I'm contemplating whether or not to put a bridge cover on my telecaster I recently got. I think it'd look pretty cool, but I'm not sure. I can't really seem to find any pictures of a telecaster with the plate on it so if anyone has some pictures of a tele with a bridge cover on it, it'd be great if you could post it. Thanks.
yeah, I was wondering how palm muting could possibly work with that sucker there. And I bet putting your palm on there will leave some nice marks on there and stuff. Thanks for the picture.
Just curious--are bridge covers purely aesthetic, or is there some tone advantage to them?
As far as I know, they're just for looks, I can't really see how it could really help the guitar except maybe protect the bridge pickup.... but how could you really damage that anyway?
I think the idea of the bridge plate was to protect the wrist from the sharp edges of the bridge and as a rest for the wrist during finger-picking. These guitars have been around for a long time.
Where would you go about getting one of those anyway? I've considered getting one for my Esquire whenever I eventually get it, but I don't think they come with the guitars anymore, and I'm not sure whether or not Fender sells them at this point.....
I think they come with the vintage reissues. You may be able to get them through Warmoth, but I'm not sure. I'm also pretty sure that they don't fit the modern 6 saddle bridges.
Hi, I'm Peter
It was originally meant to block any outside signal from interfering with the bridge pickup, but eventually found it did nothing so they stopped putting it on.
Personally, as a big time Tele enthusiast, I think they're cool, but impractical. They really don't do much and I doubt the prevent hum. Also, as Dirk stated, it kills your option to palm mute, which isn't a big deal to some, but it's still a vital part of playing guitar that's taken away.
I used to have an old bass with one, It was cool looking.

It's for looks, and not being able to palm mute would suck.