Raw Vintage Strat Saddles/Springs vs. Callaham vs. Fender

[basile865]

Hey everyone. I'm building a strat and looking into deciding which tremelo to buy. The players in this category are callaham, fender, and raw vintage.

In the past I had bought a callaham block and saddles for my american standard. The craftsmanship on the parts were top notch, but when I installed it it sounded too bright. The guitar lost its warm quality and had sort've a strange upper midrange to it. I slept on it and tried it the next day and in 5 seconds knew I disliked it. Returned the parts, which was very easy and that was that. I figured perhaps since my american standard strat is pretty heavy, the hardness of the callaham parts just didnt mate well with that particular guitar making it too bright.

Now for my current strat project I was sure to get a light alder strat body (below 4 lbs). My thougts are that maybe with the light body the Callaham stuff wont seem so bright.

One concern is this:
Lastnight on a random google search I came across a forum which posted about raw vintage parts. Apparently callaham measured the hardness of vintage saddles and they were rated at 50 B or some measurement like that, and his saddles were rated at 90 I believe. This was good for people who feared the strings cutting into the saddles creating grooves, BUT, in my opinion, thats probably the actual reason why his stuff sounds so bright. Sure something harder is going to resonate better, sustain longer, but it will also be brighter.

According to Raw vintage, their saddles are an exact metal copy, which theyve researched to the molecular level, of vintage 50's saddles. They also make springs which they claim help alot. Problem is they don't make a block or trem plate.

SO, do I find some sort of acceptable block, maybe even callaham's, get the raw vintage saddles and make some sort of superior combo, OR, is this a load of hogwash and get the american fender 57/62 bridge which I can get for around 80 bucks. (the raw vintage saddles are 75 a set, plus 20 for the springs)(callaham full bridge set is like 130)

Thanks for your input guys

[Structo]

I have Callaham trems on two strats. I like them a lot but I wish I would have chosen the narrower string spread. The vintage trem puts the E strings real close to the edge of the fretboard but after playing them a bunch I guess I get used to that.

The best thing about the Callaham trem is the short whammy bar, real nice not to have that thing sticking way out there.

I used all Callaham hardware on these as well, except the tuners. One has Sperzel lockers and the other has Kluson inline tuners.
Strap buttons, pickguard screws, jack cup.

I think the Callaham cold rolled steel block is great as well. As far as the saddles go, I guess I didn't really notice they were overly bright.
They just sound like strats to me.

I have another strat that has a vintage trem on it. I bought it from a guy so I'm not 100% sure what guitar it came out of.
But it seems to have a large steel block as well. That guitar is a 62 Strat relic, so I wanted to make it all Fender as much as possible.

There was a thread at The Gear Page with guys talking about the Raw Vintage trem springs and how they improved the tone and feel of the guitar.
Not sure if that is snake oil or what but I may have to try a set of those springs.

http://www.rawvintage.com/eng/item_springs.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Stratabuse]

I have the Callaham saddles, bridge,& block & I really like it. I didn't notice it being any brighter, but it definitley sounded better than the stock Fender bridge & block. I also read about the Raw Vintage springs & thought how can springs make a difference but I figured what the heck & bought some. Wouldn't you know it they do sound better. Don't know if you ever tried 5 springs on your Strat instead of 3, it sounds more resonate, but the tremolo action is too stiff & makes the string tension feel a little tighter. I put the 5 Raw Vintage springs in & you get the sound of five springs but the string tension & tremolo action feels like 3 spings. I would recommend them, for the money you can't go wrong.

[basile865]

thanks for the input guys.

Heres what I had read on that other forum:

The Raw Vintage website says, "We've analyzed, down to the molecular level, real 50's vintage steel saddles and have come up with a special formula reproducing the exact metal structure. We've utilized the same manufacturing technique, nickel plating directly onto the steel body, to provide you with consistent vintage tone!"

The Raw Vintage string slot is extra long like the Callaham saddle on the left (vintage Fender in middle, current Fender on right):

http://www.callahamguitars.com/sd3full.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Callaham says, "There is the belief that Pre-CBS saddles were "hardened". Every Pre-CBS saddle that we have tested only measures an average of 50 Rockwell B, and were not hardened. We use a steel with a hardness of 95-98 Rockwell B for our saddles. The steel hardens in the making of the saddle and is well over 115 Rockwell B where the string crosses."

Intuition tells me there is probably no perceptible difference in tone between Callaham and Raw Vintage saddles. However, the tweaker in me wonders if there might be.

Whichever saddle is the hardest (Callaham?) should be the best for long-term durability. That is, the hardness prevents high strings from cutting into the metal, which can cause sitar-like overtones.

On the other hand, a stamped steel saddle that is not hardened might actually sound better. Less zingy perhaps? This zingy characteristic on the high notes has spoiled some otherwise great S guitars that I've played.

[erikm5150]

I've also tried the raw vintage springs.
I figured for 20 bucks, it was worth a try...
To my surprise it did improve the tone a bit when I put them on an ibanez with a floyd type trem.

[Doug H]

I went with a call block and RV saddles and spriings. Kept the old faceplate. Still refinishing the guitar so I can't say yet how it sounds.