The Electra Forums

The bridge should definitely not be secured. I can't say for certain which of my bridges are original and which aren't, but they are definitely floating bridges. I would guess you are going to need a different bridge, though I wouldn't rule out neck shims.

It is an archtop type bridge, it fits the radius of the top perfectly. And it's in the right place.. I don't see why I couldn't just leave it, assuming I can get the correct saddle portion. Barring that, I could try to dislodge the nails... But why?

I understand what you are saying. Though, if you choose to leave the bridge As-is, I think neck shims are going to be your only option. Trying to jury rig the saddle is not a good idea, IMHO. I would definitely add neck shims before trying any mechanical additive or subtractive methods. But, as long as you're happy, I'm happy As I ponder, I cannot think of a single reason why I would feel the need to nail down a floating bridge... Anyone else? It just seems like a bad idea.

Not that I agree with doing so, but if you change strings frequently someone may have decided it was easier to fasten the bridge then to have to reposition it each time. That said it still is a stuped thing to do. A non-permanant mark like from a crayon would be a better aid

I had that same thought, but why would someone change all of the strings at the same time? I'm not saying it wouldn't happen, I just can't imagine why. I personally always change one string at a time. My elementary school music teacher (who also gave guitar lessons) use to say something to the effect that it put too much stress on the guitar neck to take multiple strings off. I know now that isn't always the case, but the stigma stuck with me and it doesn't hurt to play it safe. I can't think of any reason to do otherwise.

I'm not looking to modify any saddle assemblies, just (maybe, hopefully) find one that meets the specs I'm looking for.. I COULD try and pull the nails, and sand down the bottom of the bridge piece.. Then the roller bridge/saddles I have could be made to fit.. I don't want to shim the neck anymore.. and I want to be able to set the intonation, of course... Looks like it's comming apart, huh?

I bet it was because many people think it's safer to store or ship guitars with the string tension off. They're wrong, of course (although to be fair if a guitar was strung with 12's with nearly no neck relief and I was shipping it to another climate, I'd at least lower the tension a bit. But this is why many violins and cellos get damaged in shipping- people loosen the strings and the soundposts fall out.

I'm still advising fixing it with a different bridge rather than trying to alter the body or neck pocket. But keep us posted whatever you decide!

Xplayer, I just stumbled on to the forums at matsumoku (sp?).org
funny, I think I found these forums through their site...
Anyway, I found the thread where Curly repaired/restored PE-450
Although the damage to the neck pocket is no where near as extensive, I think we may have a similar problem in regards to the action.
Although I've stabalized the neck pocket damage, removed most of the glue squeeze-out and scraped the neck pocket clean of glue globs, I'm really starting to think that the preassure of the neck being cranked down on some glue globs towards the front of the neck pocket must have deformed the neck pocket to some extent. I really can't think of ANYTHING else it could be. The bridge is in the exact correct position (same distance from the 12th fret as the nut) and appears to be stock. Those nails are IN there, maybe with glue or something, I can't get it off easily at all.. And no luck finding a saddle that's any lower than the roller or tune-o-matic I have at present.
I was thinking of taking some sheet metal, cutting it to the size of the neck heel, loading it up with some ink and pressing it in to the bottom of the neck pocket under the neck to see where my high and low spots are. That should give me some sort of an idea where (if) the problem is located.

Also, pickup-wise.. I think I can modify one of the pickups for hum-canceling in the middle position. I tend to use that position more on ANY 2-pickup guitar anyway.. It would be a reversable modification..
Or I could make another coil to fit under the covers, making the pickups in to actual humbuckers. Again, reverseable.. Although either of these mods is reverseable, it would leave the pickups in an obviously modified at some point condition [if that makes ANY sense] Although these pickups are pretty shoddy, and the guitar is not bone stock / mint by any stretch, I 'm kind of leaning towards leaving them alone [taking them out] and going with the GFS pups... Money money money, of course is the problem, as always...

One more interesting thing: The input is between / below the bridge pickup knobs, similar to a 335. There is a hole in the lower bout, on the edge from a 1/4" jack. I'm guessing that the 1/4" was origonally on the side of the guitar. Any speculation as to WHY IN THE WORLD someone went to the trouble of adding another hole to the front of this guitar, re-wiring the innards to use it [never fun on a hollow] and leaving the old hole.. The only thing I can think is that they either wanted it more 'gibson' like, or somehow couldn't get the jack to go through the hole on the side when replacing the jack..

Couple things... I've removed the pickups in preperation to wax-potting them. I've filled the 'blank side' with cardboard, just so the wax has something to stick to. I think if I get the microphonics under control, these might actually be pretty decent sounding pickups.

I also read something...somewhere... about the wood being more prone to damage with the plug on the side vs on the front due to stress while playing.
Any thoughts?

I like your idea from your previous post of trying to find high and low spots with an improvised ink pad. It think it could tell you a lot.

I would have thought that the side would be more stable as it is curved and stiffer. However you are probably more likely to do damage putting the guitar down without removing the cord. I have seen several damaged hollow body guitaqrs with damaged wood on the side jacks so ...

Thanks for kkeping us all informed. I have been following your oddesey with interest (Iconsidered bidding on this one I think).

Methinks Workingman has the right of it. From my experience while playing, the output jack releases your instrument cable long before anything like damage is likely to occur. Perhaps THAT is the problem trying to be avoided? As Workingman said, I think the only likely damage would come from setting the guitar down...

Never underestimate the clumsy. If you pull sideways on a cord plugged into an edge-mount jack, you can tear the wood pretty easily- not because the edge is weaker but because the jack plate is usually smaller. That would be me- I somehow manage to wrap cables around my feet when I'm onstage. It's not such a problem until I set the guitar down and try to walk away...

Time for a wireless set

I have done worse.

I guess I need to take some new pics! I used the sheetmetal ink-pad. I had a few high spots, but the main problem was - the very front of the neck pocket was higher than the rest, just a little itty bitty ammount. I think it must have been glue swelling the wood or something. Anyway, I scraped the whole neck pocket and with the aid of a few purpleheart shims, got everything lined up perfectly to go with the roller bridge. Perfect for me, anyway - I like a fairly high action. Purpleheart is an AWSOME wood. It's cheap, usually under $5 / bd. ft. a board foot of purpleheart is a TON of shims, nuts, bridges, knobs etc - it's really a lot of wood when you're making little stuff. It's SO cool looking, and about as hard as ebony or rosewood too.

I think the jack was moved for someone as clumsy as myself I can totally see where it would rip a nice chunk if the cord wasn't wrapped around the strap and you stepped on it..