret. However, the Muller rocked much more than the Tune-o-matic (due to its larger radius).
This explains why that when I lower my bridge height, the middle two strings buzz first. I am very surprised at the mismatch between the bridge and the fingerboard radii on my SF IV and am wondering if the mismatch came this way from the factory or was caused by a later bridge sub (unlikely since the bridge looks like it is as old as guitar). Anyone else notice this issue?
Thanks,
maggles
Like others, I am not a fan of the Muller bridge on my 1979 Starfire IV. I get the "banjo-like" tones on the high strings noted by others (see: http://www.letstalkguild.com/ltg/showthread.php?186060-Tone-the-Muller-roller-bridge-and-armchair-physics&highlight=muller+banjo). I started looking into replacing the Muller with a Tune-o-matic (dowel old holes, drill new ones...etc). I was concerned, however, that my SF IV fingerboard radius might be lower than the 12" standard Tune-o-matic. So, yesterday, I downloaded and printed a radius diagram (search this site for link). Long story short, my fingerboard radius is indeed somewhat less than 12"....but here is the big surprise: the Muller bridge radius is clearly much LARGER than 12"! I could see this lining up the Muller saddles or the bottom of the Muller base to the 12" radius curve figure. The Tune-o-matic lined up perfectly with the 12" curve. Both bridge bases are curved to the radius on their bottoms. When placed directly on a fret, both could rock side-side, as expected for a larger radius sitting on a smaller radius fret. However, the Muller rocked much more than the Tune-o-matic (due to its larger radius).
This explains why that when I lower my bridge height, the middle two strings buzz first. I am very surprised at the mismatch between the bridge and the fingerboard radii on my SF IV and am wondering if the mismatch came this way from the factory or was caused by a later bridge sub (unlikely since the bridge looks like it is as old as guitar). Anyone else notice this issue?
Thanks,
maggles
Ironically the Korean (I think) Badass-alike on my Goya EM copy is still in great shape after 30+ years.