On my bass the string height is weird. The string height is really high at the end of the fingerboard and is really hard to play past C in thumb position. But below the octave it's playable.

I'm guessing there is something wrong with maybe the bridge and/or nut but really have no idea. Anybody have any ideas?

Reedo's the guy who would normally handle this, but he's in the middle of a move, and may not be around. It might help if you could give some measurements of your string height at the end of your fingerboard. For instance, on my bass (set for jazz playing), the G string is 1/4" off the fingerboard, and the E string is about 1/2". String height for orchestral playing is typically a bit higher, but I'm not sure how much. Does your bridge have adjusters?

Alright, the G and E are both about half an inch. The E is about a tenth more.

And I play mostly orchestral stuff awell as some chamber stuff.

It's gettin' kinda hectic around here, but I will still be around for awhile.Some generic measurements for string height are- at the nut, you should just be able to slide a business card through without getting stuck. Now, height at the end of the fingerboard is more varied, accordind to preference,
and you can only go so low before the strings rattle on the fingerboard, or so high that you can't push them down. But, for example, I do know that Rabbath has his string height at 11 MM (about 1/2 inch)at the end of the fingerboard.Strings make a difference, as well. When I got my Obligatos, I had to raise the action a few MM for optimum sound.
another question, in addition to having fingerboard adjusters,is your fingerboard round or beveled?
Makes a big difference in string height.

I have no adjusters but I was think a while go about putting some on. The fingerboard is round.

I think its pretty oubvious my strings are to high because it really hurts to play up near the top (especially my thumb!).

So should I get adjusters to lower the height aswell as having them for the future (I'll be playing this bass for a while), or get a luthier to lower the string height? What would those two operations cost?

Originally posted by nickchalk

So should I get adjusters to lower the height aswell as having them for the future (I'll be playing this bass for a while), or get a luthier to lower the string height? What would those two operations cost?
You're talking long term vs. short term returns here.
It would be cheaper just to have a luthier shape your bridge, but when the weather changes, you may need to get adjusters anyway, so my advice is to go have it set up with aluminum or wood adjusters. Depending on who does it, it could cost anywhere from $75 to $150, which may seem expensive, but a worthy investment. BTW, you can get bridge adjusters from Lemur or Kolstein's, if you're thinking of doing it yourself, but fair warning, if you've never done any bridge work before,
DON'T START NOW! You could wind up with a much more expensive problem. (up to $350 for a bridge replacement w/adjusters..:eek: gulp!)

What's better metal or wood?

There's a report linked to (All Hail) Bob Gollihur's site. The least interference was with maple adjustors, but you'll never find them. Mine were hand made. Next best was ebony. Aluminum was better then brass. But in a way, this is hair-splitting. Plenty of good players specify aluminum, which is less expensive. Avoid brass.
When you measure string height, put the ruler perpendicular to the arc of the finger board. My G is 5mm, the E is 8, with steel strings.

Thanks guys :)

is your fingerboard round or beveled?
Makes a big difference in string height. [/B][/QUOTE]
Hi ,
How does fingerboard shape affect string height?

Originally posted by Breitag

How does fingerboard shape affect string height?
I wish I could draw a picture, because it's difficult to explain. On a beveled fingerboard, the bridge must be cut slightly asymmetrically to go with the different radius, which is different than a rounded fingerboard, which is,well, round and according to most luthiers I know, easier to work with because they don't have to adjust the string height for the beveled edge. All I'm really saying, I guess (Because I'm starting to confuse myself :o) is that the string heights on round fingerboards are just different than those on beveled boards because they have to account for the different radius.
Did I just say the same thing twice? :confused:

Ha! I knew I could find somebody to explain it better! Check out this link to see what Barrie Kolstein says..
http://www.gollihur.com/kkbass/fingerboard.html and once again, Hail Bob!

I read this topic today from my office and was curious as to what the height of my strings were.
I am especially interested in string height relative to sound and manufacturer. My obligato's are 4mm at the G string and 6.5mm at the E string. Considering that I have a Kolstein bass I only have 5.5 inches from bridge to the end of my finger board.

Question, would I improve my tonal quality by raising my string height? I am not dissatisfied with it now.

Originally posted by oldsaw

I am especially interested in string height relative to sound and manufacturer. My obligato's are 4mm at the G string and 6.5mm at the E string. Considering that I have a Kolstein bass I only have 5.5 inches from bridge to the end of my finger board.


That was about what my string height used to be before I got the obligatos. I found that raising the action just a MM (to 5 at the G and 8 at the E) greatly improved my arco sound and although at first it seemed a bit higher than I was used to for pizz play, I found it to be a more "ballsy" sound than when I was just relying on the pickup and the amp to do the work.BTW, I also have a Kolstein Fendt Model and I have it set up the same as My Juzek.

Originally posted by Don Higdon

The substance of this solution is so profoundly stupid as to be laughable, entirely in character with your theories on harmonics and adjustable tail pieces.

Oh oh What's the story on adjustable tailpieces? I thought I'd try one out. You're scaring me.
Wil

See the thread ORCHESTRAL TECHNIQUE-DB- Harmonics.
If you have a proper tailpiece to begin with, you, like 98% of all bassists, won't need an adjustable tail piece.

hope you guys don't mind, i did some cleanup on this thread.

Originally posted by john turner
hope you guys don't mind, i did some cleanup on this thread.

Originally posted by Don Higdon
See the thread ORCHESTRAL TECHNIQUE-DB- Harmonics.
If you have a proper tailpiece to begin with, you, like 98% of all bassists, won't need an adjustable tail piece.


Barrie Kolstein sent me an adjustable tailpiece to try on my base. When it is correctly tuned I do not have to use a wolf eleminator. Needless to say, I sent the original one back to him asap. He says that it isn't getting rid of the wolf, it is some how masking it. I won't pretend to understand how it works, it just does.

Last evening I raised my extended E string height to 8mm to see if it improved the tone quality. It actually made it worse. Just goes to show that every URB has a personality of it's own.

When you raised the E, did you try (within reason) a different interval for that particular string, or did you make it the same as the other strings?
The theoretical argument for adjustable tailpieces is persuasive; on the other hand, I know they are not used at all in some very repectable sections. How much does an adjustable cost?

Here is the one I have http://www.kolstein.com/Merchant/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=KMI&Category_Code=tail. My teacher is in his 47th season with the Minnesota orcchestra and he plays a bass made by Barrie Kolstein with this adjustable tailpiece.

As for the string height, I tried it at 7mm then 8mm on the E string only. It got progressively worse the higher I went. I left the G string at it's original height of 4.5mm. I like to play in the higher octives and the lower G and D height makes it easier.

That's nice, but a pretty pricey tailpiece at $195. I can't say yea or nay because I've never tried one, but someone better be pretty damn convincing before I plunk down that kind of money for something I have not had a problem with, nor ever really considered changing..
http://www.kolstein.com/Merchant/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=KMI&Product_Code=TP-2&Category_Code=tail

Cross-cut:
My string heights are precisely the same, down to the .5, with steel strings. I have to look again to see if I changed when I went to Obligatos.

This is in reply to private e-mails from contrabasso_classico, whose posts (and their replies) on this thread were flushed by the moderator.

contra: Whereas your first e-mail seemed sincere enough, your second suggests you missed key parts of my reply, but I'm not sure, and here's why: Since you deigned to fill out your profile, you've used it as just another vehicle for horsing around, with the result that your credibility is fading fast; I don't know when you're jerking my chain and when you're not. And since you've been doing detective work on my reply, I'll put it out in the open.
I am not enrolled at Manhattan School of Music. I said that I study privately with one of the faculty. The bass faculty chair is/was Orin O'Brien. I do not study with her. The faculty of the entire school has a committee which represents it. The chairman of the school faculty was, and may still be, Linda McKnight, with whom I study privately. Her house is two minutes from mine. No student at MHM will know who I am.
How good I am I leave to others to say. I am an experienced jazz player trying to better my technique. In the process, I discovered how much I love orchestral playing, even though I feel like I'm over my head. I'm in RSO because Linda McKnight suggested it. A suggestion from Linda McKnight is like getting a suggestion from Tony Soprano.

As for tailpiece mass, you have it backwards. My luthier improved my Mirecourt sound by increasing, not decreasing, the mass. When you say you've seen basses with no tailpiece per se, only "cables", I don't know whether or not this is more jerking around, as with your profile. I do not know how or why mass effects sound, which is why I said "appropriate" mass. Arnold Schnitzer is out of town, so I can't ask him.

In another thread, it was pointed out that most of the nonsense which appears on TB, especially with BG players, is posted by people who have only screen names. The response from all the double bassists with screen names was to immediately post their real names.

Here's an interesting study http://iwk.mdw.ac.at/english/research/dbb/dbb.htm#stringha

Mark
"cross cut"

Proverb:
Our own (All Hail) Bob Gollihur has that link at his site. More perspicacity in that article than I can stand. Gee, I wonder what Bassturbator's analysis is.

More "perspicacity". There you go again using those $2.50 words again.

I did find that link on Bob's web site. That seems to be the best site for links that I have ever seen.

Quoting Don-
"As for tailpiece mass, you have it backwards. My luthier improved my Mirecourt sound by increasing, not decreasing, the mass. When you say you've seen basses with no tailpiece per se, only "cables", I don't know whether or not this is more jerking around, as with your profile. I do not know how or why mass effects sound, which is why I said "appropriate"mass."

My stand partner plays a beautiful 5 string that he made himself. The 5th or 6th one that he has made. I the middle of the tailpiece he has a solid piece of cylindrical metal that is at least 1.5 in. thick and 2 inches long. I asked him about it last night and he said that it is to dampen the vibrations that are inheritant in a tail piece thus improving the sound. He knows what he is talking about, for the last 30 years he built or should I say,crafts, very large church organs from scratch, including the pipes.

Mark

hey guys,
here´s another question about tailpiece vibration that´s been annoying me for awhile:
I got a set of Pirastro Jazzers from my luthier for a trial just a few day ago. I haven´t changed them yet, but will as soon as I have time...the question is that those strings are equipped with those round felt pads you sometimes see in the end of the strings, and I wonder what they are for...I mean I´ve only played Spirocores which have plain metal balls.
So, my humble quess would be that the felt pads are to prevent transferring the string vibration to taipiece. Am I right? And if so, why does that not have to be done always and with all strings?
And what will happen if I cut the pads off and assemble the Jazzers without them?
confusing...

R2D2

This question was already addressed here. Check out this thread-
http://talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=127749&highlight=Tailpiece#post127749

Originally posted by Don Higdon
[

As for tailpiece mass, you have it backwards. My luthier improved my Mirecourt sound by increasing, not decreasing, the mass. When you say you've seen basses with no tailpiece per se, only "cables", I don't know whether or not this is more jerking around, as with your profile. I do not know how or why mass effects sound, which is why I said "appropriate" mass. Arnold Schnitzer is out of town, so I can't ask him.

[/B]

Don,
I don't know who this conta guy is, or if he is jerking your chain but I do know about the cable thing. I had a chance to meet the new bassist in the president's own before he got that that job (Eric Sabo), and he did not have a tail piece, when I asked him why he told me it hleped to free up the sound of the instrument and relax tension. So at least that question has some merrit.

Scott

a good way to think of it is to look from the tailpiece end, sight over the bridge and look where the end section of the fingerboard matches the curve of the bridge. This is a helpfull way to determine what shape your bridge should be in relation to your bevelled fingerboard. Does that make sense, er probably not, sorry guys, not to good at explaining stuff like that!!:confused: :(

whats a double bass without a tailpiece, thats like a car with no wheels!!

I wish I could draw a picture, because it's difficult to explain. On a beveled fingerboard, the bridge must be cut slightly asymmetrically to go with the different radius, which is different than a rounded fingerboard, which is,well, round and according to most luthiers I know, easier to work with because they don't have to adjust the string height for the beveled edge. All I'm really saying, I guess (Because I'm starting to confuse myself :o) is that the string heights on round fingerboards are just different than those on beveled boards because they have to account for the different radius.
Did I just say the same thing twice? :confused:
I just read this thread and thought it was the best one to ask a question that I have as a newbie. Some of the Luthier Rants aren't working at this time, so forgive me if I am out of place. I have a rental URB and have pretty much figured out that it is set up for orchestral playing. It has a beveled fingerboard, and the action seems very high, especially closer to the bridge. I am trying to learn "slap bass" like Lee Rocker does with the Brien Setzer Orchestra. My questions are 1) Does the action have to be low in order to make the slapping sound correctly? 2) Is the set up for "Rockabilly" more like Jazz or Bluegrass? Or are they about the same? 3) Are gut strings the best to use for slapping and playing the jazzy swing kind of music that the Brien Setzer orchestra plays? Again forgive me for overtaking this thread. I really didn't know how to post it but wanted to stay in the newbie link. Thank you.