EBS_freak Posted May 27, 2009 Author Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='The Bass Doc' post='498890' date='May 27 2009, 03:35 PM']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.[/quote] Wasn't there a phase of putting damping underneath the ashtray? OK- the fitting of the bridge making the bass sound better unplugged - did it sound better plugged in or did you not get to try it out. And I guess it sounded "better" is open to question because it's all down to taste I guess. They do replacement saddles? I found that few places actually have BadAss bridges let alone the replacement saddles! Having said that, I'm guessing there isn't a huge amount of interest for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrenochrome Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='wateroftyne' post='498910' date='May 27 2009, 03:45 PM']I imagine it would make a difference in those circumstances....[/quote] True, I don't think it would have improved ANY of the basses I've bought since. But I'm sure there will have been plenty of people in my position at the time who did the same thing and saw improvements to very poor instruments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBS_freak Posted May 27, 2009 Author Share Posted May 27, 2009 [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] That makes sense then - the product happened to be there and was an immediate solution to your particular problem. I'm guessing back then the bridge didn't cost nearly as much as the bass! The question is now then, has the BadAss bridge got it's name due to players being put in a similar position to the case above. Back then, it was all that was readily available... it's legacy has lived on despite there being so many better bridges out there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrenochrome Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 Quite possibly, it was [i]the[/i] replacement bridge available at the time. Kind of like how Biro or Hoover are associated with ballpoint pens and vacuum cleaners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHRISDABASS Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='EBS_freak' post='498870' date='May 27 2009, 03:22 PM']Do you think that through the body stringing makes a significant difference?[/quote] Dont even get me started on this subject!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobiebass Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [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] Depends on the Bass, replaced my bit of tin for a BA on my old passive MIM Jazz and it sounded tons better. heard its not much diff on a Active bass tho, but it is standard on my Modulus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gafbass02 Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 Um, its looks cool! i just let my strings wear the grooves, not had a problem in 15 years or so of having a badass on pretty much every jazz ive owned. Only issue i have now is my new squier has the HMV bridge and i want a gold bridge and apparently the badass holes dont line up with the hmv. Hmm :-( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='EBS_freak' post='498911' date='May 27 2009, 03:46 PM']Wasn't there a phase of putting damping underneath the ashtray?[/quote] The original Fender bridge covers had mutes built in to make the P sound more like an upright. Badass is such a good name for a bridge. And if your bass body is lacking stiffness or has too much self-damping (e.g. excess moisture content) then the increased mass will isolate the string better from the body and thus increase sustain and bottom. But if your body has just the right balance of stiffness and resonance then adding a Badass could take away from the midrange character without gaining you much in return. Does anyone remember the 2-Tek bridge? Made a Badass seem not very. Alex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBS_freak Posted May 27, 2009 Author Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='alexclaber' post='499185' date='May 27 2009, 07:06 PM']And if your bass body is lacking stiffness or has too much self-damping (e.g. excess moisture content) then the increased mass will isolate the string better from the body and thus increase sustain and bottom.[/quote] But seriously... does it make any audible difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gafbass02 Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 The 2-tek was awesome. Required routing a big chunk out if I recall? Wasn't it endorsed by some chap? Loius someone? Johnson perhaps? I Vaguely it assciate with a Treker bass? (which I'm sure inspired the guy that drew the Warwick katana) but it coulda just been on the same page of a magazine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickhunt Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='gafbass02' post='499226' date='May 27 2009, 07:52 PM']The 2-tek was awesome. Required routing a big chunk out if I recall? Wasn't it endorsed by some chap? Loius someone? Johnson perhaps? I Vaguely it assciate with a Treker bass? (which I'm sure inspired the guy that drew the Warwick katana) but it coulda just been on the same page of a magazine.[/quote] I had a 2-Tek equipped Warwick Fortress Flashback bass and the bass did have huge presence/sustain, how much could be attributed to the bridge I have no idea! Mind the bridge alone must have weighed nigh on 2lb. IIRC Michael Anthony of VH had them fitted to several of his MM Sterling basses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='EBS_freak' post='499206' date='May 27 2009, 07:27 PM']But seriously... does it make any audible difference?[/quote] There was a thread about this a month or so ago, where opinions were mixed. As a result, I bought a Gotoh from Spree on the list to see for myself. I found that it gave my bass more 'thump', more attack. I didn't notice any change in frequency balance, but my strings were pretty dead at the time. However, as our memory about such matters is highly unreliable, the only way of knowing for sure would be to record a 'before' and 'after' on the same bass and then to compare the two recordings one after another. That shouldn't be too difficult for someone to set up. I remember reading some research that showed our perception of 'sound quality' becomes unreliable when sound clips are auditioned more than 15 seconds apart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bass Doc Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='EBS_freak' date='May 27 2009, 03:46 PM' post='498911 OK- the fitting of the bridge making the bass sound better unplugged - did it sound better plugged in or did you not get to try it out. And I guess it sounded "better" is open to question because it's all down to taste I guess. [/quote] Yes, the bass in question sounded distinctly 'tinny' and thin until the Badass was fitted then you could sense more resonance as in 'feeling' it through the body when it was held (accoustically). Plugging in would simply confirm what was then known - if you have a bass that's say 'dead' accoustically, plugging it in results in a dead bass sounding louder. If you have a bass that is lively and resonant, plugging it in gives you a lively resonant bass only louder. I did plug in the bass in question which simply confirmed the above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBS_freak Posted May 27, 2009 Author Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='The Bass Doc' post='499402' date='May 27 2009, 10:37 PM'][quote name='EBS_freak' date='May 27 2009, 03:46 PM' post='498911 OK- the fitting of the bridge making the bass sound better unplugged - did it sound better plugged in or did you not get to try it out. And I guess it sounded "better" is open to question because it's all down to taste I guess. Yes, the bass in question sounded distinctly 'tinny' and thin until the Badass was fitted then you could sense more resonance as in 'feeling' it through the body when it was held (accoustically). Plugging in would simply confirm what was then known - if you have a bass that's say 'dead' accoustically, plugging it in results in a dead bass sounding louder. If you have a bass that is lively and resonant, plugging it in gives you a lively resonant bass only louder. I did plug in the bass in question which simply confirmed the above.[/quote] Ah cool. At least that does give the bridge some sort of thumbs up then!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 BadAss bass bridges? I wouldn't know fer sure, but I played Deaver's Fender that had a bad-ass and it definitely sounded a bit more 'modern' and tight. But here's a tale... For years guitarists cheerfully replaced lightweight Gibson wraparound combo bridge / tailpieces with badass guitar bridges to enhance intonation-ability. And the extra mass was perceived as a benefit, for it 'increased sustain' Then one day the cry went out to the assembled multitudes - "There's [i]too much [/i]mass in a bad-ass. And they're over-engineered. And that robs tone. You need lightweight, low mass bridges in order to transfer maximum string resonance to the body". So lots of guitarists swapped out their zinc bad-asses for lightweight aluminium 'Pigtail' bridges. And lo, they were happy, for their tone was now good. Or so they believed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 [quote name='EBS_freak' post='498870' date='May 27 2009, 03:22 PM']Do you think that through the body stringing makes a significant difference?[/quote] It did on my bass. Slightly more sustain. And it just felt better - more rigid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kongo Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 BadAss on my P-bass...Heavy reliable bridge for a heavy bass! I've used Gotoh and Schaller on prev. projects and the BadAss was best...don't see how it makes the action high like some folk say though...No shim is present here. It's great...Massive mass (LOL!) and the best, no sideways movement. I like the spacing on my P-bass obviously...why would I want it wider? Now a Schaller on a 5-string fair enough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ou7shined Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 My main bass has individual bridges per string (so one would presume a comparatively low mass) and yet it sustains no problem. I just ran an almost scientific test against 2 other basses one with a standard MM "bent tin" bridge and the other a high mass brass 5 string job. I have them all suspended on the same wall on identical hangers and simultaneously pinged a string. Of course we have ash, poplar and maple bodies to factor in and for that matter it is the only one out of the 3 with a maple fretboard. Anyway it out rang them both. The thing is why would I want it to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssentialTension Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 [quote name='Ou7shined' post='500464' date='May 29 2009, 12:17 AM']My main bass has individual bridges per string (so one would presume a comparatively low mass) and yet it sustains no problem. I just ran an almost scientific test against 2 other basses one with a standard MM "bent tin" bridge and the other a high mass brass 5 string job. I have them all suspended on the same wall on identical hangers and simultaneously pinged a string. Of course we have ash, poplar and maple bodies to factor in and for that matter it is the only one out of the 3 with a maple fretboard. Anyway it out rang them both. The thing is why would I want it to? [/quote] Good question. Why would I want increased sustain when I already have to mute strings that ring out for longer than necessary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kongo Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 I didn't get mine to increase sustain, only as a huge and heavy anchor for my strings. It beats my other bridges. 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.