Larrivee Guitar Forum

Main Forums => Technical Discussion => Topic started by: Mr_LV19E on February 21, 2010, 07:19:28 PM



Title: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 21, 2010, 07:19:28 PM
I ordered a K&K mini for my F-III and received it last week. Yesterday I started the install and the first thing I did was remove the endpin and check the depth of the end block so I could adjust the output jack for installation. What I found was the end block was 5/8" thick and the adjusting nut for the jack couldn't be made smaller than 7/8". I gave it some thought and ended up making a 1/4" thick spacer out of oak, now I was set to get started. I made the template for the transducer install then I stuck a light and mirror in to the soundhole, oh cr^p. Below is a picture of what I found. The transducers are supposed to be installed on the bridge plate directly below the saddle but there is not enough bridge plate available to do that.

I thought I remembered others having Jim install a K&K so I gave him a call, this is what he told me. First he said he doesn't like K&K pickups for reasons that are not applicable here but then he said a few F-III buyers required them so he did install them and yes he remembered there not being enough room to mount the transducers. He said that he had to fit bridge plate extensions to the bottom of the top in order to do the install. I asked him if he remembered the thickness of the bridge plate and he said he didn't and he was at the store and his shop was still located at his house. He went on to tell me to send him an email with my address and he would send me a pre-made extension that all I would have to do is glue in place as he still had some materials left over from when he did the installations.
Three cheers for Jim, what a great guy that looks out for his customers.

The reason for this post is to let others know of the potential problems with which should be a simple installation of a highly regarded pickup.
The first pic shows the bridge plate and the second pic shows the size of the transducer. You would need at least 7/8" from the center of the pin hole to the front of the bridge plate to have enough room to install the transducer.

(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1680_4_1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1687_2_1.jpg)


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 21, 2010, 07:53:55 PM
Here are a couple of pics of the output jack showing the limited adjustment. Had K&K supplied one extra adjustment nut, that would have taken care of this problem. The cover for the connections has to tighten down to the nut to prevent loosening and rattling, as you can see it does that just short of bottoming out on the ground attachment.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1681_1_1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1684_3_1.jpg)


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: eded on February 21, 2010, 10:07:57 PM
The inside nut doesn't stay against the shield...  it is meant to adjust for the thickness of hte endblock.  The shield will not loosen or rattle.  I've had endpin jacks installed for years without any problems.

That bridgeplate problem is odd.

Ed




Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 21, 2010, 11:24:27 PM
The inside nut doesn't stay against the shield...  it is meant to adjust for the thickness of hte endblock.  The shield will not loosen or rattle.  I've had endpin jacks installed for years without any problems.

That bridgeplate problem is odd.

Ed

I'm just going by what it states in the installation instructions.  This is the first time I installed a pickup.
The bridge plate doesn't appear to even cover the entire area under the bridge, I would indeed call that odd.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: tuffythepug on February 22, 2010, 12:03:03 AM
The inside nut doesn't stay against the shield...  it is meant to adjust for the thickness of hte endblock.  The shield will not loosen or rattle.  I've had endpin jacks installed for years without any problems.

That bridgeplate problem is odd.

Ed




I agree that the inside nut is not meant to stay against the shield.  It is the only adjustment you have available and it is meant to be adjusted for the thickness of the endblock.  The bridgplate is a different matter altogether:  I'm glad Jim is helping you out on this matter.

By the way, when I installed the K & K on my 000-50 I used an alternate set of instructions that I obtained on the good ol' internet.   It made the job of installing the transducers a lot easier.  I've shown these instructions to others who have agreed that it makes the job simpler.   I will post these here if you are interested.

So far I haven't installed a pickup on my F III yet.    Still thinking about it.

Good luck with the rest of the install.  I'm still wondering why Jim does not care for the K & K system.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Randy_R on February 22, 2010, 12:05:12 AM
Is this something to do with the bridge being shifted back for the 12 fret neck? Has anyone put a K&K on the previous Forum I/II guitars which were OM-03's with 12 fret necks also?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 22, 2010, 01:03:42 AM
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1701_1_1.jpg)
"Find out the thickness of your end block and set the nut on the cap accordingly (see picture below). Once in place, screw the cap against it to secure the nut."

Am I not understanding that sentence correctly?

I am not comfortable tightening the cap against the grounding post of the jack. Not saying it can't be done, others have done it with no problems apparently. I saw two ways of going about it, 1. Go to the hardware store and get an extra nut or 2. Make a spacer up real quick with scrap wood laying around. I chose 2 because I didn't feel like going out, at the time I didn't know I was going to have to wait to receive a part from Jim to complete the job.
If there is some reason that I shouldn't use the wood spacer please enlighten me, there are many out there with more knowledge about this stuff than me.


Lynn, is this the site you are referring to?
K&K install (http://www.frettech.com/kk/)


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: tuffythepug on February 22, 2010, 02:17:22 AM
Roger
Yep, that's the site.  I followed these instructions for installation on my 000-50.    Note the last part where they talk about adjusting the nut for the proper length by trial and error.  The only adjustment you can make is the nut on the inside.  The outside nut holds everything in place and the "strap button" part tightens down onto the outside nut.  You have to adjust the length so that the part sticking out through the hole is exactly the correct amount to allow the strap button portion to cover it.    On your instructions there is a reference to the "endblock thickness adjustment nut."   That means to adjust it as necessary to allow for the endblock thickness plus the amount that sticks out on the outside.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: eded on February 22, 2010, 02:36:36 AM
Not meaning to be condescending...  it's the difference between following the instructions and knowing how it works.

If nothing else, there is a plastic/paper sheath inside that shield (or cap as the instruictions call it) which insulates it from that "grounding post".  And, even if it came in contact, it would have to come in contact with the center contact also to cause a problem.  

If you are concerned about anything being loose, you could put a dab of Loctite (or fingernail polish works great) on either the nut or "cap" to lock them in place.  In my experience, it's not a problem.

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Danny on February 22, 2010, 02:42:48 AM
  As far as the bridge plate; I made an extension for the Maple/Koa top re-finish I'm working on. The bouts and waist are very close to the F-III and the bridge plate was even a bit shorter. So I made a maple plate extension to work with the "Belly in" bridge I am using.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: GA-ME on February 22, 2010, 01:30:18 PM
That bridgeplate isn't K&K compatible from the looks of it. The transducers are supposed to positioned directly center, between string pairs, and exactly underneath the saddle itself. The bridgeplate was positioned poorly. Somebody at Larrivee didn't double check measurements when they drew up the modified bracing pattren.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 22, 2010, 02:51:04 PM
Could it be that the bridge plate is correct for the guitar and maybe they weren't thinking about what type of pickup was going to be installed afterwards?Its not like they designed acoustic guitars to be electricified.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Randy_R on February 22, 2010, 03:03:15 PM
That bridgeplate isn't K&K compatible from the looks of it. The transducers are supposed to positioned directly center, between string pairs, and exactly underneath the saddle itself. The bridgeplate was positioned poorly. Somebody at Larrivee didn't double check measurements when they drew up the modified bracing pattren.

I have an LS guitar with a 12 fret neck made in 1975. So Larrivee has been making this type guitar since the very beginning.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: jeremy3220 on February 22, 2010, 03:24:31 PM
I agree with GA-ME, if Larrivee is going to put the most atrociously massive bridgeplate ever conceived in there it could at least be centered under the bridge... instead having 1/4" in front of the pins and 8 feet behind. 


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 22, 2010, 03:38:27 PM
First off there is no complaint about the bridge plate except the K+K's don't fit.The 1/4" statment referred to the piece of wood that was needed to be made so that the output jack would fit correctly.I see nothing wrong with the bridgeplate,I've seen smaller and larger.I don't believe that a  acoustic guitar company has to build there guitars to the spec's of aftermarket pickup companies,there building acoustic guitars after all.


But as I say so often "What do I know".Maybe we should get a loan and buy out Larrivee so we can build them the way we want since everyone knows better.Oh ya I'm very happy with the product that they deliever.


Let the stone's fly........ :wave


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: GA-ME on February 22, 2010, 03:52:05 PM
Could it be that the bridge plate is correct for the guitar and maybe they weren't thinking about what type of pickup was going to be installed afterwards?Its not like they designed acoustic guitars to be electricified.

Rob, are you saying you think that bridge plate is where it belongs to be? Seriously? Are saying that the 1/4"-1/2" of rosewood in front of those pin holes is the correct position for the bridge plate?

 
I have an LS guitar with a 12 fret neck made in 1975. So Larrivee has been making this type guitar since the very beginning.

Randy, I know they have made them before. They messed up the bridge plate location on that particular guitar, and apparently at least a few others that Jim glued patches on, and whether they made them before or not doesn't change that fact that the bridge plate is positioned incorrectly. Take a look at some older bridge plates and look at what strings do to them and tell me what you think the longterm wisdom of that bridgeplate location is.

http://frets.com/FRETSPages/Luthier/Technique/Guitar/Structural/NewBridgePlate/newbrplt1.html


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 22, 2010, 04:08:03 PM
If that is were Larrivee decided were it belonged then "Seriously" yes.The add ons that Jim referred to was so that he could make the K+K work.At no time did he say the bridge plates were'nt installed incorrectly.Again what do I know I fix the stuff I don't build them.

Nice Thread on bridge plates by the way,BUt it doesn't apply here.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: eded on February 22, 2010, 04:18:13 PM
IF Larrivee decided he(they) wanted the plates there, that's fine but it is out of the ordinary.  Looking at that plate it's hard to come to any other conclusion than it was improperly placed.  Typically, the bridgeplate doesn't extend very far (if at all) towards the endblock.  That one would have to.  And again, typically, they extend much farther up towards the X.

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 22, 2010, 05:29:26 PM
My main purpose in starting this thread was to make others aware of the potential issues of installing a K&K to their F-III. I never doubted my ability to come up with a remedy to address any issue I encountered, nor would I believe my way was the only remedy. I have always prided myself on my ability to fix anything (got that ability from my dad). Because I fix things for friends all the time I am aware of the fact that not everyone has that ability. When I approach something for the first time I almost always follow the instructions that are provided. Each subsequent time I change how I do it to make it more efficient and easier.
As far as the bridge plate being installed the way it is, well it is what it is. That is the way Larrivee did it and if there are any issues as a result of it down the road that is why there is a warranty. It appears the edge of the bridge plate is directly under the saddle, maybe that explains why this guitar has so much volume.

Not meaning to be condescending...  it's the difference between following the instructions and knowing how it works.

If nothing else, there is a plastic/paper sheath inside that shield (or cap as the instruictions call it) which insulates it from that "grounding post".  And, even if it came in contact, it would have to come in contact with the center contact also to cause a problem. 

If you are concerned about anything being loose, you could put a dab of Loctite (or fingernail polish works great) on either the nut or "cap" to lock them in place.  In my experience, it's not a problem.

Ed
I agree there is usually some type of sheath inside the shield insulating it from the grounding post, but this one does not have one.  It just didn't feel "right" when I tightened  the shield up, like metal against metal type grinding.  Thanks for the loc-tite idea, hadn't thought of that.

I appreciate everyones input but I didn't start this thread to cause a battle over how  Larrivee decides to build its guitars, just to let others know that the installation will not be a simple one.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Danny on February 22, 2010, 05:48:24 PM
My main purpose in starting this thread was to make others aware of the potential issues of installing a K&K to their F-III. I never doubted my ability to come up with a remedy to address any issue I encountered, nor would I believe my way was the only remedy. I have always prided myself on my ability to fix anything (got that ability from my dad). Because I fix things for friends all the time I am aware of the fact that not everyone has that ability. When I approach something for the first time I almost always follow the instructions that are provided. Each subsequent time I change how I do it to make it more efficient and easier.
As far as the bridge plate being installed the way it is, well it is what it is. That is the way Larrivee did it and if there are any issues as a result of it down the road that is why there is a warranty. It appears the edge of the bridge plate is directly under the saddle, maybe that explains why this guitar has so much volume.
I agree there is usually some type of sheath inside the shield insulating it from the grounding post, but this one does not have one.  It just didn't feel "right" when I tightened  the shield up, like metal against metal type grinding.  Thanks for the loc-tite idea, hadn't thought of that.

I appreciate everyones input but I didn't start this thread to cause a battle over how  Larrivee decides to build its guitars, just to let others know that the installation will not be a simple one.
  The first part of your post looks like something I could be saying. Have any of your friends or family called you "MacGyver"? I never watched a full episode of that show , but I know he is resourceful and quick to find a fix.
               I've been thinking it may be a good idea to have a "Tips" thread. Where anyone could post an idea that may benefit others who do some of their own repairs. At the same time unclrob and others could provide further insight into problems with a particular "tip" or add to it.  Anyway if we all "play nice" I think it would be a help to the forum.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 22, 2010, 05:52:24 PM
Quote MrLV"My main purpose in starting this thread was to make others aware of the potential issues of installing a K&K to their F-III."

Thats what I thought when I read it.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: tuffythepug on February 22, 2010, 05:54:43 PM
  Roger

 I have no doubt that you have all the experience and ingenuity needed to figure it all out.    :winkin:

I was a little intimidated when I installed my K & K and so I used instructions that were touted to be "idiot proof".      I didn't even try to use the instructions that came with the unit.   The frettech instructions with color photos was a big help to me and to others who have used them.  As long as you get 'er done that's all that matters.   I am sure you will like the result when you've finished.  

 Will you be playing through an amp or using a PA ?   You may need a pre-amp;  The signal is not that strong with just the transducers and no boost.   But you probably already knew that.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 22, 2010, 06:30:37 PM
  The first part of your post looks like something I could be saying. Have any of your friends or family called you "MacGyver"? I never watched a full episode of that show , but I know he is resourceful and quick to find a fix.
               I've been thinking it may be a good idea to have a "Tips" thread. Where anyone could post an idea that may benefit others who do some of their own repairs. At the same time unclrob and others could provide further insight into problems with a particular "tip" or add to it.  Anyway if we all "play nice" I think it would be a help to the forum.
Have any of your friends or family called you "MacGyver"? I believe I have heard that before, but mostly I have been called other names  :rolleye:
I think a tips thread (it would have to be a sticky) is a great idea.
  Roger

 I have no doubt that you have all the experience and ingenuity needed to figure it all out.    :winkin:

I was a little intimidated when I installed my K & K and so I used instructions that were touted to be "idiot proof".      I didn't even try to use the instructions that came with the unit.   The frettech instructions with color photos was a big help to me and to others who have used them.  As long as you get 'er done that's all that matters.   I am sure you will like the result when you've finished.   

 Will you be playing through an amp or using a PA ?   You may need a pre-amp;  The signal is not that strong with just the transducers and no boost.   But you probably already knew that.
Lynn, I forgot that I had that link until you mentioned it, thanks. I will definitly use that method over the printed ones that came with the PUP.
I plugged the PUP into my Genz Benz Shenandoah Jr (great little amp BTW) before I ever started the instalation just to be sure the PUP was working, I was surprised at the output level being as it is a passive PUP.  I do have a Fishman Pro-EQ pre-amp that I plan on using with it.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: GA-ME on February 22, 2010, 06:38:10 PM
I appreciate everyones input but I didn't start this thread to cause a battle over how  Larrivee decides to build its guitars, just to let others know that the installation will not be a simple one.

It's not a battle over how they decide to build guitars to merely note that they made a mistake in placement of the bridge plate. I really don't think they planned to have most of the bridge sitting forward of the bridge plate. For the life of me, I fail to understand why some forumites find the need to justify or explain away mistakes from Larrivee. The only reasonable explanation for the positioning of the plate is error in placement. When somebody laid out the original jigs for bracing placement on these guitars they simply made a small calculation error. If they were off by another 1/4", or so, the ball ends would have ended up in the spruce. It has already been noted that the build turnaround, from order to delivery, for these guitars, was very fast. Speed generally decreases accuracy in any task. It's not the end of the world and for the time being it is functional. However, anyone who thinks it's a good idea to have slotted pins jamming the ball ends up against a mere 1/4" or so of rosewood, with the grain running parallel to the holes, either doesn't understand the stresses present or chooses  to not think critically about the situation.  I'm just saying it was likely an error. Everyone makes mistakes. The guitars are still playable, and they came in at a great price, for sure. But none of that changes the fact that the bridge plate placement surely looks like error. Sheesh, reality isn't that scary..........................


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Danny on February 22, 2010, 06:42:00 PM
Have any of your friends or family called you "MacGyver"? I believe I have heard that before, but mostly I have been called other names  :rolleye:
I think a tips thread (it would have to be a sticky) is a great idea.

                             Yes I have been called "MacGyver", but mostly Dependable Dan. Not as much anymore since I'm not going out on the jobs as much. That may change soon though.

          As far as "tips" I have been applying what I have learned for 40 years as a craftsman into working on guitars. Sometimes I fail, sometimes over and over again. But then other times I make a tool or use a method that is familiar and it adapts just fine.
          Actually building a guitar or making a living at it as unclrob does would be out of the question for me. But I'm starting to do things I would not have even thought of doing on my own a year ago.
          
             (Roger, thanks for the update you provided for us F4 folks :thumbsup That was welcome news and a big relief to know they were on the radar.)


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 22, 2010, 07:42:35 PM
It's not a battle over how they decide to build guitars to merely note that they made a mistake in placement of the bridge plate. I really don't think they planned to have most of the bridge sitting forward of the bridge plate. For the life of me, I fail to understand why some forumites find the need to justify or explain away mistakes from Larrivee. The only reasonable explanation for the positioning of the plate is error in placement. When somebody laid out the original jigs for bracing placement on these guitars they simply made a small calculation error. If they were off by another 1/4", or so, the ball ends would have ended up in the spruce. It has already been noted that the build turnaround, from order to delivery, for these guitars, was very fast. Speed generally decreases accuracy in any task. It's not the end of the world and for the time being it is functional. However, anyone who thinks it's a good idea to have slotted pins jamming the ball ends up against a mere 1/4" or so of rosewood, with the grain running parallel to the holes, either doesn't understand the stresses present or chooses  to not think critically about the situation.  I'm just saying it was likely an error. Everyone makes mistakes. The guitars are still playable, and they came in at a great price, for sure. But none of that changes the fact that the bridge plate placement surely looks like error. Sheesh, reality isn't that scary..........................

GA-ME, to be clear I agree that it doesn't look right and it was possably an error on Larrivees part, correct me if I am wrong but I thought the bridge plate was supposed to be under the entire bridge (this is clearly not the case here).  I also know that they didn't design the bridge plate for aftermarket PUP installation, but I can without a doubt say "I don't know enough about guitar construction to make that call". You, unclrob and others  on the other hand have "hands on experience"
I should have expected some critique on larrivees methods when I posted the picture, I just wanted to make my intentions clear that all I wanted to do is help others.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: BenF on February 22, 2010, 08:00:23 PM
Roger, if I were to install a pup in my forum III, I would likely have gone this route due to general support for it on this forum as a great pickup and easy to install. I appreciate this thread hugely, having probably saved me some cash in the long term.

Ben.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: GA-ME on February 22, 2010, 08:14:01 PM
GA-ME, to be clear I agree that it doesn't look right and it was possably an error on Larrivees part, correct me if I am wrong but I thought the bridge plate was supposed to be under the entire bridge (this is clearly not the case here).  I also know that they didn't design the bridge plate for aftermarket PUP installation, but I can without a doubt say "I don't know enough about guitar construction to make that call". You, unclrob and others  on the other hand have "hands on experience"
I should have expected some critique on larrivees methods when I posted the picture, I just wanted to make my intentions clear that all I wanted to do is help others.


Roger, I think most folks would be glad you posted the information. It may save folks the hassle of ordering a pickup system that ordinarily would be compatible, but will not work for the F III application without modifications to the top. It is also useful because it will alert Forum III owners to the fact that they should probably pay more attention to the bridge plate than normally would be called for. It wouldn't take that long under certain conditions for a string to be out of the plate and into the spruce with that positioning. It would be advisable to peek inside with a mirror from time to time to make sure the strings haven't made it to the spruce.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: jeremy3220 on February 22, 2010, 08:55:18 PM
correct me if I am wrong but I thought the bridge plate was supposed to be under the entire bridge (this is clearly not the case here). 

It's actually a matter of preference. The bridge plate on pre-war Martins did not extend quite as far back as the belly on the bridge. Also with most designs the wings of the bridge  will extend over the legs of X so the bridge plate certainly won't cover the entire footprint of the bridge. The pin holes do seem a bit too close to the front of the plate but the real issue for me is all that unnecessary weight behind the pins. I personally don't think the bridge plate should be used as a brace in the traditional sense because it is so low. And low wide braces are the least effective for structure and tone purposes... they are typically anyway; sometimes raising the impedance is a good thing.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: AZLiberty on February 22, 2010, 09:46:03 PM
All this drama.  What's wrong with an old fashioned ribbon transducer under the saddle?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: eded on February 22, 2010, 09:48:06 PM
I appreciate everyones input but I didn't start this thread to cause a battle over how  Larrivee decides to build its guitars,

That thought never crossed my mind.  It is the reality of public forums, though.  Any conversation can morph to include stuff you never thought would be part of *that* conversation.   :smile:  I don't think anyone is being hostile towards Larrivee (the company) in this thread.  It all seems like pretty healthy discussion, to me.  I'm sure *if* there is ever an issue, they will stand behind their product.

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: eded on February 22, 2010, 09:49:18 PM
All this drama.  What's wrong with an old fashioned ribbon transducer under the saddle?

The sound. 

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 22, 2010, 11:00:35 PM
All this drama.  What's wrong with an old fashioned ribbon transducer under the saddle?
  The ribbon can be a hassle in getting the acoustic unplugged sound as good as if it didn't have it as well.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: AZLiberty on February 23, 2010, 01:45:42 AM
Fine.

I like the sound (acoustic and electric) from the Fishman undersadle unit in my OM-03RE. 


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 02:13:20 AM
The D-09 I had sounded bad with the Fishman. I just took it out and made a bone saddle, then it was fine.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 23, 2010, 02:18:34 AM
I just want to have a nice pick-up so if I'm ever at an Eagles concert and they ask me to come up and join them I'll be able to plug right in.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 02:20:00 AM
I just want to have a nice pick-up so if I'm ever at an Eagles concert and they ask me to come up and join them I'll be able to plug right in.
:roll


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 23, 2010, 02:27:30 AM
:roll

Something funny?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 02:30:32 AM
Oh no, not really. Tell Glen that Danny says howdy.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 23, 2010, 02:57:00 AM
Oh no, not really. Tell Glen that Danny says howdy.

 :roll

Actually, my brother was very good friends with Glen in high school and they used to jam in our basement, I filled in on drums a couple times.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 23, 2010, 03:00:56 AM
Have you considered a baggs Ibeam?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: dermot on February 23, 2010, 08:12:31 AM
You would need at least 7/8" from the center of the pin hole to the front of the bridge plate to have enough room to install the transducer.

(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1680_4_1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1687_2_1.jpg)

much the same issues mounting a K&K on this orignal '31 OM18 (posted by Ted Hudson on UMGF's henk-0-gram thread) i think;
(http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt175/TedHutson/Picture152.jpg)



Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: jeremy3220 on February 23, 2010, 12:48:03 PM
Now that's what a bridge plate should look like.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 12:52:40 PM
Now that's what a bridge plate should look like.
  Well, minus the cracks that are spreading between the pin holes. :winkin:


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: BenF on February 23, 2010, 12:59:30 PM
Now that's what a bridge plate should look like.

But there is a similar amount of wood in front of the pin holes as on the forum III plate, just not 2 miles behind it.  This makes me wonder whether there really is a potential problem other than fitting a K&K PUP, as others suggest.  If the Martin bridge plate is original, it has survived 80 years without the ball ends getting close to the spruce?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 23, 2010, 03:54:32 PM
Have you considered a baggs Ibeam?

No but I did consider the B-Band, I really wanted a passive PUP for this guitar though.

Looks like they got the transducer a little close to the pin holes on my LV-19, but this pickup works great. You have to loosen the strings to get at the battery though.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LV-19E/IMG_1770_1_1.jpg)


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 23, 2010, 04:05:33 PM
You can get a passive one but you would need the offboard preamp.I've installed a BUNCH of these with very happy results.Fairly natural tone.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: eded on February 23, 2010, 04:07:53 PM
Have you considered a baggs Ibeam?

Not since hearing the K&K.  Actually, I haven't considered any others since hearing the K&K.  No quack, not absolutely necessary to have a preamp, great sound, no batteries...  why continue looking?

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Randy_R on February 23, 2010, 04:14:17 PM
While it may not be optimal, has anyone tried a set of K&K behind the bridge pins of their FIII instead?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 23, 2010, 05:27:04 PM
While it may not be optimal, has anyone tried a set of K&K behind the bridge pins of their FIII instead?
K&K recommends not putting them behind the bridge pins (makes the guitar sound distant), if you don't have enough bridge plate in front of the pins they're alternate method is to mount them to the sound board as close to the saddle as possable. Jim felt pretty strongly against gluing them to the sound board.

The K&K website was offline over the weekend so I really didn't have any access to additional info but since reading through their FAQ section I have learned quite a bit.

FYI, K&K states if you decide to use the double stick tape method for attachment you lose 30% volume output over the glue method.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: jeremy3220 on February 23, 2010, 05:58:35 PM
But there is a similar amount of wood in front of the pin holes as on the forum III plate, just not 2 miles behind it.  This makes me wonder whether there really is a potential problem other than fitting a K&K PUP, as others suggest.  If the Martin bridge plate is original, it has survived 80 years without the ball ends getting close to the spruce?

Yeah the ball ends shouldn't move 1/4" forward. If they did you'd have more obvious problems to deal with too.


  Well, minus the cracks that are spreading between the pin holes. :winkin:

 :tongue: Of course but the solution isn't more bridge plate.



Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: GA-ME on February 23, 2010, 06:42:55 PM
But there is a similar amount of wood in front of the pin holes as on the forum III plate, just not 2 miles behind it.  This makes me wonder whether there really is a potential problem other than fitting a K&K PUP, as others suggest.  If the Martin bridge plate is original, it has survived 80 years without the ball ends getting close to the spruce?

It appears that the worn and damaged holes in the Martin bridge plate are more than double the size of the holes in the Larrivee and that there is still more real estate in front of the worn/damaged pin holes on the Martin than there is on the Larry. It looks like at least three of those pin holes in the Martin, if superimposed over the Larry center on center( of the original hole), would be into the spruce. Plus, if the rosewood plate cracks along a seam like the Martin plate did, there is very little glue surface towards the front 1/4" to reamain bonded under the tension. It is something I'd keep an eye on and it would make me be a bit more careful on restrings in making sure the ball end is seated tghtly against the plate so sawing action is minimized when tuning up to pitch. It may or may not be a problem in the future, but it is worth keeping tabs on.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 07:14:37 PM
     GA_ME "It is something I'd keep an eye on and it would make me be a bit more careful on restrings in making sure the ball end is seated tghtly against the plate so sawing action is minimized when tuning up to pitch. It may or may not be a problem in the future, but it is worth keeping tabs on."

    This is a big concern regardless of the guitar you may own. Dan Erlewine said tha a very high percentage of the guitars brought to him for repairs are strung up incorrectly. I think it was like 70% or so. That ball end needs to be tucked up tight and not dangling down at all. It can cause buzzing and a constant "sawing" of the plate and then the top by the wound strings. As you keep adjusting the tuning you are pulling the string a bit more each time and cutting the plate.
     I do my best to feel inside and make sure that ball it up tight against the plate every time I change strings.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: GA-ME on February 23, 2010, 07:21:16 PM
Dan, I usually use my pin to push the ball into the pin hole while I hold tension on the string. The wound strings do in fact function as a saw if you leave them dangling and then pull them up when turning the machine head.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 07:35:27 PM
  I do that as well. But the larger wound strings I try to feel on the plate itself. Also bending the string on the ball end towards the neck will help it seat in place.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: GA-ME on February 23, 2010, 07:42:49 PM
Dan, it's not much of an issue on my guitars as I prep them for unslotted pins so strings just pop into the slot on the bridge plate and stay there when a bit of tenson is on the string.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 23, 2010, 07:44:59 PM
Dan, it's not much of an issue on my guitars as I prep them for unslotted pins so strings just pop into the slot on the bridge plate and stay there when a bit of tenson is on the string.
  I wanted to do that on this Maple/Koa refinish I'm completing right now. But I'm jazzed up and am going to make it playable ASAP and make changes later on.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Blue in VT on February 23, 2010, 08:23:38 PM
Dan, it's not much of an issue on my guitars as I prep them for unslotted pins so strings just pop into the slot on the bridge plate and stay there when a bit of tenson is on the string.

Yeah Slotting the bridge is one of those things that I can't understand why all guitar makers don't do...it just makes since...I've slotted a couple of my guitars myself and it was wicked easy and I feel much better about restringing and the long term longevity of my bridge plate.

Cheers,

Blue


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: eded on February 23, 2010, 09:07:50 PM
  Also bending the string on the ball end towards the neck will help it seat in place.

I've been doing this for years...  part of the string change ritual.  Before the string goes in, I use needle nose pliers to just bend the ball back a tiny bit.  So that the string is on tangent with the curve of the ball.  Then, I make sure it is in place before I put the pin in.

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: jeremy3220 on February 23, 2010, 10:09:37 PM
It appears that the worn and damaged holes in the Martin bridge plate are more than double the size of the holes in the Larrivee and that there is still more real estate in front of the worn/damaged pin holes on the Martin than there is on the Larry.

I don't know. There should be about 29/64" between each of those pin holes and I'd guess by the pic that there is at least that much distance to the front of the plate. There maybe 1/2" to the front of the plate which should be the same distance from the center of the pins on the Martin to the front of its plate(if memory serves me correct)... Of course someone could measure it... not that it matters much... ok, I'm done.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 23, 2010, 10:18:30 PM
The front edge of the Larrivee plate is about even with the saddle position.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: LaminateBoy on February 25, 2010, 09:16:44 PM
While it may not be optimal, has anyone tried a set of K&K behind the bridge pins of their FIII instead?

Yes, that is exactly what I did. The amplified sound is a bit boxy. I've tweaked the sound with the Pure XLR preamp and it is acceptable, but not the best it could be. It's still better than a UST


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: Daysailer on February 26, 2010, 01:35:31 AM
Could it be that the bridge plate is correct for the guitar and maybe they weren't thinking about what type of pickup was going to be installed afterwards?Its not like they designed acoustic guitars to be electricified.

I just looked at my Original Forum OM,  and the bridge plate and pin holes look the same as on my F-III.
I think unclrob is correct,  this is where Larrivee wants the bridge plates on these 12 frets.
No one seems to complain about the quality of the response, sustain or overall sound with this bridge plate placement.

Forum IV  =  12 fret......hmmm  maybe same placement coming on those also.

just my 2 cents worth......barely    :beer


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini not good
Post by: eded on February 26, 2010, 01:52:49 AM

Forum IV  =  12 fret......hmmm  maybe same placement coming on those also.


The spruce top "special edition" bridgeplate is properly placed.  That is to say, it is where they usually are.  And, FWIW, a K&K goes on just fine. 

I'll try to get a photo.

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 26, 2010, 03:27:13 AM
I checked my OM03PA and its in the same place as the forum.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 28, 2010, 12:59:35 AM

Got the bridge plate extension from Jim in the mail today, glued it in place and the guitar is hanging on the wall of my music room.  Tomorrow I will install the K&K.


(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1800_1_1.jpg)


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on February 28, 2010, 01:44:05 AM
  That is some clean work. I wouldn't dare show you my bridge extension on the Maple/Koa.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Barefoot Rob on February 28, 2010, 02:36:32 AM
Let us know if there are any volumn or tonal changes.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 28, 2010, 04:05:52 AM
Let us know if there are any volumn or tonal changes.

I will. I'm hoping because of the close proximity of the brace that it will have little impact.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on February 28, 2010, 08:16:46 PM
Okay, it is installed.
Didn't notice any change in tone or volume playing unplugged.
Plugged directly to my amp this passive PUP is louder than my active PUP on my LV. I started playing and my wife said from the other room, "that is the nicest sound i've heard since you started playing, how come you didn't put that pickup in a long time ago?"   :laughin:

Really though, this pickup sounds so balanced with no harshness at all. Can't stay here to long because my wife wants to jam   :nana_guitar but here are a few more pic's.
First one is a workbench shot, second shows the bracing and you can see the extension from outside the guitar and the third shows the final pickup position.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1814_2_1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1803_1_1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1823_5_1.jpg)

Here are a couple shots of the jack install inside and out.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1820_4_1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/daddyo12453/LS-03HB/IMG_1816_3_1.jpg)

I will make some changes in the installation method next time I put one of these in.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Daysailer on March 01, 2010, 03:20:30 AM
Well done, and also very good pics.

How you did the pics, especially the 'glow thru' brace showing one, would make a good separate thread.

Glad it sounds good too.  Dont ya love it when a good plan comes together and works.... :thumb

tks 4 sharing...  :beer


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: AZLiberty on March 01, 2010, 06:47:17 AM
Love the D'Addario colored ball ends in the installed pic.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Zohn on March 01, 2010, 08:21:56 AM
Roger, nice looking installation.
You remarked that Jim doesn't like th K&K - did he say which one he likes?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Michael T on March 01, 2010, 10:45:26 AM
Not to interfer with a directed question but Jim has done a couple K&K's for me and had mentioned the Baggs (I don't know which), but as I told him my guitars have the K&K and so do my son's. We just prefer the sound, have the pre's and he did a great job. I don't know that he doesn't like them, he may just have a preference for the Baggs.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on March 01, 2010, 04:36:54 PM
 :donut2  :coffee  Thanks for the positive replies.

I don't remember the specifics regarding Jim's opinion of the K&K but this is the gist of it.
The way I remember it (this is where I have problems) Jim said he took a guitar in (I believe he said it was a Martin D28), he said the owner wanted the K&K pickup removed to put in another guitar. He said when trying to remove the transducers that they were damaged beyond repair and that he broke the top of the guitar. I think that would be enough for me to not want to try that job again.  I don't know how the top broke, but I can tell you it is not easy to get your arm in the sound hole to clean off the transducers after installation. That is one part I would change next time I do one of these, I used the supplied Dum Dum putty to hold the transducers to the piece of cardboard. You use so little that it doesn't seem like it would be an issue but when you press up on the cardboard the putty spreads and so does the stupid glue gel (they tell you to use a generous amount of glue, I think I know how much to use next time based on the amount that oozed out the edges). You just have to take your time and slowly scrape off what you can with your finger nails. 
The web site says to use a razor blade to slice under the transducers to remove them, well first of all when you put your arm through the sound hole your working blind, second you would have to come at them from the tail end of the top because of the x braces, I don't know about others but my arm only goes so far through the hole and I could just reach the bridge plate but being able to hold a razor blade (with handle) try to line it up with the PUP and get any leverage doesn't seem like a job I would enjoy. All guitars are different but the F-III being only 4" deep and the sound hole being a tad smaller in diameter is a bit limiting as far as access goes.
Jim's opinion of the K&K had nothing to do with its performance. And again the story may have been told a little differently (he's a busy guy so when I do call him I like to get down to business and not take up too much of his time).
I had to turn the volume down on my amp from 5 to 2 to get the same volume level as I get out of my B-Band PUP in the LV, I'm very happy with the sound. Plus, it doesn't matter what note or string that I play, they are all the same volume. No resonant frequencies that want to feedback.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Barefoot Rob on March 01, 2010, 05:51:20 PM
Roger repairpeople develope a soft area in there forearm so that it bends a little> :humour:


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on March 01, 2010, 07:56:51 PM
  Roger on working blind in the soundhole; You can buy the expensive Stewmac mirror that folds and then opens inside to give you a broad view or remove a mirror from the casing on a car or truck rearview mirror or two. Most of those will be the right shape to fit in the hole. I used a dremel cutting wheel to open up the casing and get the mirror out.
  Or just go to the auto parts and buy the cut to fit mirror replacement material. You can get a fairly large sheet of it for less than $7, then cut it in strips 3" wide and place them inside.
   Then put a scraper of some kind (exacto, small gasket scrapers, etc.) on a bent tool handle and you can see where you are working by the mirror (and a small lite) your hand won't be in the way if you make the angle right on your "custom scraper".

      I have a craftsman specialized gasket scraper with 3 high quality steel blades that fit on a handle made for it. They can be made razor sharp and I have a cut to prove that. Anyway they have a hole in the middle and they have many angles and shapes between the three blades so they can be screwed on to other handles. A wooden back scrubber handle is one of the tool handles I use. It has an angle at the head and is made of good solid wood. But many other handles could be adapted. Dan Erliwine shows this technique in his book, only he uses tools sold by Stewmac quite a bit. Although sometimes he makes his own and shares how to do it yourself.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: eded on March 01, 2010, 09:16:45 PM
With the K&K... 

You don't really need to put all that much pressure on the pickups when gluing them on...  if you are deforming the putty, you are putting more pressure on than necessary.  You just need to get the 2 surfaces (pickup with glue and bridgeplate) to make contact.   Then you need to hold it (again, LOW pressure) for a minute, then let it sit with no pressure for another minute (or 5).   Then it is plenty easy to remove the cardboard and putty dots. 

FWIW, I've installed several (uhm...  6 or 7) and never had a problem. 

I've gone through several of their "suggested methods", from wraping inverted scotchtape around my finger and using a pair of pins to feel the location to the current single element at a time with a jig.  What works best for me, is a all at once jig.  I still "dry fit" everything several times, until I'm sure of what is going to happen before I spread any super glue.  I've never removed one (never wanted to) but I've bought one that had been removed.  So it *is* possible.

There *is* a certain amount of blind work you need to do if you do anything inside a guitar. 

Ed


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on March 02, 2010, 12:53:42 AM

How you did the pics, especially the 'glow thru' brace showing one, would make a good separate thread.


When I get the time I will do that.


Danny, I got a couple mirrors that I use. Thanks for the custom tool idea.

Ed, I'm sure I applied too much pressure but will take your advice on the next one. The all at once jig is the one I used. The one thing that I followed closely in the instructions was the part about installing the one pickup directly under the high E string, the other two between the G and D and the A and E.

Thanks for the tips.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Barefoot Rob on March 02, 2010, 03:00:03 AM
What did you use to secure the added piece of wood?


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Mr_LV19E on March 02, 2010, 04:42:54 AM
What did you use to secure the added piece of wood?
Double stick tape.








 :humour:

Carpenters glue, let dry 24hrs.


Title: Re: F-III bridge plate + K&K mini different?
Post by: Danny on March 02, 2010, 01:09:31 PM
Double stick tape
  I thought of that. Great stuff :winkin: