Plain and to the point gents; if you are going to sell guitars with 9.5" radius fingerboards please provide a bridge that matches. The 6120 I just bought is unplayable because of this and I've heard of many others right here on this forum that are having the same problem. If it's happening to our little community you can bet that it's happening to many others as well.
We here at the GDP love Gretsch guitars, we feel a sense of pride in these fine instruments and we want to see the brand prosper. Consider us the canary in the coal mine and we are telling you that there is a problem, a problem that could end up costing Gretsch/FMIC a lot in warranty claims and even in future sales.
The answer is simplicity itself, all you need to do is make available a set of staggered height bridge pieces that will allow a 12" radius bridge to be adapted to a 9.5" radius fingerboard. Yes, there will be some cost incurred, but the goodwill this will provide will more than offset these costs.
Speaking on behalf of the community of Gretsch guitar enthusiasts please let me remind you that we (collectively speaking) need you and the guitars you produce but you need us as well. The Gretsch name was sullied by quality problems in the past and the brand was unable to sustain production. Now, thanks to the unending efforts of Fred and Dinah Gretsch this name prospers once again and the agreement with FMIC is an opportunty for two great names in the music industry to benefit by cooperating.
Anyone at Gretsch/FMIC that reads this, please, take the time to correct this problem while it is small. A junior engineer could create staggered height bridge elements in a matter of hours and putting such into production would be a small enough undertaking. Perhaps in the future you could simply build guitars with a 12" fingerboard radius and simplify matters greatly but for the time being there seems to be a real problem developing and you need to address it in a way that protects the interests of loyal customers.
Memo to Gretsch/FMIC re: fingerboard vs bridge radius
« » Page 1 2 3-
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 9:56 a.m. Mark S(ynchro):
-
- Rated: 44 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 10:15 a.m. Jeff O(Come All Ye Faithful):
I have a 1994 SSL that plays beautifully, don't know if they used to address this issue.
My 2005 SSLVO has pretty much been in the box since I bought it, but it played beautifully when I brought it out. I plan on recording with it starting February/March, so if this is an issue on the higher end (vs. Hot Rod), it'll soon become apparent.
As for the Hot Rod - I was pretty much frustrated. I have the action set as identically as humanly possible on all five (5) of my 6120 models (1994 SSL, 2004 6120-1957, 2004 RHH, 2005 SSLVO, 2006 PTV). This was not possible with the Hot Rod.
I'm curious - do they address this with the SSLVO's? Must not, if Jetbunny is having an issue. I'll but the Horton Heat away and play the SSLVO next chance I get, and see if there is an issue, and report back promptly. -
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 10:51 a.m. Mark S(ynchro):
Thanks Jeff. I had wondered about these very things regarding your Setzers. I did try lowering the action on my new 6120 to the point that only the outside two strings were buzz-free and it serves to demonstrate the point.
Face it, Gretsch made running change that didn't work, now they need to fix it. The world won't end. -
- Rated: 19 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 11:00 a.m. Gretschadelphia:
At the price point of a Pro Series Gretsch, bridge and fretboard radius should be addressed at the factory. With the 9.5 radius necks, the bridge saddles should be dealt with at the factory with either different saddles or modification of the existing saddles.
If you are paying that kind of $$$ for a guitar, it should be expected that the guitar should only require a basic set-up to play
well (trussrod adjustment, bridge height, intonation). No Pro Series instruments should be going out to customers needing any type of fret leveling, etc. Alot of the complaints I've heard re
Gibsons is that they come out of the factory still needing major finishing work (nuts, frets, etc)- what also compounds the problem are stores like guitar center and Sam Ash that don't even look at the guitars before they put them on display (another good reason to buy from a site sponsor). Hope I didn't go too far off topic and don't mean to rant. Happy holidays to all on these pages as I anxiously await my Power Tenny. This year Santa lives in Ponca City, Oklahoma and drives a brown truck... -
- Rated: 19 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 12:18 p.m. Gretschington:
Gretschadelphia: said:
At the price point of a Pro Series Gretsch, bridge and fretboard radius should be addressed at the factory. With the 9.5 radius necks, the bridge saddles should be dealt with at the factory with either different saddles or modification of the existing saddles.
Absolutely.
Gretschadelphia said:
Alot of the complaints I've heard re
Gibsons is that they come out of the factory still needing major finishing work (nuts, frets, etc)
And I absolutely agree on that, too. Nut and frets. I had a customer bring in a brand new SG for me to make right and I was shocked that a new guitar (and a GIBSON, no less) needed THAT much work done to it. This was the first new Gibson that came across my bench so I called a friend who does repair work in another part of the country and asked him if he thought that maybe this guy got a lemon. He informed me "Not by Gibson's standards; I see it all the time. It's disgusting." It was the most time consuming fret dress I've ever done on a new guitar. I couldn't believe it. In the end, I had it playing great and he was thrilled but I think I'll have to raise the price a bit to do a fret dress on any new Gibsons that come through due to how much additional time it takes to make them right. The frets didn't just need to have "the tops kissed" then recrowned, we're talking WAY more work was needed than that. It would have been less work if I had fretted it myself in the first place! The fret heights along and across the fretboard were incredibly uneven. It's blatantly obvious the moment you lay a straight edge on it and take a look. I'm still shocked and disgusted by that experience. My Ibanez is a much less expensive guitar and it had much better fretwork than that Gibson!! -
- Rated: 115 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 1:44 p.m. wenzel:
FMIC/GRETSCH, please fix this to prevent the gretsch name and legacy from being tainted by an unmatched radius fretboard and bridge combo. Thank you. Chris
-
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 1:45 p.m. Mark S(ynchro):
The Power Tenny is starting to sound ever better to me as well. The big problem is I truly want a natural finished 16" archtop. I've only been wanting one since 1972 and d@mnit I intend to have one. The one they sent me can't be made right without much time and effort. A complete re-planing of the fretboard might do it and there is still that matter of a Bigsby that is mounted so crookedly that it is apparent across the room. "Measure twice, cut once"; I don't feel particularly good about a brand new guitar that would require extra holes drilled in it to get the tailpiece to align. Either do it right the first time or don't bother. The best thing they could do with the one they sent me is to donate it to a Luthier's tech school and that's a very sad thing cecause it sounds dynamite . . . if you crank the bridge up high enough that it nearly topples from its posts. The only other time that I've seen an archtop with this sort of a problem the top had begun to collapse. This isn't the problem with this guitar, the top has a robust arch to it, the problem is somewhere else in the geometry of the guitar, quite possibly the way the neck is set. Somebody at Terada was asleep at the switch on this one.
I don't blame the dealer at all, I have a standing arrangement for them to send me the guitars without setup. I always do a baseline setup on any new guitar I buy so I tell them not to go to the bother. I've been doing my own setups literally since the early '70s and have never been unable to obtain a good baseline until this instrument. Sadly, of any number of new guitars I've bought this way (invariably Fender or Gretsches) this is the first time I've been truly disappointed. Virtually every other Gretsch or Fender that I've bought has been very decent right out of the box. A fresh set of strings, a tweak here and there and I'm ready to play. In the case of this guitar I've been tweaking for over a week and it still comes down to physical, mechanical problems that go beyond the scope of a setup.
I fear that Fender's policy of trying to use authentic specs from the past is going to cause problems with these guitars. Frankly, I don't give a crap whether Setzer's original 6120 had a 9.5" radius fingerboard or not, I want a guitar that plays like the '05 6120 I just sold. I bought this new 6120 based my experience with that guitar, a guitar with the same specifications and merely a different finish. I don't know what FMIC is trying to do at this point but they are at risk of undoing 15+ years of progress. In the late '70s I wouldn't even consider a Gretsch because the guitars were not very good. When they ceased production I was neither surprised or saddened, the name had been robbed of any status it ever held in my eyes. I had been aware of the new Gretsches since the early '90s and had mixed reactions to them. An early '90s Nashville that I played (perhaps in 1993) was unimpressive albeit very attractive. I G400 that I played during the '93 Anaheim NAMM show left a positive impression upon me and I was aware of the product line. The pre-FMIC Gretsches for the most part left me with a poor impression for the same reasons that have been discussed here so often. In many cases the laminate seemed too thiich, the guitars seemed heavy and clumsy. My impression, for the most part, was that I was playing a cheap '70s IMC copy of a Gretsch (for whatever reason, the G400 that I played in '93 left a much better impression upon me). A pre-FMIC Cad green Country Club that I played weighed too much and had very poor acoustic qualities.
Fender has done a lot for the line. The Country Club that I own (JT0606) is as fine of an instrument as any Gibson L-5 I've ever played (and I've played quite a few). The Nashville that I recently sold (JF0407*) to make room for my new 6120 AM was also as fine of a guitar as I've ever owned. It was a base 6120 model with no frills, just a very competent guitar. I sold it to get this 6120 AM and now, after having read of so many similar disappointments that new G-6120 buyers are experiencing I am starting to feel that this may have been a mistake. The new one (JT0610*) is simply not of the caliber of the guitar it was purchased to replace. Neither was I apprised that Gretsch was changing their specifications for this model. Had I been aware that these were shipping with a 9.5" radius fingerboard I may well have chosen to sit tight. At this point in time the only Gretsch 6120 that seems to be shipping with a 12" radius fingerboard is the RHH. What gives Fender? I realize that you can't change the specs in your printed catalogs but you should be able to keep your web site up to date.
FWIW, within minutes of discovering these flaws I called the dealer and the dealer called Gretsch. The inside rep that they deal with was out on vacation and I agreed to sit tight. I am optimistic that Gretsch will do the right thing by me and at the start of business tomorrow I intend to be in touch with the dealer. My efforts of the last week have yielded an improvement but the instrument is still far from acceptable. Perhaps through their facilities they can make this into an acceptable B stock instrument but this guitar was not sold to me on that basis so it will have to find another home if that is the case.
I am motivated to start this thread because I find the deviations from published specifications on new Gretsches troubling. Several others here on the GDP have had somewhat similar disappointments recently and I am sincerely concerned that somewhere within FMIC there are decisions being made without have been fully thought through. The changes to specs don't make a lot of sense to me.
-
- Rated: 42 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 3:02 p.m. JBGretschguy:
I have most of the fret issues solved on my '05 SSLVO, but it still plays like a turd compared to my '59 6120. I may have the SSLVO's fretboard planed to 12" or 16" and get it refretted.
The fret work and bridge matching on new Gretsches simply isn't very good.
-
- Rated: 16 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 3:40 p.m. Crazyquilt:
Damn. That really is a shame. I'm feeling particularly blessed that my 6120 has been such a positive experience; all the changes I made were voluntary and (comparatively) minor.
But a mis-set neck and a crooked tailpiece on such a high priced item? That's unconscionable.
Gibson can get away with their now-legendary poor QC because, for better or for worse, they're Gibson. Gretsch, unfortunately, has a longstanding rep of variable to poor quality. FMIC has done an outstanding job, in general, reversing that trend, as well as bringing a lot of positive developments to the line.
I'd been aware of Gretsch, of course, for years, and, here and there, I'd played them, mostly 6120s, but also a couple of Historic Series. Without exception, I was unimpresed, and could not understand how such high prices were being charged.
That changed when I purchased my Electromatic hollowbody. I liked the guitar very much, but I didn't know if it'd be something I'd eventually leave behind, an instrument I'd keep, or a 'gateway drug.'
Clearly, it's been the latter.
I still would not hesitate to buy an FMIC Gretsch -- certainly, I'd take one of those over a pre-FMIC instrument, unless we were talking a true vintage piece. Nor, however, would I have any compunction in returning the instrument, if FMIC didn't, or couldn't, make it right. And I would certainly share my experiences with other potential customers. -
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 4:13 p.m. Mark S(ynchro):
The whole thing is pretty vexing. I've tried everything I can think of to correct it and the only solutions I can think of at this point involve major surgery. I might consider major surgery on a guitar that had been with me for years but a new, out of the box instrument requiring such repairs is something I have no desire to own.
I see two issues here, one is specific to my guitar and one is not. With my particular guitar there is a geometric problem in this instrument that causes the bridge to have to be abnormally elevated. More importantly, there is a general problem becoming evident involving a mis-match of neck radius and bridge radius. The first problem I can understand, defects occur whenever any product is mass produced. The second problem is, at least in my humble opinion, a design problem, something that will cause problems even if the guitar is built perfectly to specification.
I have a good dealer backing me on this and I'm confident that FMIC/Gretsch will take care of the problem specific to my guitar. I strongly hope that FMIC/Gretsch will correct the design problem that has crept into their line. -
- Rated: 212 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 8:07 p.m. Proteus:
Mismatched bridge-fingerboard radii are not quite so much design problems (which implies a trip to the "drawing board" to fix), nor a QC problem (as the guitars live up to their specs).
It is a "spec" problem, as in what hardware is specified to mount to a particular model. It's of longer standing than something that has just "crept into the line." My 6120GA, of 2004 manufacture, shows the classic symptoms - buzzing on the G & D when the bridge is set for the desired action on the other strings.
It's been a topic of discussion here several times, and I don't know whether anyone at Gretsch has paid attention.
The solution has to go beyond a saddle set graduated to the appropriate radius for Adjust-a-Matic guitars, because certain bar bridge models are also involved: to be clear, my 6120GA has a 9.45" radius fingerboard and a 12" radius bar bridge.
I don't expect FMIC to order up bar bridges shaped to a 9.45" radius - but at the very minumum, a tech doing final setup for 9.45" guitars equipped with bar bridges could easily cut the 1,2,5, &6 slots to appropriate depths to create an effective 9.45" radius.
(Even better - for better appearance, these slots could be cut before the bridges are plated.)
I don't think 9.45" radius guitars should be eliminated from the line; I like the feel of the GA, and the availability of such guitars provides an alternative for players who prefer a Fenderier feel.
_
Do new Gretschs have consistently bad neck and fretwork? No, not in my experience. But they're not perfect either, and perfection would be nice. It must be said that I've experienced as consistently excellent fret leveling and finishing on (all but the cheapest) Jay Turser as on Gretsch guitars. Of the broad range of recent Korean guitars I've gotten intimate with, the proportion of great to just competent fret jobs is about the same - around 70% are fine, and 30% need attention.
(I haven't been playing new Fenders of any price, so I can't speak to their final fret finish - but Gibsons and Epis seem to hold about the same proportion, and possibly a bit lower.)
(Sidebar: The most consistently excellent neck and fretwork I've ever seen in the industry - on production guitars - came from the Matsumoku plant in Japan from about 1981 through 1986.)
Does this mean Gretschs are bad guitars? Emphatically, no. They look and feel and - by far most importantly - sound as only Gretschs can. Nothing else, regardless how gorgeous the fretwork, can make that claim.
Should Gretsch be aiming for higher standards than most of the rest of the industry? Sure, we think so. We'd like them to.
But in the past, the most rabid Gretsch fanatics have had to accept that a certain amount of manufacturing slop - and inconsistencies and idiosyncrasies in the product - have been part of the Gretsch experience. (Some have gone so far as to pretend it's part of the very charm of Gretsch.)
By all reports, the guitars are of consistently higher standards of manufacture now than ever before. Of course, it always remains to be seen whether any golden age will continue - but I don't see any recent evidence pointing to any interruption in the ongoing improvement of the line.
Just saying - this radius mismatch hasn't suddenly cropped up. I'm not about to jettison my GA because it's affected by it. There's more than enough good in the rest of the guitar that the mismatch shrinks to a minor aggravation, all things considered.
But it's definitely cheesy to produce models with mismatching components, and to keep doing so when a thorough program of gradual improvement would sort things out. To keep such a mis-spec is much more an American GM thing to do than a Japanese Toyota thing.
I like that Gretsch is nominally an American brand, but I also like that the factory is in Japan. I'm hoping the Japanese genes will win out here. -
- Rated: 19 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 10:17 p.m. Gretschadelphia:
Reading these posts are making me a bit anxious as I await delivery of my Power Tenny. One of the reasons I purchased the Power Tenny from Shanghai (beyond the excellent price) was that I was able to discuss my concerns with Joel re the quality control and playability of the new Gretsches. Joel felt that the Pro Series guitars he was getting were getting better and better, with none of the recent ones being problematic or at worst "dogs". My main concerns were not "basic set up" but that the guitar could be set up to play well with truss rod adjustment, bridge tweak, ect. He assured me that he would inspect the guitar, set it up and if there were any issues beyond his means to correct, he wouldn't ship it out to me. Not just to pump up Shanghai, but other site sponsors also make this same pledge. Before ordering my Power Tenny I tried out several Pro Series Gretsches at local dealers. The RHH and Setzer models I tried at Guitar Center had high action
and string buzz (a bad combination IMO) but maybe just needed some serious set -up. I played a 6122-62, a flame topped Setzer and a Tenny w/ Hilo's at a non chain store which all played pretty well right off the rack and would probably play like butter with some minor tweaks. Based upon the Gretsches I sampled, my discussions with Joel, the invaluable opinions and info posted on this site and most of all my absolute 30 year lust for a Gretsch guitar (and the good graces of my long suffering wife) I went ahead and ordered my Power Tenny. It should arrive soon, I hope I'm not disappointed...I'll post when it arrives and hopefully be able to wax eloquently (well maybe wax ineloquently) of its' beauty, playability and sound. -
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 10:33 p.m. Mark S(ynchro):
The power Tenny seems to be immune from this problem. They have a 12" fretboard radius and a matching bridge. I wouldn't be at all concerned about buyng a Power Tenny from Joel, he's a good dealer.
As I mentioned earlier, my arrangement with this dealer is that he doesn't setup any new guitars I buy. I strongly prefer to do my own initial setups. -
- Rated: 19 ↑
Dec 25, 2006 11:12 p.m. Gretschadelphia:
This may be a little off the topic (and on this site I'm probably preaching to the choir). But anyone who plays guitar at any level should buy a decent book about basic set up (there are several out, I have Dan Erlewine's) and even if they never plan to actually
change a string themselves it's worth it just to educate yourself enough to spot and question potential problems when buying a guitar or just to ask the right questions, regardless of its' price or pedigree. I learned the hard way many years ago when I purchased a brand new Gibson Les Paul Special. The thing buzzed and just wouldn't play right. I took it to a repair shop for a set up and the luthier (who I later became a customer of)said it had a twisted neck and while he could fix it by planing down the fretboard, etc told me to take it back to where I purchased it as it was under warranty. When I took it back to the dealer, their repair guy did the old "oh those guys always want to mess with everything, etc and proceeded to do some fiddling with the bridge and truss rod and pronounced my guitar fit for duty. Of course it was no better than before. Being young and stupid, I lived with it for a few years and finally traded it at a good loss.Long story short, I bought a set up book, talked to people who knew their stuff and got educated. -
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 26, 2006 12:43 a.m. Mark S(ynchro):
In many was you are preaching to the choir Gretschadelphia. I'd venture to say that a fair percentage of the folks that post here regularly are pretty experienced at setup work. For the most part I don't let anyone else even work on my guitars unless it involves something I lack the tools for. I can only recall paying for two guitar repairs in the last 30 years, total combined cost $142. I hope to buy more equipment/tools in the future and possibly do repairs and setups as a supplemental income when I retire (I still have 15 years to go).
The resources available today for people wanting to do their own work are great. There are a lot of good books out there, videos and Stewart McDonald has an online knowledge-base of sorts with topic-specific instructions for a wide range of tasks.
BTW,
If the Country Club I just bought from him is any indication Joel does great setup work. I unpacked that guitar, tuned it and started playing it with no problems at all. I'm sure that your new Power Tenny will be great. -
- Rated: 1 ↑
Dec 26, 2006 10:43 a.m. Tex:
I don't remember the specs now but I always thought my 6120-60 had a 12" radius and that the bar bridge was 16". Whatever the case, it was mismatched (I do know that) and playability was undoubtedly affected. I found a TOM w/ the same radius and that helped considerably.
So (Proteus), bar bridges are, as a rule, 12" radius and not 16"? I've gotta do some measuring when I get back home after the holidays. I hadn't really thought about notching the slots on the old bar bridge, but I guess that should work. It really shouldn't come to that though. -
- Rated: 212 ↑
Dec 26, 2006 12:49 p.m. Proteus:
Hmm. I haven't measured the actual radius - I've just assumed the bar would match the radius of most Gretsch necks, and only be out on a few. 16" would seem extreme!
I just know there's a significant mismatch between the GA's neck at 7.45" and the bridge. I don't have the feeling it's as great as the 16 would make it.
(Actually, we could probably live with a 14" radius bridge on a 12" radius neck, or 10.5" on the 9.45".) -
- Rated: 1 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 11:12 a.m. Tex:
Proteus,
I'm not at home, so I just did a Google "cache" search of the Gretsch Pages (don't have the Archive link here) and it turned up some discussion of the radius of the bar bridge earlier this year w/ some people saying it was 16" (and you registering disbelief in a thread or two about this number). And I also found a thread from 2001 where it seemed accepted that the bar bridge was 20! I think that is clearly mistaken, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were 16. I'm gonna measure when I get back into town--unless someone else has a bar bridge and radius measure handy?
By the way, I think you're right about minor deviations--probably wouldn't be too noticeable, but a 12 and 16 or 9.5 and 16 is just too much. -
- Rated: 1 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 11:17 a.m. Tex:
By the way, Walter Broes posted this a long time ago the old board. Might be of interest to some of you:
Downloadable Radius Gauge -
- Rated: 42 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 2:34 p.m. JBGretschguy:
16" was the actual radius on vintage Gretsches and it feels great.
-
- Rated: 1 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 2:58 p.m. Tex:
Interesting. Assuming the bar bridge is 16", perhaps they just produced bar bridges in spec w/ the originals then. However, (and I guess this is the question we all want answered) why would they change the fretboard radii and not that of the bridges? Seems soooo obvious. -
- Rated: 83 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 7:43 p.m. Mark S(ynchro):
Here's on possible solution thanks to a fine GDP member named Flynn. ABR-1 saddles designed to accomodate a range of fingerboard radii.
-
- Rated: 19 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 7:54 p.m. Gretschington:
A new kind of FAQ:
Is it annoying that Gretch has the wrong radius bridge? Yes
Should they sell guitars with the bridge radius matching the fretboard radius? Yes
Do you need to buy a new bridge to fix this if you own one with a 9.5" neck and a 12" bridge? No
Is it fairly easy for a local luthier with some common nut files to file your existing bridge saddles so that the bridge radius will match the fretboard radius? Yes
Is it cheaper to have your current bridge filed than to completely replace the bridge? Probably
How long will it take to do this operation? About 40 minutes if you take your time and are meticulous and spend 10 minutes per saddle for the 4 saddles that would need filed. -
- Rated: 3 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 8:29 p.m. faceache:
This might be common sense, but if you have a compound radius, 9;45 to 12, what would the bridge radius be set at? somwhere in the middle?
-
- Rated: 212 ↑
Dec 27, 2006 10:01 p.m. Proteus:
A point of detail: I understand from conversations with a luthier that it's not necessary that the radius of strings across the bridge match the fingerboard profile exactly - that in fact it's common (and apparently desirable) for the bridge to be a little flatter than the neck.
16 might work for 12, which is pretty flat to begin with. But whatEVER is on the mismatched Gretschs doesn't work.
More precisely, it's only a problem if it's a problem. And on my 6120GA, it IS a problem. A small one, and easily enough rectified by notching the 1, 2, 5, & 6 slots in the bar bridge a bit deeper.
