BadAss bridges

[EBS_freak]

I don't get it. What's the appeal over other bridges? Apart from the name obviously...

[The Bass Doc]

Mainly the fact that it prohibits any sideways movement of the saddles. It also has greater mass and enhances the potential sustain. It's important to have the slots properly - I've seen examples where the string is just allowed to sit on the saddle and this negates the first point.

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='The Bass Doc' post='498717' date='May 27 2009, 01:30 PM']Mainly the fact that it prohibits any sideways movement of the saddles. It also has greater mass and enhances the potential sustain. It's important to have the slots properly - I've seen examples where the string is just allowed to sit on the saddle and this negates the first point.[/quote]

That's the point - the second you file those saddles, you are stuck with a specific string width. I don't get why they are held in such high asteem when they haven't got the adjustability of say some Schaller and Hipshot bridges. Am I right in thinking that the holes line up with the existing holes on Fender bridges? To me, that would be the only advantage - you don't have to redrill your bass.

[BOD2]

Some info here

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=193"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=193[/url]

I would tend to agree with you basic point - there are lots of other bridges that are equal to, if not better than this one.

[Buzz]

Apart from the greater sustain and transmission of notes from the strings to the body, my personal belief is that it's only held in such popular use because it was the first proper redesigned bridge for Fender basses and it got used by lots of people. There's also the fact it's simple, reliable and it works.

Now Fender after 25ish years(!) of the Badass being out have finally got around to bringing out their High Mass Bridge means that I wouldn't be looking to replace a bass that has a HMV fitted. I'd also look at the Hipshot or Gotoh replacements as they both do direct replacements if I get another Fender style bass with the bent tin as they're cheaper.

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='BOD2' post='498760' date='May 27 2009, 02:09 PM']Some info here

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=193"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=193[/url]

I would tend to agree with you basic point - there are lots of other bridges that are equal to, if not better than this one.[/quote]

Cheers - yup. I think the appeal is the fact that it's a dead easy replacement (bar the filing) that doesn't require a luthier - but I am thinking that there is a bit of hype about this one. A few bassists have said that they are going to replace their stock bridges with a BadAss with little evidence as to why it's a good idea. A more adjustable would be my choice, but as usual, each to their own.

[birdy]

Don't diss the Badass :-)

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='Buzz' post='498762' date='May 27 2009, 02:13 PM']Apart from the greater sustain and transmission of notes from the strings to the body, my personal belief is that it's only held in such popular use because it was the first proper redesigned bridge for Fender basses and it got used by lots of people. There's also the fact it's simple, reliable and it works.

Now Fender after 25ish years(!) of the Badass being out have finally got around to bringing out their High Mass Bridge means that I wouldn't be looking to replace a bass that has a HMV fitted. I'd also look at the Hipshot or Gotoh replacements as they both do direct replacements if I get another Fender style bass with the bent tin as they're cheaper.[/quote]

That would be it then - they had the market covered and Fender chose not to do anything about the problem(? - is there actually one in most people's eyes or was it clever BadAss marketing in action?!) until quite recently.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Buzz' post='498762' date='May 27 2009, 02:13 PM']Now Fender after 25ish years(!) of the Badass being out have finally got around to bringing out their High Mass Bridge...[/quote]

Fender first started using high mass bridges in 1981.

[Buzz]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='498775' date='May 27 2009, 02:22 PM']Fender first started using high mass bridges in 1981.[/quote]

As part of their standard model ranges? Eg, the American Standards and such?

[wateroftyne]

They didn't go the whole hog on the standard range, but they did chunk 'em up a bit.

[wateroftyne]

FWIW - I get on with the bent tin just fine, as do thousands of others. I wouldn't describe them as unusable or anything...

[The Bass Doc]

Yes, definitely clever marketing and being 'first'. It's a bit like EMGs being first to mass produce active pickups - many more followed (I remember being a fan of Reflex but they were BRITISH therefore couldn't possibly any good?). On your point of adjustability, if the Badass is cut correctly on day one I can't think why anyone would want to vary it - indeed Schaller 3Ds have a habit of losing the preferred spacing every time you re-string.

There's now some healthy competition for Badass but it's going to be hard to shift them from 'Top spot'.

[warwickhunt]

Main issue that I had with the 'old' Fender bent plate bridge was the grub screws invariably stood to proud and were uncomfortable if you played close to or muted over the bridge. No worries for WoT as he wouldn't know what that first 8" - 9" of string was for!

[The Bass Doc]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='498786' date='May 27 2009, 02:29 PM']FWIW - I get on with the bent tin just fine, as do thousands of others. I wouldn't describe them as unusable or anything...[/quote]

Yup the bent tin on my '63 hasn't moved in the twenty-odd years I've owned it.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='498794' date='May 27 2009, 02:33 PM']Main issue that I had with the 'old' Fender bent plate bridge was the grub screws invariably stood to proud and were uncomfortable if you played close to or muted over the bridge. No worries for WoT as he wouldn't know what that first 8" - 9" of string was for! [/quote]

Hoi!

I'll have you know, young man, I played a Jazz last night. Yes... a Jazz. It had TWO PICKUPS and everything! It was like a bass from the future.

Anyway, I was honkin' away at the bridge and I never noticed the grub screws once.

So there.

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='498802' date='May 27 2009, 02:36 PM']Hoi!

I'll have you know, young man, I played a Jazz last night. Yes... a Jazz. It had TWO PICKUPS and everything! It was like a bass from the future.

Anyway, I was honkin' away at the bridge [u]and I never noticed the grub screws once[/u].

So there.

[/quote]

that was the neck you were anchored to NOT the bridge... that's why you didn't notice the grub screws!

[EBS_freak]

The piece of tin - is that why they put the huge ash tray over it? Covers a multitude of sins right?

So, people are with me then? The BadAss doesn't really offer anything over the standard bridge unless you are certain that the larger mass improves sustain. Has anybody actually *proven* this to be true?

As for the Schaller 3Ds - yup, they have their issues on a restring but they are still a nice bridge. Hipshot A are still my fave though.

The thing that bothers me about the filing of the bridge- it's just a bit too limiting for my liking. What about if you were to change string gauge... or make your bass a piccolo bass? That's an expensive bridge to become unusuable. OK, granted, the nut would probably have to be replaced, but the cost of a new nut is a lot less that that of a new bridge. Can you buy spares for the BadAss for such circumstances? Or is is new bridge time?

[Ray]

I am also very happy with the "bent tin" bridge. My Jazz is 2004 so I have the slightly chunkier bridge WoT referred to (not the new HMV bridge). It also has grooves for the grub screws so the saddles don't move from side to side.

I think it's also worth noting that if your bass is strung through the body a BadAss bridge won't make the slightest bit of difference to sustain or tone, IMO.

[CHRISDABASS]

i A/B'd the BadAss bridge on a few jazz basses a while back and i found it to be a pretty pointless piece of kit (in my opinion)



(here come the BadAss gang to kick my head in)

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='Ray' post='498834' date='May 27 2009, 02:57 PM']I am also very happy with the "bent tin" bridge. My Jazz is 2004 so I have the slightly chunkier bridge WoT referred to (not the new HMV bridge). It also has grooves for the grub screws so the saddles don't move from side to side.

I think it's also worth noting that if your bass is strung through the body a BadAss bridge won't make the slightest bit of difference to sustain or tone, IMO.[/quote]

Do you think that through the body stringing makes a significant difference?

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='CHRISDABASS' post='498843' date='May 27 2009, 03:02 PM']i A/B'd the BadAss bridge on a few jazz basses a while back and i found it to be a pretty pointless piece of kit (in my opinion)



(here come the BadAss gang to kick my head in)[/quote]

This is it. I can find numerous people who say you must get one... but nonthing concrete as to why it's actually a must have addition. It seems to me the second the word "upgrade" is mentioned, "BadAss" usually follows. Why??

I haven't got anything against BadAss bridges, but just interested behind the reasons as why they are successful (as a product) and why people seem to consider them as a must have upgrade.

[The Bass Doc]

[quote name='EBS_freak' post='498824' date='May 27 2009, 02:47 PM']The piece of tin - is that why they put the huge ash tray over it? Covers a multitude of sins right?

So, people are with me then? The BadAss doesn't really offer anything over the standard bridge unless you are certain that the larger mass improves sustain. Has anybody actually *proven* this to be true?

As for the Schaller 3Ds - yup, they have their issues on a restring but they are still a nice bridge. Hipshot A are still my fave though.

The thing that bothers me about the filing of the bridge- it's just a bit too limiting for my liking. What about if you were to change string gauge... or make your bass a piccolo bass? That's an expensive bridge to become unusuable. OK, granted, the nut would probably have to be replaced, but the cost of a new nut is a lot less that that of a new bridge. Can you buy spares for the BadAss for such circumstances? Or is is new bridge time?[/quote]

The ash tray was originally called a hand rest - Leo's idea was that you would position your hand over the chrome cover in the pickup position to play ahead of it for a relatively deep sound and over the bridge position cover for a more trebly response.

As for 'proven' to improve the sound I have heard a poor 'tinny' sounding cheaper-end bass sound better (accoutically) after fitting a Badass but I wouldn't rush to fit one to a perfectly OK Fender - the difference (if any) would be minimal and in many cases it robs from it's originality.

Badass do now supply replacement saddles for the occasions you mention above.

[Adrenochrome]

It's quite simple. The first bass I owned was a plywood Squier Jazz. No bottom end and no sustain, plus the saddles moved when I played (too) hard through my weak practice amp. This was well before I had the interweb, and at the music shop in Leeds the only replacement bridge was a Badass. It was easy to fit, it improved the sustain and I wore my own grooves in the saddles by practising a lot. It was all that was available and it worked.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Adrenochrome' post='498907' date='May 27 2009, 03:44 PM']It's quite simple. The first bass I owned was a plywood Squier Jazz. No bottom end and no sustain, plus the saddles moved when I played (too) hard through my weak practice amp. This was well before I had the interweb, and at the music shop in Leeds the only replacement bridge was a Badass. It was easy to fit, it improved the sustain and I wore my own grooves in the saddles by practising a lot. It was all that was available and it worked.[/quote]

I imagine it would make a difference in those circumstances....