BABICZ BRIDGE | What The Benefit New 'Ashtray' Bridge Is ?

Sorry, have no experience with Babicz.
I like the Fender 3-saddle, myself.

 

The only "benefit " I see is that it looks like a traditional tele bridge from afar.
Would I pay USD 190 for this?
Heck no.

 

This new bridge is a combination of several ideas already out on the market. The cutaway on the treble side was pioneered by Joe Barden, and other makers like Glendale and Callaham offer 'em. The saddle locking system is virtually identical to the design of the early Floyd Rose vibrato.

The real difference between Babicz and Fender is the Fender version is not made with the high precision and close tolerances of the Babicz--which is what you're paying for. Many Fender bridges are really ragged in the corners with sharp edges; they're stamped from steel sheet, tumbled and plated, and slapped on a guitar.

The real question is this: does extreme precision make better tone? No.

Is hardware like this worth the added cost? You have to decide that for yourself.

 

Well, it’s about the same price category as Glendale, Rutters, Callaham so if you are “spendy” the price isn’t insane. I appreciate they thought to make it in nickel and with the string through option. Still looks overbuilt but I may try one.

 

I would bet my tone dollars on alloy having a greater impact on tone (& sustain) than how well it was machined, and even then it is doubtful that anyone will hear any real difference, including the guy who is trying to justify the expense to his friends.

 

I'm not saying it's not a good bridge, but the waffle about it really annoys me.

" . . . improving tonality and sustain."

What does tonality mean? Just putting -ality on the end of a word doesn't make it mean anything.

If they mean tone they should say tone.

If they mean tone they're talking rubbish anyway. Do you really improve tone? Or do you just change it? And do they mean voice, or sound rather than tone?

You don't improve sustain. You increase or decrease it.

If products like this really make a difference they need to be able to explain how.

And they need to understand that the plural of tele is not tele's.

Maybe they just need to hire a decent copywriter.

 

Looks interesting, thanks!

 

As far as different from their original Tele bridge with their inventive cam saddle design:

-- It looks like the actual plate thickness is a little more (.15) than the original.
-- the cams are brass where the originals are either steel or aluminum.
-- and I would hope that this would actually fit the Fender issue ashtray cover !!


I had the original design for a parts top load Telecaster. The traditional three barrel one was just too buzzy and unstable, and this really worked good for that Tele.

This new bridge is crazy expensive!!! No advantage other than looks w an ashtray cover.

.

 

you can get some great tones out of a fender ashtray bridge if you think that babicz bridge will make you sound better go for it

 

Many players think this



is an acceptable substitute for practice.



...

 

Are you trying to pull back the curtain to reveal the little man in control??????
If you ever succeed in injecting common sense and plain speaking into Western marketing.....our whole economies may collapse.

 

It’s funny that it improves “tonality” but only sustain, and not “sustainality.”

 

Yeah, what was I thinking??

 

Nice looking bridge but too expensive for me

Is it a top loader only?

 

No, if you look at the picture of the bridge you'll see the E, A and D strings are strung through the body, while the unwound strings are toploaded.

 

Can you post a picture of the reverse of the card so we can see the CVV number.

I've entered the number to buy a new super-dooper, solves a problem your never knew you had Babicz bridge and the site is asking for the three digit number of the back of the card.

Thanks in advance.

 

That bridge as most of the other Babbage Telecaster bridges, is top load or string through

And also either three hole or four hole mount.

 

I had one of the original flat Babicz bridges on a tele I bought. I didn't notice it sounding any better than anything else. It's a sleek-looking design (as is this new one), but I think it's kind of over-engineered for a tele. Contrary to what people think, you can still palm mute with it...though it's a little more challenging and more nuanced than a regular tele bridge. They are lightweight. And the saddle design is comfortable on the palm (unlike traditional vintage Fender branded bridges...between the sharp bridge plate corners and the protruding screws...that's why I use aftermarket vintage bridges).

The problems...to me:

1. It's very complicated to put on, take off and adjust. It takes much longer because you pretty much have to completely take it apart to put it on or off. Not the best choice for those who swap pickups often.
2. Lightweight metal is not always good. The locking screws (that secure the cams from turning) on mine stripped out. Came right off after that. Just glad I didn't spend $175 buying it new.
3. You almost need a chart (they provide one on their website) of how to adjust it...because everything locks down. You might thing certain parts are stuck when they're actually locked by another screw.
4. It creates "problems" to be solved with its marketing schtick and its design creates a whole new set of actual problems that other bridges don't cause.
5. The price...$175 for the original...close to $200 for this one...is a hard sell for ANY bridge, but especially for a radical new design. Only the most curious will spring for it. Resale value will be nowhere near that...another problem. I don't think the design/benefits are substantial enough to justify that price point. Again...over-engineered.

 

Sustainification ?