Marvin palm rest - onto a Marquee.

[JimN]

Do you ever need to damp the strings with the heel of your hand? You won't be able to if you fit that guard.

It isn't used as a hand-rest on the Marvin - it is simply there to stop the tremolo bridge plate from moving too far upwards.

JN

[dusty fretz]

The two-bar hand-rest on the Marvin is indeed exactly that. It's fitted to prevent inadvertent contact between the bridgeplate and the player's hand, as the latter could exert undue downward pressure and accordingly cause pitch-rise problems. This component was absent on early prototype examples, but was added when the potential for tuning troubles was realised. If fitted purely to limit upward movement of the bridgeplate, the latter would have to tilt forward an inordinate amount, far beyond any practical purposes, to actually come into contact with the bars.

[JimN]

Paul, I can't agree that the bars over the tailpiece on a Marvin are meant for use as a handrest. The player's hands are nowhere near it when playing!

On the other hand, the counterpart bars on the Shadows Bass model, being placed over the strings between the bridge and the neck (a bit like the pickup cover on a Precision or a Jazz Bass) are certainly meant to serve as a handrest.

I was a bit puzzled by your observation about the trem plate never hitting the bars in use. I've had a Marvin for 39 years. I am renowned among those who know me and my guitars for being an absolute stickler in respect of set-up, and I can assure you that it is easy for the bridge-plate to touch the bars in use (depending on set-up tastes, of course - it's easier for the parts to collide when the instrument is equipped with very light-gauge strings). As a matter of fact, the twin bars on the Marvin are at different heights because of the excursion of the bridge plate in use and the angle formed. If the unit is affixed to the guitar the wrong way round (and I've seen that done), the trem becomes limited in range if the player wishes to avoid constant clashing of the plate against the restraint bars.

Best wishes,

JN

[dusty fretz]

Hi Jim,
Seems like we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I can only concur with Jim Burn's description of this component, as he too called it a handrest when discussing with me the development of the Marvin, and he also related the reasons for its inclusion.

Regarding downward palm pressure, it all depends on the angle of hand attack, particularly on the bass side. Remember that back then more than a few players liked to play with the guitar slung quite high, a position that brings the right arm round to more in line astern with the bridge, thus making that area increasingly susceptible to unwanted interference. I don't experience this particular performance problem and presumably neither do you, but Burns obviously considered the possibility was sufficient to warrant a solution.

I must admit I've never known the bridgeplate to tilt far enough forward to touch the bars. Surely for this to happen, the arm tip would then be hitting the scratchplate? I agree that operation depends on string gauges (suitably balanced by spring number and tension) and back in 1964 these tended to be pretty beefy by today's standards. Regardless of what's fitted, I like to set up a Rezo-Tube unit so that the bridgeplate floats parallel to the body, which allows a slight upward pull, but with the optimum combination of resistance and response on down bends. With this set-up, raising the bridgeplate to such an extreme angle would require considerable force and decrease pitch beyond normal requirements.

The bars are different heights to improve playing comfort. The lower one is sited adjacent to the bridge saddles, as it better matches the height of the latter and therefore doesn't impede string damping, while the higher one at the rear provides greater clearance and protection from body parts. Jim told me they initially opted for two of the taller bar, but typically decided to tweak things further for the player's benefit.

Anyway, what's in a name. It's a case of vive la difference and whatever gets you through the night!

[Bill Bowley]

As a long term (since 1964) owner and player of Burns Marvin's I have to agree with Paul, I have always believed that the 'two bars' were a hand rest that also guarded against unwanted pitch changes due to external objects (mic stand etc or the player's wrist or whatever). As for hand position whilst playing, watch Hank in this clip of 'Bombay Duck' - and in any case, if it was only to restrict trem plate movement, why would Bruce bother to have one at all?

[JimN]

Is it even possible to rest your hand (any part of it) on the guard whilst playing? I agree that "palm rest", "hand rest", etc, etc are useful terms to apply to the item for quick identification and reference, but it isn't a hand rest. At least, not whilst playing.

The difference between a Stratocaster and a Marvin is that the trem plate on a Marvin is not fixed down (though it is held in place by string/spring tension). It can, at the extremities of its travel, move out of the V-shaped recess on the pivot bar unless restrained. I have seen it happen (not to me) and the results are not pretty.

JN

[Bill Bowley]

Of course, the use of the 'rails' (I'll call them that for now for the sake of impartiality!) by individuals could also depend on exactly where they were mounted on the guitar- here's two different positionings which would obviously cause some difference in how they might be 'used'..........

[mgeek]

The two-bar hand-rest on the Marvin is indeed exactly that. It's fitted to prevent inadvertent contact between the bridgeplate and the player's hand, as the latter could exert undue downward pressure and accordingly cause pitch-rise problems.

I think this pretty much covers it.

It's probably called a hand rest because it's a more catchy name than 'those bars that stop you inadvertantly knocking the bridgeplate with that bit of your wrist into your forearm', but that's 100% what the bars are for.

If I came across a Marvin that's bridgeplate actually came into contact with those bars, I'd just think it needed setting up properly, though I suppose it's possible that a few snuck out where the bars were too short?

[JimN]

If I came across a Marvin that's bridgeplate actually came into contact with those bars, I'd just think it needed setting up properly, though I suppose it's possible that a few snuck out where the bars were too short?

I have seen at least one example where the two bars were each the same height (equivalent to the lower height on a standard unit). I suspect that the rail might have been assembled from odd spare parts out of the hundreds which flooded the UK market in the year or so after Baldwin Guitars went out of business in 1970. It would have been a problem to fix, as well, since the "proper" spares were simply not available, except by chance encounter.

But getting back to the Marquee problem, do you intend to fit the guard over the bridge?

JN

[Bill Bowley]

Off Topic for a minute if I may?

Dusty F,

That clip of 'Bombay Duck' shows the BALDWIN Marvins with the 'one piece' scratchplate that I was trying to tell you about way back when you were putting 'The Burns Book' together that nobody (at that time) seemed to remember. I always thought it would 'pop up' eventually, who would have ever thought back then it would be on a world wide instantanoeus video messaging system?!!

Regards