#1
I've been looking into different ways to do stuff. Re-stringing a floyd rose backwards keeping the ball ends and all and came across this interesting concept last month. It's nothing new it's been around for a very long time.

This is what it looks like if people are not sure.




Apparently you...
get more sustain and tone
better tuning stability (I can imagine)
looser strings which can be a good thing for players using heavier gauges
and you break less strings

Any thought or opinions on this
#2
I overstring on two as in the pics to get a low break angle while having the tailpice posts screwed right down. - I think it offers a mechanical advantage. On the other one I just put the strings through in the normal way, because I don't want to mar the already-thin nickel plating.

I like a low break angle becuase it is putting strain on the bridge posts and their mountings.
#3
Wow. That's really odd looking. I always restrung my Les Paul the "normal" way
My Gear:
Epiphone Les Paul Standard Plus Top
Schecter Damien Platinum FR
Yamaha FG700S (Acoustic)
Peavey Vypyr
Fender Mustang I
#4
I've done it that way several times and didn't notice any advantages at all
2002 PRS CE22
2013 G&L ASAT Deluxe
2009 Epiphone G-400 (SH-4)
Marshall JCM2000 DSL100
Krank 1980 Jr 20watt
Krank Rev 4x12 (eminence V12)
GFS Greenie/Digitech Bad Monkey
Morley Bad Horsie 2
MXR Smart Gate
#6
The angle from the bridge to the stop bar forms a steeper angle the normal way. Wouldn't the steeper angle put the string under more tension, increasing sustain? I read that gibsons are made with the angled headstock because of that reason. Or at least that the angle became part of the gibson sound. So wouldn't stringing it this way lessen that effect, not to mention wear off the finish in those spots.
Guitars:
Mitchell MD-100SCE Acoustic/electric
Gibson SGJ 2014

TC MojoMojo (it'll arrive eventually) > TC Hall of Fame > Orange Micro Terror stack

my tube preamp project idea
#7
^The idea, at least as I understand it, is that with the "topwrapping" you can screw the tailpiece all the way down to the body of the guitar to give it better body contact. With some guitars, the bridge is too high relative to the tailpiece, and the strings will hit the side of the bridge or the break angle will be too great and you'll break strings over the saddles.

Some guitars will have the bridge and neck aligned properly so that you can have the tailpiece screwed down and still have a decent break angle. I think that's one reason why some people notice a difference and some do not. If your tailpiece is sitting way off the guitar, this might help. If it's already screwed down most of the way it probably won't change much.

I'm not sure there's much advantage to be had, the difference is so small, but it's fun to experiment with. The real answer of course is to use a Bigsby, which is Advanced Topwrapping for the Discerning Player.
#8
There are probably 150 threads on top-wrapping vs bottom-wrapping on each of the Les Paul forums, and the consensus is that there is no consensus regarding whether it makes a difference, offers an advantage or anything similar. What it DOES do is resurrect every "face-palm" meme on the Internet. Folks have been doing it both ways since the late '60's, and there's no question that the tailpiece was NOT designed for it.
#9
I totally agree with the last post about what it's not designed for. If I had some recording gear I'd try to have an end all discussion over it. I'm just trying to remember what the last guitar I flipped this winter/fall 2014 - 2015 I had that had a stoptail last now.

sure the plating happens but if it's already rusty and all who cares right?

lots of good points on this so far though
#10
I do the top wrapping a well and no I can't hear any tone changes from screwing the tailpiece hard to the body. The reason I do it is because it gives me another option for string bending. I can use my right hand to push down on the strings and do some little whammy bar type things and the extra angle gives me more movement.

One example is we use to play ironman (sabbath) and with those bends in the intro I use to do behind the nut (like jake e lee did) but my guitar would often go out of tune because of the string sticking at the nut, so I started doing it at the bridge and that eliminated the problem
#11
Hmmmm. This is from Gibson's own website:

http://www2.gibson.com/News-Lifestyle/Gear---Tech/en-us/There-s-More-Than-One-Way-To-String-An-Axe.aspx

If you look you will see that a Gibson stop tailpiece (eg mine from '95) has indentations in the front, just like the back, to accommodate the string balls.

It appears that Gibson don't advocate one over the other, and the tailpiece is designed for either option.
#12
Who cares what it was designed for? Early amplifiers were never designed for distortion, the Bassman wasn't designed for guitar, and solidbodies were designed to avoid feedback.

Not a single one of those things is as fun if used "as designed." I don't see much benefit to topwrapping but I also don't see any reason (beyond marring the plating) why you shouldn't do it if you feel it gives you even a small or even an imaginary benefit. If it makes you feel better, why not? The placebo effect is still an effect, and it's not like it costs anything.
#13
It wasn't designed for it...but the stop tail tail piece wasn't designed for anything or at all really.

they just slapped together some shit so they wouldn't have to use fender bridges.

it's a terrible design. top wrapping helps the guitar intonate better if you screw the tailpiece all the way down. but it's like putting lipstick on a pig. the benefits are very small.
Prs se Holcomb is the answer
#14
Quote by AcousticMirror
top wrapping helps the guitar intonate better if you screw the tailpiece all the way down..


Mind explaining the physics of that one?
#15
Quote by Tony Done
Hmmmm. This is from Gibson's own website:

http://www2.gibson.com/News-Lifestyle/Gear---Tech/en-us/There-s-More-Than-One-Way-To-String-An-Axe.aspx

If you look you will see that a Gibson stop tailpiece (eg mine from '95) has indentations in the front, just like the back, to accommodate the string balls.

It appears that Gibson don't advocate one over the other, and the tailpiece is designed for either option.


That article stated, "Most Les Pauls leave the factory with their strings passing through the tailpiece from the back, as the system was originally designed."

Indentations in the front don't really mean anything.

The author of the article just repeats what's already been said in Internet forums, that some folks think it does this and that and they do it the other way. LOTS of articles on the Gibson website are "written" not by any authority on the subject (or by Gibson themselves), but via random Internet plagarism.
#16
The original tailpiece on a Les Paul (1952) was the elongated tailpiece Les himself designed that somewhat mirrored the tailpieces of some of his Epiphone arch top acoustic/electrics. The tailpiece was in the long run impractical for the Les Paul guitar and the stop tailpiece was invented. Cost was also a factor. Stop tailpieces also were much cheaper to make. Les himself rarely used a stop tailpiece as he was fond on Bigsby Vibratos.
Attachments:
Les Paul 1952 imagesCAIBD0FA.jpg
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Apr 27, 2015,
#18
I just do it because I like top-wrapping LPs. Looks right and it feels good


I also double ball too which I'm sure people think is weird.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#19
Quote by Rickholly74
The original tailpiece on a Les Paul (1952) was the elongated tailpiece Les himself designed that somewhat mirrored the tailpieces of some of his Epiphone arch top acoustic/electrics. The tailpiece was in the long run impractical for the Les Paul guitar and the stop tailpiece was invented. Cost was also a factor. Stop tailpieces also were much cheaper to make. Les himself rarely used a stop tailpiece as he was fond on Bigsby Vibratos.


Actually, that wasn't the original tailpiece of a '52. This is:



See what's different?
#20
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
I just do it because I like top-wrapping LPs. Looks right and it feels good


I also double ball too which I'm sure people think is weird.



"Double ball?"
#21
You are right about that tailpiece. I picked a bad picture. Actually that tailpiece was still in use on archtops for a number of years. It's on my 1957 ES 225 and is impossible to adjust for individual string intonation. Strangely it seems to work OK.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
#22
Quote by dspellman
"Double ball?"



So if you're looking at a regular LP style tailpiece, you know the holes where the strings should go? A ball end goes in there, and when the new string is placed, the ball end will make sure that the string loop area stays recessed in the tailpiece and not sticking out and cutting your hands etc... It also makes it so that the string isn't being bent on the string loop as well.

I'll take a picture of it when I get home and show you if you'd like.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#23
I top wrap one of my main gigging guitars as extra insurance against string breakage.

I find with standard top wrapping that the windings at the ball end prevent the thicker strings from running straight and flush over the bar, meaning the position of the wrap can wander a bit affecting the spacing and probably sustain.





So I actually do a "reverse top wrap", for want of a better term. In through the back as you would stringing normally, then fed back under the tailpiece and wrapped up over the top. Voids any perceived benefit of having the tailpiece hard down against the top but that's not a big deal for me. Anyone else do this??

EDIT: Pics for reference of gap and spacing issues caused by typical top wrapping - not my "reverse" method.
Charvel DX-1 FR / DS-1 ST / DC-1 FR / Custom Strat / La Patrie Hybrid CW / Vypyr 30 / VK100 / 1960A
Last edited by Danustar at May 1, 2015,