Beer of the Bass Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1414763943' post='2593081'] Perhaps there's a reason double basses have soft wooden bridges ... so that the movement, the energy, of the string is more easily transferred to the body and so to the large sound box. My guess is that a more rigid bridge on a double bass would lead to the string ringing longer but the volume would be reduced because there would be less transfer of energy to the body/sound box. YMMV. [/quote] Double bass bridges are quarter sawn maple and not particularly soft as woods go but the mass appears to be critical, as evidenced by the clip-on mutes orchestral players use for some passages - a fairly small amount of weight attached to the bridge can change the sound noticeably. I suspect maple was the best compromise available for balancing rigidity against weight while being hard enough and reasonably stable. However, a double bass bridge is coupling the strings to a thin and somewhat flexible soundboard on the front of a resonant chamber so may not be particularly analogous to a bass guitar bridge which anchors the strings to a solid slab of wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The bridge on solid electric and acoustic instruments perform very different roles after that of defining one end of the speaking length of the string. On an acoustic instrument it's all about transferring the string vibration energy to the soundboard, whereas on a solid instrument it's there to do the exact opposite so that the maximum string energy can be sensed by the pickup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The tailgut and the endpin block on a DB would be a better comparison to an electric bass bridge imo, different end pins make a big difference and I presume the block of wood at the base would make a big difference to depending on its size and or density. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Hmm badass on my double bass...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssentialTension Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1414767083' post='2593123'] Double bass bridges are quarter sawn maple and not particularly soft as woods go but the mass appears to be critical, as evidenced by the clip-on mutes orchestral players use for some passages - a fairly small amount of weight attached to the bridge can change the sound noticeably. I suspect maple was the best compromise available for balancing rigidity against weight while being hard enough and reasonably stable. However, a double bass bridge is coupling the strings to a thin and somewhat flexible soundboard on the front of a resonant chamber so may not be particularly analogous to a bass guitar bridge which anchors the strings to a solid slab of wood. [/quote] Yes, I didn't mean that it was not hard wood (as opposed to a softer wood) but either way it's softer than a BBOT or a Badass. Is there a more rigid and more high mass bridge for double bass? A sort of 'double badass'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer of the Bass Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1414770167' post='2593175'] Yes, I didn't mean that it was not hard wood (as opposed to a softer wood) but either way it's softer than a BBOT or a Badass. Is there a more rigid and more high mass bridge for double bass? A sort of 'double badass'. [/quote] There were cast aluminium adjustable bridges from Selmer and Framus, but they appear to have been a fairly short lived fad so I've no idea what they sounded like. My bass still bears the scars from one - they sat on three metal cups which leave big round marks on the top! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlungerModerno Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1414767353' post='2593128'] The bridge on solid electric and acoustic instruments perform very different roles after that of defining one end of the speaking length of the string. On an acoustic instrument it's all about transferring the string vibration energy to the soundboard, whereas on a solid instrument it's there to do the exact opposite so that the maximum string energy can be sensed by the pickup. [/quote] +1. I don't know for sure what the exact factors are in determining the complex relationship between material, construction and sound on a solid body instrument - but I know it's a different system to an acoustic one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noisyjon Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I met Bill Nash in the Westside shop on Denmark Street once and he said adding a higher mass bridge to a Fender type bass with a BBOT is one of the best things you can do for it. I'm from the thinking of I like the fine tuning some offer (thinking Hipshot A type with Fender mounting) and IMO the better sustain they seem to offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer of the Bass Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 The "better" sustain thing could be a double edged sword IMO, as the quicker decay that usually goes along with with shorter sustain could also be perceived as punchy and characterful. If you can hear a difference and you like it that's great, but for some it will be moving away from the qualities they enjoyed about a Fender style bass in the first place. Though I have known a couple of players with aggressive right-hand technique who actually move the saddles around on a BBOT bridge, and for those players switching to something like a Badass or Hipshot would be a wise choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_5 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 either way, it's always nice to have a slab of metal proclaiming you to be a 'BADASS' at gigs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='Twangster' timestamp='1414619344' post='2591565'] ...I know it makes some...but would changing the (reasonably chunky) bridge on my Squier P Special make much difference - if I replaced it with, say, a Badass or Gotoh? [/quote] Many, many years ago I had a 70-ish (?) m/n P Bass with the old threaded saddles (when did they stop doing them?). I had some trouble with sideways string movement so had Peter Cook (not the Dudley Moore one) change it for a Schaller - I think he binned the original. Worst thing I could have done. Lost half its tone in one fell swoop. I then went on to sell the bass for approx £180. Even though it was about 1982, that still hurts. I sold it to buy a Westone Quantum, which made sense at the time. (Actually, that was a really good little bass). Generally speaking I don't believe in heavy duty bridges, although it depends on the instrument. It's the old horses for courses thing though. I know Scott Thunes tried a Badass on his old P Bass ('63?) and took it straight off, saying it was a piece of junk, but obviously others swear by them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1414622297' post='2591627'] Having been through the replacing bridges thing, a hi-mass bridge - especially the Badass - seems to "tighten" up the sound, make the lows and highs more focused, and slightly scoop the mids. That`s why personally I don`t like them on Precisions, they seem to reduce the Precisions main strengths. [/quote] I would tend to agree that this is my experience too, one of the reasons I didn't go for a Nate Mendel in the end....although obviously that could change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles'tone Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I have a Hipshot A in aluminium here waiting to go on my VM P bass. I'm hoping that it won't make any difference to the tone of my bass as I like it just the way it is and don't want to bugger up a good thing. BUT, I am hoping it will make a noticeable difference to the weight of my bass as I'm trying to shave off as much weight as possible (bad back, got lightweight tuners and knobs already on). Anyone know the weight difference at all or will it be just an unnecessary faff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteb Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Changing from a BBOT to a high mass bridge WILL make a difference to your sound. You will get noticeably more sustain and send a stronger signal to the amp / desk with a slightly fuller tone. You will also get a tighter feel to the instrument (which I prefer) and it will be easier to adjust. Whether you like this slightly stronger sound is of course up to you. I do but if you want to recreate vintage Jamerson type tones then it isn’t really going to help you in that! FWIW I have always upgraded the bridges on every Fender I have owned (including the jazz that I currently have), with the exception of a Nash that I had for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssentialTension Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I'd love to know what are 'a slightly fuller tone', 'a tighter feel' and 'this slightly stronger sound' that Jamerson didn't have. Can anyone really tell in a blind test which bass has the higher mass bridge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Cloud Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1414785048' post='2593379'] I'd love to know what are 'a slightly fuller tone', 'a tighter feel' and 'this slightly stronger sound' that Jamerson didn't have. [/quote] True, Jamerson did indeed sound like Jamerson because he was in fact Jamerson and not not Jamerson. Whether or not Jamerson's sound is regarded as the benchmark of bass sound is another subjective matter altogether. If it is yours then that's great...but with all due respect to Jamerson he isn't mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dincz Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Unless the BBOT is literally that - and actually bends when a string vibrates - colour me sceptical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowieBass Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I must be that oddity that has never had problems adjusting the two BBOT design bridges on my Squiers - I've been able to get them perfectly intonated and the action set exactly how I want it. The bridge on the Jazz has channels for the saddle screws to follow but I've never had problems with the saddles on the bridge on the Precision which omits the channels. The only thing I'd maybe change is to have threaded saddles so I could have a choice in string spacing. YMMV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgsjx Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 [quote name='peteb' timestamp='1414782841' post='2593344'] Changing from a BBOT to a high mass bridge WILL make a difference to your sound. You will get noticeably more sustain and send a stronger signal to the amp / desk with a slightly fuller tone. You will also get a tighter feel to the instrument (which I prefer) and it will be easier to adjust. [/quote] Stronger signal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norris Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I have a thunderbird with the "much slated" 3-bolt bridge. It's not particularly high mass either, but the tone and sustain are fantastic. I have no issues with it at all. I've never swapped out a bridge, but have a couple of Jazzes - one USA strung through and a MIM non-through. Not an appreciable difference. I suspect a high mass bridge would have as negligible effect. Colour me sceptical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BassManGraham Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I put Badass II & III bridges on all my Jazzes (I have had 9 over the years) including 1 Squier, 3 Mex, 1 Jap, 2 American, American Deluxe and a Tony Thompson Quadra Jazz on which a Badass comes as standard (this bass plays better than all the Fenders). I even put a spare Badass II bridge I had on an SX Jazzbass, Not really recommended as the bridge is worth more than the bass. To my ears they do greatly improve sustain (but less so on thru body strung American models that have heavier mass bridges). Badass bridges are far better engineered than standard Fender bridges and my main reason is to give greater stability as the saddles on my first American Precision in the late 70s kept collapsing due to poor thread on the grub screws, and I've never liked or trusted cheap Fender bridges since. I have also put Hipshot Supertune bridges on Gibson EB3 and Thunderbirds as they are more easily adjustable than the standard 3 bolt bridges. BUT always keep original parts when retrofitting and upgrading. The single biggest change to sound and best retrofit if you want to "activate" a Fender is a John East active circuit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telebass Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 [quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1414713863' post='2592700'] I'm not a physicist but that sounds contradictory. If the bridge transfers more vibrations to the body then how is it possible that the bridge also absorbs less vibrations from the strings so that there is more sustain? Surely, either the vibrations stay in the strings for more sustain or they are transferred to the body for less sustain. Besides which I've never had a bass that needed more sustain. Muting and damping is much more often needed than more sustain - in my experience. [/quote] Again, this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telebass Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I've said it many times before. If you're strung through the body, the mass of the bridge really is irrelevant. It's just there for the strings to break over. Change your bridge because you don't like the saddles/spacing/lateral slip etc etc, fine. You'd do more to affect the sustain by changing the strings. And as ET said, what is this need for sustain? How many seconds of ring do you need? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twangster Posted November 7, 2014 Author Share Posted November 7, 2014 Quick update - just installed brass saddles...I recorded the bass beforehand with the steel ones then again after with the brass.....no discernible difference whatsoever but I love the way it looks, so karma wise it's an improvement. I'm installing Toneriders this weekend which I think will make a bigger difference. 😃 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 I have tried the high mass bridges but have always been more than happy with the good old BBOT bridge does what it should,easy to adjust and is reliable. I think having a Badass or whatever is a more to do with looks and status than sound but that is only my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.