Fender or Squier?

[Grangur]

[quote name='throwoff' timestamp='1402911458' post='2477698']
Wood is not a homogenous material no, that's why it's lucky that ALL the tone of a bass comes from the strings, pickups and electronics.

The wood makes not one jot of difference.
[/quote]
You may be [i]extremely [/i]slightly wrong if we consider the possible effect that a beautiful wood with amazing grain could make the player feel better and more "at one" with the instrument, and therefore play with greater feel. Also the shape of the body and neck gives the player the ergonomics to be able to access the strings better. This is all "splitting hairs" though.

So this puts us firmly back in the realms of "it's all in the fingers".

[throwoff]

Ok, perhaps I worded it poorly, the wood has no effect on tone, the feel and attachment to an instrument can come from the wood.

[notable9]

Just picked up a new Squire Vintage Modified P/J precision bass cause Ive always wanted a jazz bass but could never get on with that weird offset body mallarky and narrow nut!

This bass, and I stress... for the money is astonishing. Its light weight, the frets and tinted neck are smooth and nicely finished.The controls are weighty and smooth and the sound from the bridge PU is full on Jaco loveliness, in fact Im pretty sure the guy in the store who was behind a couple of racks thought i was playing a Thumb bass or something cause he seemed genuinely amazed at the tone I was squeezing out of it.
Its a very nice bass.

Edited June 16, 2014 by notable9

[SubsonicSimpleton]

[quote name='throwoff' timestamp='1402911458' post='2477698']
Wood is not a homogenous material no, that's why it's lucky that ALL the tone of a bass comes from the strings, pickups and electronics.

The wood makes not one jot of difference.
[/quote]
[quote name='throwoff' timestamp='1402913145' post='2477722']
Ok, perhaps I worded it poorly, the wood has no effect on tone, the feel and attachment to an instrument can come from the wood.
[/quote]
The sound is generated by string vibration, which is in turn affected by the mechanical integrity of the structure which supports it at each end - as the instrument vibrates in sympathy with the strings, certain frenquencies will be cancelled, attenuated or boosted by the interaction between the string and the structure, this isn't some dippy xyz wood species sounds a certain way BS, but simple physics, and the same reason that deadspots occur on bass necks. Propagation of vibration through solid materials is directly affected by their physical properties, for engineering purposes, these properties are easy to control for refined metal and plastics, but trees not so much.

IMHO the grain structure, density and moisture content of the timber is way more important than specific wood species, and is one of the reasons why if you try a bunch of identically specced mass manufactured guitars or basses back to back, you will find that some are better than others and this is noticable both amplified and unamplified, and that weight can vary quite a bit from one example of a given design to another. The main variable that cannot be controlled easily in a modern production enviroment is the quality of the individual bits of wood.

The cheaper the instruments, the bigger the variation as they are being built down to a price, so lower grade timber isn't being screened from the production process. When I've made comparisons like this in the past, the difference in tone tends to be subtle, but responsiveness to playing dynamics, clarity and sustain is much more noticable and makes certain instruments seem to "sing" easily in comparison to others, or the notes in certain registers have more energy or definition, with the exact same strings, pickups & electrics through the same amp on the same settings.

You could also make the argument that some of this variation might be caused by inconsistency in the amount of glue used in joints, neck/pocket seating accuracy, nut seating etc and I would be in agreement, but modern manufacturing processes have really tightened the overall QC on even the cheapest instruments and consistency is much more about variations in materials now from what I've seen of modern buget offerings including basses that retail new in the sub £100 bracket.

[BassTractor]

Very, very good. Applause!!!

[Grangur]

Have you seen this

It's a gadget made to "open up the wood" by vibrating it to get it moving and open up the sound. I can see it "possibly" working on an instrument with a sound board, but with an electric bass..?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsRhNzdB-g8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwBzplLz8Y

Edited June 26, 2014 by icastle
Link fixed.

[HowieBass]

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1402953333' post='2478314']
Have you seen this

It's a gadget made to "open up the wood" by vibrating it to get it moving and open up the sound. I can see it "possibly" working on an instrument with a sound board, but with an electric bass..?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsRhNzdB-g8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwBzplLz8Y
[/quote]

I know that some materials, I think mainly metal, can undergo a process called work hardening where there's a definite change in internal structure (and obviously the phenomenom of metal fatigue) whereas I can only imagine timber becoming somehow a little more compliant as it ages (loses stiffness) which presumably is what's supposed to be going on with played in instruments. Tests have been made where professional violinists were asked in a double blind trial to rate violins where some were modern and others were vintage Stradivarius instruments and there was little preference for one over another - in fact most of the players chose a modern instrument for one that they'd take home, based on playability and sound alone - you'd imagine that a Stradivarius would have benefitted more than any other in terms of being 'broken in' through vibration. The thing that's always puzzled me is why some people claim that an instrument which sounds good acoustically (not plugged in) is going to be better (when played through an amp) than one that sounds dead or quieter as I've always thought that to hear it in this way means the instrument is robbing the strings of energy in order to radiate it through the neck and body (and wouldn't you want as much energy as possible to be seen by the pickup?) - maybe subtracting energy through sympathetic resonance makes other frequencies stand out more which is what they like to hear through their amp though of course take too much energy away from a vibrating string and that's where a dead spot arises...

Edited June 26, 2014 by icastle
Link fixed.

[throwoff]

[quote name='SubsonicSimpleton' timestamp='1402932624' post='2478023']
The sound is generated by string vibration, which is in turn affected by the mechanical integrity of the structure which supports it at each end - as the instrument vibrates in sympathy with the strings, certain frenquencies will be cancelled, attenuated or boosted by the interaction between the string and the structure, this isn't some dippy xyz wood species sounds a certain way BS, but simple physics, and the same reason that deadspots occur on bass necks. Propagation of vibration through solid materials is directly affected by their physical properties, for engineering purposes, these properties are easy to control for refined metal and plastics, but trees not so much.

IMHO the grain structure, density and moisture content of the timber is way more important than specific wood species, and is one of the reasons why if you try a bunch of identically specced mass manufactured guitars or basses back to back, you will find that some are better than others and this is noticable both amplified and unamplified, and that weight can vary quite a bit from one example of a given design to another. The main variable that cannot be controlled easily in a modern production enviroment is the quality of the individual bits of wood.

The cheaper the instruments, the bigger the variation as they are being built down to a price, so lower grade timber isn't being screened from the production process. When I've made comparisons like this in the past, the difference in tone tends to be subtle, but responsiveness to playing dynamics, clarity and sustain is much more noticable and makes certain instruments seem to "sing" easily in comparison to others, or the notes in certain registers have more energy or definition, with the exact same strings, pickups & electrics through the same amp on the same settings.

You could also make the argument that some of this variation might be caused by inconsistency in the amount of glue used in joints, neck/pocket seating accuracy, nut seating etc and I would be in agreement, but modern manufacturing processes have really tightened the overall QC on even the cheapest instruments and consistency is much more about variations in materials now from what I've seen of modern buget offerings including basses that retail new in the sub £100 bracket.
[/quote]

This is a very long post and don't take my short reply for evidence of not having read and digested it.

You show me the human being that can honestly hear the difference micro vibrations make to a string vibration once that has been passed through pickups, electronics, amp and speaker and I will show you superman.

It is a placebo effect of the highest caliber!

Much the same as blind tests have shown people can't tell a strad from a modern violin and that famous test where someone bolted the pre CBS Fender loom and pickups to a plank of wood and nobody could tell which sample was the guitar and which was the plank.

Edited June 17, 2014 by throwoff

[hairychris]

[quote name='HowieBass' timestamp='1402995269' post='2478563']
I know that some materials, I think mainly metal, can undergo a process called work hardening where there's a definite change in internal structure (and obviously the phenomenom of metal fatigue) whereas I can only imagine timber becoming somehow a little more compliant as it ages (loses stiffness) which presumably is what's supposed to be going on with played in instruments.[/quote]

That's pretty much it. What I understand from an experienced luthier friend is that wood needs to be "taught" to be an instrument, or broken in.

[quote name='HowieBass' timestamp='1402995269' post='2478563']Tests have been made where professional violinists were asked in a double blind trial to rate violins where some were modern and others were vintage Stradivarius instruments and there was little preference for one over another - in fact most of the players chose a modern instrument for one that they'd take home, based on playability and sound alone - you'd imagine that a Stradivarius would have benefitted more than any other in terms of being 'broken in' through vibration.[/quote]

A couple of things here. First, yes, in that even historic instruments need to be regularly played or the character of the wood changes. Secondly, we don't know whether Stradivarius was really the top producer, only that a lot (in comparative) terms of his instruments survived. We don't know how many of them are the real deal against how many are, to put it bluntly, are donkeys. Modern methods do mean that our instruments now are better designed and build than the vast majority of museum pieces.

[quote name='HowieBass' timestamp='1402995269' post='2478563']The thing that's always puzzled me is why some people claim that an instrument which sounds good acoustically (not plugged in) is going to be better (when played through an amp) than one that sounds dead or quieter as I've always thought that to hear it in this way means the instrument is robbing the strings of energy in order to radiate it through the neck and body (and wouldn't you want as much energy as possible to be seen by the pickup?) - maybe subtracting energy through sympathetic resonance makes other frequencies stand out more which is what they like to hear through their amp though of course take too much energy away from a vibrating string and that's where a dead spot arises...[/quote]

I think that it's the other way round. If the body/neck don't vibrate then they are absorbing or damping the vibrations. The body vibration feeds back to the strings.

Looking at throwoff's reply (just appeared whilst I was writing this):

Yes and no. The longer the chain between instrument & ear, the less noticeable the difference to the listener. That's absolutely true. You could make a bass out of rubber, shove actives on it, and *something* will come out of the other end! With this in mind, taking the thought to the illogical conclusion, I don't see many instrument makers building pickuped instruments out of vibration-absorbing materials. Hmm.

However, whatever comes out of the cab, as a player I want the instrument to give me physical feedback - I want to feel sustained notes as the neck feeds the energy back to the string. I'm a fairly n00b bass player, and forum n00b too, but have been a guitar player/gear tart for many a moon. From my personal experience/annecdote the livelier a guitar feels, or the more it talks to me through my left hand, the longer it sustains.

My $0.02!

[HowieBass]

[quote name='hairychris' timestamp='1403000607' post='2478646']
I think that it's the other way round. If the body/neck don't vibrate then they are absorbing or damping the vibrations. The body vibration feeds back to the strings.

[/quote]

If the body and neck don't vibrate then they don't vibrate; you can't have it both ways where something both absorbs energy but doesn't vibrate. You can't get more energy out of a system than you put in - the string can't vibrate any harder than when you first strike it so there's isn't any amplification going on with a string somehow collecting vibrational energy from the body - as I said if an instrument couples at a particular frequency (and it's usually the neck) it will suck energy from a vibrating string and that's where a dead spot occurs. It's known that adding mass to a headstock shift's the resonant frequency lower because you make the system stiffer/less compliant (so it's harder to make it vibrate).

[Grangur]

I may be being thick here, but surely it's better for the sound if the bass doesn't vibrate?

E.g.;
1 - High mass bridges are claimed to aid sustain; as they don't vibrate.
2 - Using a sponge deadens the note as it vibrates with the string.
3 - Putting a finger on the string kills the note because the flesh vibrates with the string and absorbs vibration.

The only thing that would go against this is if the body vibrates it may move the position of the pickup in relation to the string as it all vibrates and THIS may mean vibration in the body is a good thing.

My $0.02

[SubsonicSimpleton]

Just go to somewhere like PMT and try a bunch of supposedly identical spec guitars or basses through one amp - If you can't tell any difference then the only thing you really need to worry about when buying an instrument is whether you like the finish.

In the strad versus modern blind test, the musicians couldn't identify whether an instrument was vintage or modern, but they did consistently identify instruments that they thought were better than others
[quote]

‘[u]Soloists readily distinguished instruments they liked from those they did not[/u] but were unable to tell old from new at better than chance levels,’ the report concluded. ‘Given the stature and experience of our soloists, continuing claims for the existence of playing qualities unique to old Italian violins are strongly in need of empirical support.’

[/quote]
http://thestrad.com/latest/news/blind-tested-soloists-unable-to-tell-stradivarius-violins-from-modern-instruments

Human beings don't function like scientific precision measuring apparatus, but the senses are potentially very sensitive in a very non-linear way, so small differences in frequency response can make a big subjective difference in whether or not you like something.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter why you find an instrument inspiring to play or like the sound it produces, the most important thing is the joy you get and bring to others from the music you produce with it.

[Grangur]

[quote name='SubsonicSimpleton' timestamp='1403007626' post='2478745']
Just go to somewhere like PMT and try a bunch of supposedly identical spec guitars or basses through one amp - If you can't tell any difference then the only thing you really need to worry about when buying an instrument is whether you like the finish.

In the strad versus modern blind test, the musicians couldn't identify whether an instrument was vintage or modern, but they did consistently identify instruments that they thought were better than others

[url="http://thestrad.com/latest/news/blind-tested-soloists-unable-to-tell-stradivarius-violins-from-modern-instruments"]http://thestrad.com/...ern-instruments[/url]

Human beings don't function like scientific precision measuring apparatus, but the senses are potentially very sensitive in a very non-linear way, so small differences in frequency response can make a big subjective difference in whether or not you like something.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter why you find an instrument inspiring to play or like the sound it produces, the most important thing is the joy you get and bring to others from the music you produce with it.
[/quote]

You're so right. LOL

It's the one reason I'm definitely going to the Herts Bass Bash in July; a blind test of P-basses.

[throwoff]

The violin point is slightly out of sync with the argument (despite me being one of the people who used it! )

The quality of wood on an acoustic instrument does alter the sound as the whole thing vibrates as one.

Sold bodied electrics do not.

[Grangur]

[quote name='throwoff' timestamp='1403010325' post='2478794']
The violin point is slightly out of sync with the argument (despite me being one of the people who used it! )

The quality of wood on an acoustic instrument does alter the sound as the whole thing vibrates as one.

Sold bodied electrics do not.
[/quote]

Totally agree. If the sound board in a violin body didn't vibrate it'd be like having a static cone in a speaker cab.
Acoustic instruments are a whole different situation. They have one similarity - they have strings and tuning keys... end of.

[SubsonicSimpleton]

[quote name='throwoff' timestamp='1403010325' post='2478794']
The violin point is slightly out of sync with the argument (despite me being one of the people who used it! )

The quality of wood on an acoustic instrument does alter the sound as the whole thing vibrates as one.

Sold bodied electrics do not.
[/quote]
So are dead spots on necks a placebo effect?

And why can you still hear the effect of the dead spot when you are using an amp?

[Grangur]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]This question of woods and vibration is really a key thing for me right now. In my collection I've a Wishbass. It has a Musicman "style" Kent Armstrong pup. And the tone is a really loud sexy growl with some punch to it. I'm not so sure about the look of the Wishbass and [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I'd like to sell the Wish and go to a MM and fit a Kent Armstrong, as it's made for a double-humbucker, but will it sound the same?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]In theory the answer is "yes" it's a bass. Strings and everything in the same place etc. But the Wish has no truss rod. Theres a lot of wood in it and the rigidity of the neck is in the 2 lines of purpleheart wood that runs down it. I guess the answer is in buying a MM and trying it.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Oh, and it needs to be a fretless... [/font][/color]

[Grangur]

[quote name='SubsonicSimpleton' timestamp='1403022308' post='2478963']
So are dead spots on necks a placebo effect?

And why can you still hear the effect of the dead spot when you are using an amp?
[/quote]

The answer is in sight:
http://basschat.co.uk/topic/192342-dead-spots/

There's some useful links in there. In short it's about vibration in the neck; not the body. This I believe, because the neck is slimmer and has a greater ability to vibrate than a wide slab of wood (the body).

[barkin]

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1402520991' post='2474465']

I'm not 100% sold on going for a Fender or Squier. I was actually thinking "budget or premium". I guess an Overwater-Tanglewood is also an option.
[/quote]

You're not far from me, if you want to try a Tanglewater Classic J. Or I could maybe bring it along to the bash on 6th...

[Telebass]

I actually sat down and a/b'd my two today.
They're strung the same, have same or similar hardware, and each has a USA pickup, one a Fender, one a Seymour Duncan.

The bodies are different, the MIM being alder, the Squier agathis.

I could not hear any significant difference in tone or volume.

The Squier wins, because it's over 2 pounds lighter. But no different sound-wise.

[hamfist]

[quote name='SubsonicSimpleton' timestamp='1402932624' post='2478023']


The sound is generated by string vibration, which is in turn affected by the mechanical integrity of the structure which supports it at each end - as the instrument vibrates in sympathy with the strings, certain frenquencies will be cancelled, attenuated or boosted by the interaction between the string and the structure, this isn't some dippy xyz wood species sounds a certain way BS, but simple physics, and the same reason that deadspots occur on bass necks. Propagation of vibration through solid materials is directly affected by their physical properties, for engineering purposes, these properties are easy to control for refined metal and plastics, but trees not so much.

IMHO the grain structure, density and moisture content of the timber is way more important than specific wood species, and is one of the reasons why if you try a bunch of identically specced mass manufactured guitars or basses back to back, you will find that some are better than others and this is noticable both amplified and unamplified, and that weight can vary quite a bit from one example of a given design to another. The main variable that cannot be controlled easily in a modern production enviroment is the quality of the individual bits of wood.

The cheaper the instruments, the bigger the variation as they are being built down to a price, so lower grade timber isn't being screened from the production process. When I've made comparisons like this in the past, the difference in tone tends to be subtle, but responsiveness to playing dynamics, clarity and sustain is much more noticable and makes certain instruments seem to "sing" easily in comparison to others, or the notes in certain registers have more energy or definition, with the exact same strings, pickups & electrics through the same amp on the same settings.

You could also make the argument that some of this variation might be caused by inconsistency in the amount of glue used in joints, neck/pocket seating accuracy, nut seating etc and I would be in agreement, but modern manufacturing processes have really tightened the overall QC on even the cheapest instruments and consistency is much more about variations in materials now from what I've seen of modern buget offerings including basses that retail new in the sub £100 bracket.
[/quote]

A very fine post sir. Hurrah, and well worth a long, slow read by many of the folks spouting all sorts of nonsense they know nothing about.

Although I would adjust one sentence ... "the grain structure, density and moisture content of the timber is JUST AS important than specific wood species".

[darren]

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1402904605' post='2477614']


Actually in my experiance it's the other guys in the band that care the most about you having a bass that says Fender on the headstock... I've been to a number of auditions where it's expected that you'll play a fender... obviously I never join those bands once I've found out they are more concerned with what they look like than what they sound like, but still it does happen alot.

I agree that no-one in the audience cares but quite a few bands would turn their noses up at anything other than a Fender.
[/quote]

I can't understand why it's important but I guess it is to some people. Don't blame you for walking away.

[throwoff]

[quote name='SubsonicSimpleton' timestamp='1403022308' post='2478963']
So are dead spots on necks a placebo effect?

And why can you still hear the effect of the dead spot when you are using an amp?
[/quote]

Dead spots have nothing to do with the wood, every single one I have ever come across could be fixed by working the frets.

Sometimes too high but more often than not they are not seated properly.

[throwoff]

[quote name='hamfist' timestamp='1403071751' post='2479358']
A very fine post sir. Hurrah, and well worth a long, slow read by many of the folks spouting all sorts of nonsense they know nothing about.

Although I would adjust one sentence ... "the grain structure, density and moisture content of the timber is JUST AS important than specific wood species".
[/quote]

Oh and as I am one of the people who 'know nothing about this' let me say I have worked for guitar makers for years and sold the snake oil of 'wood makes all the difference', spend every minute of your working day surrounded by various woods, instruments etc etc and you soon realise other than looking pretty they do no noticeable difference to the tone of the instrument.

[Jonnyboy Rotten]

[quote name='SubsonicSimpleton' timestamp='1403007626' post='2478745']

Ultimately it doesn't really matter why you ... like the sound it produces, the most important thing is the joy you get and bring to others from the music you produce with it.
[/quote]

Bagpipes anyone!?