Strings thru Body

[olieoliver]

Bill, did you ever change the bridge on that guitar?
 
OO

[bsee]

You won't get increased tension, or even increased downward pressure over the bridge saddles.  The angle over the bridge can't really be any steeper unless you're going almost right angle and immediately through the body.  If you do that, you get a severe bend in the string, but you may also get the string to push down harder onto the saddle.  That could impact tone in some subtle way, though I'm not sure.  If you maintain the same angle as with a tailpiece and then turn down through the body, then there will be a bunch of pressure at that turning point as well.
 
Anyone got a cover for the can of worms I just opened?   I thought the whole concept was pretty much covered, but I don't remember us discussing pressure on the bridge saddles previously.
 
-bob

[David Houck]

There's actually not much clearance above the back rail of the bridge given the usual angle the strings take from the saddle to the tailpiece.  Of course this varies depending on the distance from the bridge to the tailpiece and how high the bridge is sitting.  And you don't want the strings touching the back rail unless you want your bass sounding like a sitar.

[funkyjazzjunky]

I see now thanks to Bob & Dave
 
In reality, some luthiers may use strings-thru-body construction to make up for the cheap bridge.

[elwoodblue]

It seems as if the tailpiece were set in to the body a bit so there is good solid contact with endgrain of the wood that would bring the neck wood recipe into the equation more.
 
  I know there is a difference in instruments that have a brass insert on the back that makes good contact with the endgrain as opposed to just having the strings anchored into plastic insets on the back.