What is the correct string location on the Thunder I-A bridge?

Hello again folks,
I recently made my first post ( http://forum.westoneguitars.net/members-westones-f6/spectrum-st-s-and-thunder-i-a-t491.htm ) and received such a warm reception and collegial support that I am moved to make a topic post number two!

Having played guitar for some 50+ years (yikes!)
I never thought I'd be asking such a strange question, but here's one for the forum experts anyway.
After I got my Thunder I-A, I of course gave it a cleaning. It was actually in pretty good condition and mostly needed the dirt removed and the brass shined up a bit. Then I restrung it, and here's where it got weird for me.

Here's the first attempt:




If I let the string follow its natural straight path to the nut as in the D, G, an B, strange things happen. In most cases the string passes over the allen screw instead of the designated notch in the barrel.
That results in incorrect spacing (see the top picture)

I puzzled over this for quite awhile. It just didn't make sense. So I pushed the E and A over to sit in the notch, but that causes the string now to "jog" over from the entry point, which again, doesn't make sense, and I suspect, puts some unnecessary strain on the string.

It played OK...sort of, but string spacing is obviously not not right at the top end.

So, I tried again. This time I slotted the strings into the notches




Now I appear to have correct string spacing and positioning over the pup poles, but at the expense of some weird offset going on behind the barrels. They are all seated in their "tracks" and it all appears to be stable but it just doesn't feel right.

From my research I understand that the bass model came first and used this barrel bridge design. I'm guessing that it was "modified" to take 6 strings, but not too successfully since it was later replaced.

I'd appreciate any comments or suggestions from the learned folk here.
Cheers!
Barry

I'll just bet there are 3 right hand side and 3 left hand side - looking at the bridge from above - , and you'll have to take the strings off and turn some of the barrels 180˚ after taking the grubb screws out and then replace them opposite to the way they are now.
I'll also wager that the saddles are set to the radius of the fretboard so be aware of that when you play around with them.

Thanks for the response corsair.
I had a similar thought too...initially.

But looking at it again, I realized that it wouldn't solve anything. The notch/slot would move even more to the treble side, exaggerating the offset problem.

What does look wrong is that the barrels themselves look crowded and jammed into the available space which prompted my original comment about the poor adaptation from the bass design.

The other thought I had (perish it) is that the bridge housing itself is not aligned correctly, i.e., not screwed into the body at the right place! That would be almost unthinkable for an Uncle Matts guitar but...

I'd appreciate hearing from any other Thunder I-A owners if they've experienced the same problem. Also does anyone recommend an outright replacement perhaps with a later model Thunder bridge?

Hello Barry,

Oh, in case I haven't already done so, Welcome from me too!

Interesting point you've made there.

Although a slightly different design regarding the bridge plate, my Paduak I also sports the same barrel type saddles. This is how I've had to set mine up. I've opted to put the strings in the keyhole slots as opposed to the holes in the back of the bridge but either way, the strings come up over the barrels in exactly the same position.



John, the bass models do have the barrels facing in opposite directions as you've mentioned but it doesn't seem to work on the six string models for some reason!

Strange one this I reckon!

Pauline :flower: :queen:

"Curiouser and curiouser," said Alice.
I've never encountered anything like this on any make guitar, and was certainly flummoxed to see it on a Matsumoku made effort!

I hope to get some useful input from others on this, but if I don't, I reiterate:
could this bridge be successfully replaced with later
Thunderbird model's? (assuming I can find one!) Or possibly a Spectrum type bridge? Or...?

I'm not happy with that offset pull on the string. That can't be good.

edit:
Yes, Polly, you did welcome me on my original post. Thanks!
For some reason your pic didn't display right away as I read your reply the first time, so I didn't see what you were saying about your "keyhole" solution. But as you can see I don't even have that option.
I also note that your barrels are seem to have enough room (smaller?) and run in a differently designed "track".
Rats!

Mm, true. OK then, does the bridge have the keyholes that Polly's has under the saddles?? We really need some one with a Thunder to have a look, eh!
No, that offset is not a good thing; replacement is always an option but you will probably have to drill new holes in the body... any of the guitar warehouses will be able to help.

corsair wrote:Mm, true. OK then, does the bridge have the keyholes that Polly's has under the saddles??

Nope!
(See edit comment above and pics.)
As they say in French, "Je suis screwed!"
And not in a good way either.

Hello again Barry,

I've had another look at your bridge and I knew there was something familiar about those 'grooves' in the base plate. This is a photo of the bridge on one of my 1984 Thunder I's - the saddles are different but they still sit in the same type of grooves that are on your base plate. I reckon if you could get hold of this type of bridge, or even just the saddles, it would work.



I'm beginning to wonder if yours has been modified... the saddles might not be the originals and perhaps they were taken from something like my Paduak I and that is why they aren't sitting straight! Just a thought!

Pauline :flower: :queen:

I've got a call or two in on other forums so hopefully someone in here or out there will see the problem and solve it for us!
That looks like a 1A Ver.1 to me Poll... Barry, did you take the thing to bits when you cleaned it?

Back again!

I've just been looking through some other photos of my restorations and I've come across these photos of bridges.

The first one is from a Thunder IA Bass - note the position of the grooves for the left and right sides of the saddles...



The second one is from another 1984 Thunder I but this one didn't have the grooves in the base plate!



"Curiouser and curiouser" indeed!

Pauline :flower: :queen:

OK, here we go...



...I know it's a bass but the saddle grooves are centred and see how the strings pass to the left and right of the saddle screw? Maybe that's an answer...

Hey, thanks for the pix and interest folks!

The more I look at this thing the more I'm really wondering if this bridge, or possibly the saddle barrels, are original. If it is original then it means that Matsumoku issued a superb guitar with an obviously flawed vital part. That's possible, but hard to believe!

corsair wrote:I've got a call or two in on other forums so hopefully someone in here or out there will see the problem and solve it for us! That looks like a 1A Ver.1 to me Poll... Barry, did you take the thing to bits when you cleaned it?

Thanks John...yes I believe it is a version 1 effort. The serial number indicates 1981 (likely December). The information on the westone.info site makes reference to the barrels having been replaced on later versions.
It's a bit hard to tell, but if you look at the picture on that site:
http://westone.info/thunder1a.html
It all appears to be correct at least with the barrel-type saddles. They don't seem to be cluttered and jammed in. Of course you can't see just where the strings are located.

Regarding cleaning, I removed the bridge intact, without removing the saddles or reversing them in any way. I was more concerned about removing the lose dirt and lightly cleaning the brass plating, and did not want to start fiddling with intonation, etc. The plate is held down with 3 screws which were simply removed and replaced. Nothing was done to alter the setup. I noticed all this madness when I restrung it.

The barrels don't seem to have enough room (too wide for the plate), especially when you compare the picture on Westone.info, and I don't understand why the string notch is offset rather than centred on the barrel, as in the picture of the bass.
Flipping or reversing the notch side would do nothing except to make the offset problem worse as mentioned before. What is starting to look more likely is that the plate itself was located incorrectly at the factory!
Since I've had the plate off I can tell you that there is only one set of screw holes.

Pollyanna wrote:This is a photo of the bridge on one of my 1984 Thunder I's - the saddles are different but they still sit in the same type of grooves that are on your base plate. I reckon if you could get hold of this type of bridge, or even just the saddles, it would work.

That approach makes much better sense, and looks to me to be a design correction on later models?

I really appreciate all the help and your time. I just don't know what the solution is at this point, and I certainly do not want to do anything drastic unless absolutely necessary.
Let's hope we get a experienced response from someone. Maybe it's a simple solution that looking at me and I just can't see it. Worst case scenario is that I play it the way it is, offset and all. I can't have the string laying over the set screw!

Cheers!

I just cannot think of anyway that that can be put right without perhaps drilling new string holes for the affected strings! Take it to a luthier and get him to look at it and offer suggestions; advice costs little.

Hey, there's an Electra on eBay ATM with the same bridge! If you've got the right software, you could drag and drop the pic of the bridge and then reize it to see whats going on in there...

Electra

Hi John,

I've tried fiddling about with that photo but I can't get a clear enough image when I magnify it. By the looks of things though, the strings are all in the same position as they are on my Paddy... to the left of the barrels and all facing the same way.

Barry, I suppose you could always email the seller and ask him a few questions and maybe get him to send you some close up photos... it's worth a try!

Pauline :flower: :queen:

I've just taken another look and from what I can make out, it is the same as my Paddy with the keyholes in the bridge plate! Bummer!

Hey, great minds think alike and all that!
I saw that one, she's a beauty, and you bet I did pay special attention to the bridge! It's quite different and has the "keyholes" like Polly's. It's also seems larger and is fastened by 4 screws, not 3 like mine. Strange, since the seller claims that it pre-dates the Westone branding?!

I even have it "dog-eared" to watch what happens to it. I'd love it for myself but I don't have the coin at the moment. . Even if I did I'd never cannibalize her anyway.

Repositioning the bridge seems like the only sensible solution at this point. It would not be too difficult a task but would involve plugging the original holes only to re-drill them only a few millimetres away--a bit dodgy, but easy I guess for someone who knows what he's doing and has the right tools. And matching the grain is not an issue since the plate would cover it up.

Ar-r-r-gh! This is maddening! Thanks. (sigh)

Pollyanna wrote:...Although a slightly different design regarding the bridge plate, my Paduak I also sports the same barrel type saddles. This is how I've had to set mine up. I've opted to put the strings in the keyhole slots as opposed to the holes in the back of the bridge but either way, the strings come up over the barrels in exactly the same position.


Pauline :flower: :queen:

Ya know I hate to point it out Polly, but on second look at your Paddy's bridge, the G, B, and high E strings are also exhibiting the same sort of offset towards the treble side. Although not as drastic as mine.
Just what in 'heck' is going on anyway?

Good god; so they are! WTF is going on here?! Why reposition the bridge?: drill new string holes for the offending strings - easy peasy!!
That Electra is a primo bit of kit, eh!!

corsair wrote:Why reposition the bridge?: drill new string holes for the offending strings - easy peasy!!

Not so easy, methinks. The offset is a matter of millimetres and drilling another hole so close to the original would at best, weaken the metal, or worse, overlap the original hole. <--(artist's conception)

You couldn't rely on the string ball end being secure under that condition as it would pull through.
It's much easier and more structurally reliable to change the wood screw positioning.

You could braze the holes up relatively easily as the bridge is brass and then re-drill

Steve

Ehh gads...you're ambitious!
The only braising I do is on a joint of beef, thank you very much.

My welding/brazing skills from shop class are foggy and dim, and weren't all that great anyway as I recall.
Seems like refinishing the metal afterwards would be a nuisance and would look noticeably tampered with. And I doubt if the tensile strength would be the same.

I'd much rather play with wood.

Alternatively, buy some brass plate and bend to match. Just a thought considering how cheap brass is. If you match up all the mounting holes, you wont need to make any alterations to the body

I have to admit, I've never seen a bridge designed so ...... mmmmm . Thankfully, my Thunder 1a has the through body stringing and bridge to match. I don't envy you. It must frustrating.

I'm too close to death for all that mucking about!
And I have enough to do around the house.

All I want to do is play dammit--I'll just put up with the string offset until they break!

Hi Barry,

You are dead right about the offset of the strings on my Paddy. One of the barrels was a home made job and slightly larger than the others. My son machined it down as much as he could for me but it was badly made in the first place and he couldn't take it down any further without going into the slot where the string sits. It is that one which has knocked the other barrels out of line.

I'll tell you this, your bridge has got us all puzzled now. I can only think that if you could find some replacement saddles, you might be able to solve the problem. You could of course always have a whole new bridge plate made with the string holes realigned!

Who knows, you might just get lucky and see one on eBay - and if pigs could fly, the price of bacon would go up...

Pauline :flower: :queen:

Polly, you've just reiterated the overall problem with the barrel type bridge--either the barrels are too wide for the string spacing when arranged with the ends touching, or the entry holes for the strings are wrong.

If it were possible to stagger one or more vertically, the offset problem would likely go away, but of course the intonation would be trashed and the string spacing would probably be buggered as well.

I cannot fathom what Matsumoko was thinking with this arrangement. Especially since it's obvious that they had better solutions available. But it is deliberate since it even has dual tracks for the screws to travel in.
Maybe it's just a temporary lapse in quality control?
There must have been some method in their madness but damned if I can figure it out.

Hey Barry, this was the answer I got from a good bloke in the US I am doing some "business' (yet another guitar being acquired!!) with ATM - this fellla is something of an expert in guitars generally and Vantage (another of Uncle Matt's brands) in particular...

RE: WESTONE PROBLEM

Looks
exactly like my '81 Avengers. Exactly. A little bit stupid, a little
bit annoying, eventually you just ignore it and play.

so there you go; ignore it and play!!

John

My 0.02 - I'd go with John's suggestion and try a luthier who knows his stuff.

corsair wrote:Hey Barry, this was the answer I got from a good bloke in the US I am doing some "business' (yet another guitar being acquired!!) with ATM - this fellla is something of an expert in guitars generally and Vantage (another of Uncle Matt's brands) in particular...

RE: WESTONE PROBLEM
Looks
exactly like my '81 Avengers. Exactly. A little bit stupid, a little
bit annoying, eventually you just ignore it and play.

so there you go; ignore it and play!!

John

Thanks to John and Squid Head--that's pretty much where my head is at on this topic! Just play the crap out of it!

Incidentally, I am familiar with the Squid Head...I was thinking about buying a "Vantage" that was for sale locally but I couldn't I.D. it correctly. The Squid man was helpful in summarizing what turned out to be a Franken-Matts Vantage. (I didn't go for it)
Cheers!

Weird design to be sure. Playable? O hell yes. But those "little things" bug me too much. I would fix it, dude.

Yeah, I know.
I'm usually a stickler for making things right too. But in this case I don't have the time (or will) to do it myself, and no cash to have it done by a luthier . My last visit to one cost me $200 for a neck reset on a 1990 Ovation Elite 1868 with a heel that had broken away from the body (worth it though).

Hey look at it this way...it's been working OK all its life--until I started getting all uppity about the offset thing. And I guess it's at the stage now where it's likely considered an Uncle Mats historical oddity, so I feel a little odd about defacing the original "design", wacky though it is.

Yeah - lets call a spade a spade, that's not designed in, I think the Mats factory dropped the ball somehow. Not good, but not the end of the world :!:


Best,

Ian

P.S. Non-Westone related, I found a local Aria Pro II for $250 - says its mint, looks like a PE 120, but I need to check the serial number etc..

anaerobe wrote:
P.S. Non-Westone related, I found a local Aria Pro II for $250 - says its mint, looks like a PE 120, but I need to check the serial number etc..

Hey, great Ian, good luck picking it up. I wanna see it!

(As I write this I'm drooling over an Aria Pro II Cardinal CS250 that's currently about to expire on eBay US. Looks like it'll go for $300-350 CAN, plus shipping, taxes, duty, etc. It's a gorgeous guitar, similar in style and vintage to my Thunder--um, except no funky bridge!)

Good luck to you both!!

It was a great looking instrument - spitting image of a PE120 - but made in the post Mats era. I took a pass.... enough of the Mats stuff still crops up around here!

Lucky so and so!!

The problem is not the guitars but my obsession with collecting and playing these guitars. My spouse (bless her) sometimes looks at me sideways when I mention adding to the herd.

Apologies to Barry for revisiting you old post, I know this has caused you a lot of grief.

I was playing my 12-string this morning when I noticed this:



It's the bridge off my Hohner TE Custom XII:



I wonder if Matsumoku used a modified 12-string bridge for your early Thunder? I would explain the offset to the strings. Just a thought!

I'm sorry for any distress caused Barry, sorry!

DAN.

DuoFuzz wrote:Apologies to Barry for revisiting you old post, I know this has caused you a lot of grief...I wonder if Matsumoku used a modified 12-string bridge for your early Thunder? I would explain the offset to the strings. Just a thought!...I'm sorry for any distress caused Barry, sorry!

No worries Dan. That bridge of yours looks kinda scary too, except for the fact that you have a string either side of the intonation screw. At least the saddle as a whole is symmetrical with equal tension on both sides; nothing to slop about sideways! The strings however are still twisted into an unnatural bend to get them over the barrel, so no improvement there.

But a lot has happened since I started this thread a year ago, and I've learned a lot.
For example, I did a restoration of a Vantage Avenger AV310 which came with the same idiotic bridge. Not only was it a complete refinish job for me but I also successfully replaced the bridge with a standard surface mount one. It's a long thread but an interesting one if you're considering doing the same: REFINISH & BRIDGE REPLACEMENT

For those interested in even more discussion about this problem, here's another long thread on the subject:
WHAT WAS UNCLE MATS SMOKING...?

Finally, for those who may have missed it, I specifically asked Tom Presley about this "design" problem and he confirmed that it was an error in Mats' judgement and should never have seen the production light of day. You can pick up my question and his reply here: TOM PRESLEY ON BARREL SADDLE BRIDGE DESIGN

Yeah, I never saw the point of wrapping the strings around the adjustment screws like that, it's not like there isn't the room to space out the ball ends a little bit.

The only reason I posted my pics was that the more I've seen of your old bridge (and the odd time you've mentioned it in passing ), the more it looks to me like it could have been based on a modded 12-string unit, only half strung. An unusually bad design choice by Matsumoku but quickly put right looking back through the catalogues.

DAN.

It would seem obvious that the bridge is a design flaw, which is why they were replaced on later models. I picked up a Nov 82 Thunder I-A a couple of weeks ago which had one of the saddles missing on the bridge. As you will no doubt know that these Westone parts are hard to get and I located the "Actual" bridge (Gotoh GTC101) and Saddle Sets (S11) on www.g-gotoh.com but to buy them from Japan with the shipping and import duty to the UK was a little too much. I opted to change the bridge for the Gotoh GTC102 bridge which is the same as the GTC101 except made in steel and as it is gold in colour it is a comparable visual replacement also. I bought it on www.ebay.co.uk site for £40 + £1.95 p&p.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130308586287&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT

I don't think it looks so bad and it will be a good functional replacement. Maybe you should consider one.

Martin.

There are a couple of pics below that give you the measurements....

...and the string spacing across the saddles would be 10.5mm as well?? Nice work, thank you!

Thanks for that Martin.
As I referenced already, I sweated through this exercise some time ago and have actually already purchased replacement bridges for my 3 affected Mats guitars, including the Thunder. They're not Gotoh's, but still reasonable quality and price. One has been successfully installed, and I'm still dragging my arse to replace the other two.

I had established at that time (the hard way!) that the correct string spacing was 10.5mm and this has since been confirmed by Toshi Owa and Tom Presley so we can't get much better than that, eh? Toshi also confirmed that it was Gotoh's that were originally used on the Westone designs so you have indeed chosen the correct hardware. Looks good!

edit: Is your Thunder a string thru as well?? (Just had a second look) Mine is surface mount.

Yes Barry, mine is a string through body which is different from yours. You would need something more like this one....

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370359236479&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

or the bridge marked as B1 in this ad, although it doesn't give the string spacing size ...

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140279912638&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT,
Very cheap too.

Martin.

umpdv5000 wrote:...or the bridge marked as B1 in this ad, although it doesn't give the string spacing size...

I believe it was either the B1 or B2's that I bought (the purchase info is on my old laptop). But, yes, the same bridge purchased from a USA eBay seller.