Vibramute vs. Moseley Tailpiece
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:53 pm
I’ve been a Mosrite fan for decades, and have been aware of the ongoing “debate” on the two kinds of tailpieces those guitars had. Vibramute tailpieces were generally installed on Ventures models up to 1965, and Moseley tailpieces on those guitars and Mark I versions thereafter. Vibramutes returned on some later “re-issue” models. In fact, I have had both myself: a ‘70s Ventures Vibramute re-issue (which I kick myself for having sold) and a 1972 Moseley Mark I (which I still have). Having had both, I can see the differences between the two, but—as a guitarist and not an expert in guitar engineering—would honestly be hard-pressed to say one or the other is “better”. The prevailing attitude, it seems to me, is that the Vibranute is more valuable, mainly because the older Mosrite guitars are more valuable—the Vibramute contributing to that value. However, Deke Dickerson, in another post in this forum several years back, said, “I also think that the '63-'65 guitars with Vibramute tailpieces sound better because the bridge/tailpiece has so much more mass than the pot-metal Moseley tailpieces. But it really depends on what kind of music you're going to play on the guitar.” All this begs the question, since Semie designed both, why did he switch from the Vibramute to the Moseley? At the time of the changeover, was the Vibramute already considered preferable, by end-users and others, to the tailpiece that replaced it? If so, would Semie have knowingly downgraded a key component of his guitars? If not, then why not replace it with the Moseley? I don’t think there is a definitive answer to all this, but it would be interesting to hear the theories and opinions of the forum’s members.