|
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 347
Location: Reno, NV | Here are a few pics of the break angle on my 1771LX. This is with 2 shims and 3/32 action on (E).
Is this sufficient break angle??
Do you have more or less?
If at all possible, please post a pic of your break angle and description of action height, so we can compare the action:break angle ratio of the different "O's"
Thanks
Yak
 |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2005
Posts: 4903
Location: Phoenix AZ | Looks OK to me.
 |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2006
Posts: 7307
Location: South of most, North of few | Ouch Tup, that hurts just to look at.... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 5576
Location: big island | that's a martin break angle. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 10777
Location: Keepin' It Weird in Portland, OR | So you made me look at my guitars... At least the two that are out.
Looks Okay to me... But I ain't no Luthier.
[Tup, I'm surprised that those pegs don't pull out! I hate those bridges] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: Warren,Pa. | Yak, have you experimented with removing any shims? If you can do it w/o causing buzzing...more break angle would, in theory, be better. But I've tweaked the heck out of my 6778LX...even had the factory do a neck-reset (at least they SAID they did)...and it looks just like yours. It plays and sounds fine.
John <>{ |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Break angle is fine, don't worry about it. It looks like the A string is in a groove? Maybe it's just bad light. That might give you problems as it wears more. Just something else to watch. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15682
Location: SoCal | Bill's right. The break angle is fine. My 1627 RI has the same angle and it sounds great.
Tup, I hate bridge pins........ |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2003
Posts: 425
Location: SE Michigan | Sorry to be the voice of dissention but that looks just like my 1777lx looked before I sent it back to the factory for a neck reset. How many shims are under the saddle? I was down to no shims on mine, the action was tolerable but there was no where left to go if I ever needed to go lower.
While the break angle may be marginally acceptable now, as the top ages and bows out more it will be impossible to get good action out of the guitar. Also as I am sure you already know, a low break age does take away some of the tone and volume of the guitar.
I would send the photos off to Kim Keller or someone at the factory and see what they say. One thing I have heard is that the lighter bracing on the LX models makes them a little more suseptable to this kind of problem (but they sure sound nice). |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 347
Location: Reno, NV | Originally posted by Brian T:
Sorry to be the voice of dissention but that looks just like my 1777lx looked before I sent it back to the factory for a neck reset. How many shims are under the saddle? I was down to no shims on mine, the action was tolerable but there was no where left to go if I ever needed to go lower.
While the break angle may be marginally acceptable now, as the top ages and bows out more it will be impossible to get good action out of the guitar. Also as I am sure you already know, a low break age does take away some of the tone and volume of the guitar.
I would send the photos off to Kim Keller or someone at the factory and see what they say. One thing I have heard is that the lighter bracing on the LX models makes them a little more suseptable to this kind of problem (but they sure sound nice). Exactly... Thats the reason I posted this. I have 2 shims under that saddle currently, I used to have 3 and about 4/32 action on (E). It sounded awesome, really thick and powerful sounding, but the action was a bit too high for my liking. Im perfectly happy with the 3/32 action I have right now. As a matter of fact I even like 3/32 on the electric because of my heavy hand. But, as you have said, Im worried that should the top start to belly up, then I won't have enough break angle to go much lower in the action with loosing most of my sound. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | From the bottom of the string to the top of the bridge: min-2/32 max-6/32
I think that's what the settings used to be. If you're in that range you're OK. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 347
Location: Reno, NV | Yep...Checked that... Thanks for the reminder CWk2.
However, which string is this measured on? Its not the same amongst all strings... i.e.. the saddle contour doesn't follow the bridge contour. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | The bridge contour should be close. as far as strings they should all be in that range, or really close to it. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15682
Location: SoCal | This is just me, but I wouldn't worry about the break angle you've got currently at all. In the future, you may have a problem that needs to be addressed, but you don't know that for certain.
Now, having said that, I respect Brian's opinion on this. It's a personal choice that everybody's got to make.... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12761
Location: Boise, Idaho | I just changed strings and took out a shim in the CL30 and the high E string hit the bridge. No clearance with one shim still in. The action wasn't all that low at the neck. I had to put a shim back in to get it to work. The bridge seems thicker than my other Ovations and the saddle sits lower in the bridge. I wonder if the bridge is just made incorrectly. |
|
| |
What do you think of this break angle...??
