String through body or not?

[WalMan]

So I now have the twins:
[list]
[*]Red 4+1 L2500 fretted - no string through option
[*]Green 3+2 L2500 fretless - string through or not
[/list]
Now then. Both are 34 scale 5's & it had crossed my mind to perhaps add string through to the 4+1 'cos supposedly that gives a tauter B, but would require the body to be drilled for a start, and the neck plate serial (not the final arbiter of age on G&L's I realise) is potentially quite early.

Posted a thread on the G&L forum and received a helpful response, but that was actually to convert the through body on the 3+2 to bridge only - see [url="http://www.bassesbyleo.com/l2500_bridge_mod.html"]HERE[/url] - on the basis that it gives a much more solid bridge attachment to the body. It seems that the bridges on the 4+1 & 3+2 versions are the same, but on the 3+2 five of the screws holding the bridge to the body are lost to the through body stringing to leave only two actually holding the bridge on - though of course if stringing through body the strings ought to be handling that duty.

I need to compare the differences as best I can - fretted:fretless, maple:ebony fingerboards and presently different gauge strings as that is what I had available, but wondered what conclusion others might have drawn on the differences of through body or bridge only stringing over time.

Until the newest addition of the green fretless all my basses in over 30 years of basses & gigging have been bridge mounted strings. The change will be interesting for me. Might even put some comparative clips up once the stitches are out tomorrow and fingers start working

[geoffbyrne]

The Laws of Physics state that the pitch of the note depends on the tension on the string between the bridge & the nut (or the fret where it's stopped down).

And the gauge of the string (obviously).

And the scale length. (Getting like The Spanish Inquisition sketch now).

However, for any given scale length & string gauge, the tension for a certain note will always be the same, no matter how far away or near the end of the string is tethered, therefore string through will not change that.

If you are talking about the transfer of resonance into the body, though, then ther may be something to that.

But in practice, most of us with the facility (I have it on my Cirrus BXP - I've tried both ways & can't tell any difference) can detect very little, if any difference.

G.

[chris_b]

I string through the body of my Lakland. I've never done it the other way so I've no idea if it makes a difference.

[Sean]

I've done this and A/B recordings on a Lakland DJ4 (lost the recs now) and the difference is negligible and as far as any difference to the sound once you are in the mix, forget it. Spend your energies on other stuff like EQ tweaks instead.

[martthebass]

[quote name='Sean' post='836091' date='May 13 2010, 12:49 PM']I've done this and A/B recordings on a Lakland DJ4 (lost the recs now) and the difference is negligible and as far as any difference to the sound once you are in the mix, forget it. Spend your energies on other stuff like EQ tweaks instead.[/quote]

I'd tend to agree with this.

If I've got a bass with a String-thru option I tend to string it that way but I can't say I miss it when it isn't there. For example I string my 30th Ray thru but don't miss the string thru on my Fretless Ray (where arguably it would be more beneficial).

I certainly wouldn't spend money on a conversion.

[chris_b]

I guess that Leo stopped offering stringing through the body on Fender basses because it didn't make much difference. But if that's the case I don't know why he offered it again when he started up Musicman! He still carried on with through body stringing on his guitars (Tele) though!

If your strings are long enough why not? I wouldn't spend money on a conversion either.

Edited May 13, 2010 by chris_b

[OutToPlayJazz]

In terms of a Jazz, it seems to increase the bottom end richness a little, but that's all. Just think of a top loaded instrument as a little dryer and grittier. As Mart says, I always use the string-through option if it's there.

[Cat Burrito]

Two of my Fenders have it, two don't. I like the string through option but there is little difference and I certainly wouldn't look to 1) have it added or 2) be put off by a bass that didn't have the option.

[Rumple]

When I had my fretless Overwater made for me I discussed the option with Chris May but he was of the opinion it makes no difference to the sound and pointed to an artical in a bass magazine by Roger Sadowski saying the same thing.



R.

[WalMan]

All good stuff. Cheers.

Not sure where I got the "string through on the B on a 34 scale bass gives a tauter more defined B" from. Difficult to tell at the mo as I have 45-130 on the bridge mount 4+1 and 50-135 on the string through 3+2.

What was interesting, to me anyway, was the reverse view received from the G&L forum. Having looked at the bridges it is clear that they are the same, but that on the 3+2 the bridge is fixed with only two screws and the holes that the strings come through are the screw holes that give - according to the G&L article - a more solid fixing on the 4+1.

Think I need to get the fretless 3+2 reset to 45-130 same as the fretted 4+1 as the heavier gauge strings I used on the fretless (as they were to hand) are only long scale and on the A at least are barely long enough. Anyone need two sets of Hartke long scale 50 gauge strings I have left?