Bass Weight

[Steve Killingsworth]

I spent about 30 minutes this afternoon playing a friend's new laminated Kohr (I think I spelled it correctly). It had excellent pizz tone but when I put my bow to it, I was really impressed with its sound. It was easily head and shoulders above my ES-9 Engelhardt and sounded almost as good as some carved basses I have played.

The thing I really noticed was its weight or rather the lack thereof. I am curious enough to weigh both it and my bass because it feels like it is probably 3-5 pounds lighter than my bass. Is weight that big a factor in the tone, resonance, volume? Why or why not. Also, what does an "average" bass (if there is such a thing) weigh?

[mchildree]

Steve, your question brought to mind a piece of information that's posted on Arnold's New Standard Bass website...maybe it'll tell you something:

The best weight for a string instrument is the minimum which allows it to stay intact. The laminate material is specially manufactured for use in these instruments. It consists of internal plies of European poplar with external plies of fine spruce and maple. The advantage of this construction is stiffness and light weight. Many players are surprised by the light weight of these basses, but are enthused when they hear what this light weight does for the sound and for the response.

I have noticed that my Cleveland is the lightest ply bass I've run across...and it certainly has the best tone by far.

[Paul Warburton]

Originally Posted by Steve Killingsworth

I spent about 30 minutes this afternoon playing a friend's new laminated Kohr (I think I spelled it correctly). It had excellent pizz tone but when I put my bow to it, I was really impressed with its sound. It was easily head and shoulders above my ES-9 Engelhardt and sounded almost as good as some carved basses I have played.

The thing I really noticed was its weight or rather the lack thereof. I am curious enough to weigh both it and my bass because it feels like it is probably 3-5 pounds lighter than my bass. Is weight that big a factor in the tone, resonance, volume? Why or why not. Also, what does an "average" bass (if there is such a thing) weigh?

Those Kohr basses are astually Christophers I think. The named is Howard Core's last name Germanized.(Core is an American dealer)
I've had a couple and they are amazing. I've only played the 100% laminated ones and. as you say, the sound is great both pizz and arco. Those strings that they come with are IMHO, the nicest sounding strings i've come across for arco and pizz. I started a thread on this, but nobody came up with any answers as to the name of these strings. Guess they're Chinese.
The only thing I dislike about these basses is the ugly, too shinny spray on varnish.
There are a whole slew of threads on these basses.

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Excellent discussion. I've noticed a direct correlation between bass weight and volume. My Czech carved bass weighs about 3 tons, whereas my LaScala feels like a feather. However, I don't think you can draw as direct a relationship between weight and tone, although it works in my case. When I bought the Czech bass originally, it was in a showroom with many other basses, most of which were lighter than it was, and yet I liked its tone better.

I still wonder if heavy (read THICK) basses are by nature easier to amplify when it comes to very high volume situations. It seems to me that their thickness would act as a form of insulation against all of the sound waves flying around on the stage, whereas a thinner bass would be more likely to pick them up and get wolfy and/or feed back.

[Paul Warburton]

Originally Posted by Chris Fitzgerald

I still wonder if heavy (read THICK) basses are by nature easier to amplify when it comes to very high volume situations. It seems to me that their thickness would act as a form of insulation against all of the sound waves flying around on the stage, whereas a thinner bass would be more likely to pick them up and get wolfy and/or feed back.

Agreed. My Bohmann, being a fiver and with alot added weight from fancy carvings and heavy duty machines is not the loudest bass i've ever heard. With an amp it's one of the best basses i've ever heard.
I really think that the rule of thumb is....the louder a bass is acoustically, the harder it is to amplify. The softer the bass is acoustically ........easier.?

[Matt Ides]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

Agreed. My Bohmann, being a fiver and with alot added weight from fancy carvings and heavy duty machines is not the loudest bass i've ever heard. With an amp it's one of the best basses i've ever heard.
I really think that the rule of thumb is....the louder a bass is acoustically, the harder it is to amplify. The softer the bass is acoustically ........easier.?

Hmmmm. I have a Musima ply bass that is pretty loud acoustically and light weight. I also think it amplyfies well. I use a realist and get a nice even tone throughout with the pick up (although this could be more of the right pick up on the right bass syndrome).

I haven't had to play in any really high volume situations with the bass.

[Steve Killingsworth]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

Those Kohr basses are astually Christophers I think.

I saw that in another thread. I am going to a shop in Nashville in a couple of weeks to look at a hybrid Shen. The luthier just told me that he also has a hybrid Kohr he wants me to try. All this on top of a NS laminated LaScalla that I plan to try out. I fear a difficult decision may be forthcoming.

My friend's Kohr has lots of volume without requiring lots of work. That might be in keeping with your comments about your 5.

[FidgetStone]

Weight: I rented a no-name plywood bass before I bought my hybrid Christopher that weighed a full seven pounds more than the Christopher. It was bigger as well. I don't know if it was a full 7/8, but it was at least a large 3/4.

The ribs were thick as well. The tone was pretty good, especially compared to the 1/2 beater that I was renting before. Though the tone was a litter deeper in the lower registers than the Christopher, the overall tone was a little more one dimentional and less complex. The volume was also less than the lighter Christopher.

Feedback: The big, thick and heavy bass would feed back much worse than the Christopher. This thing would feed back if I looked a speaker, much less stood near one. It may, however, had as much or more to do with the fit of the K&K pick up as it did the bass. I don't know.

Additional Question: What tension string helps volume on light and heavy basses? Low tension on light basses and high tension on heavy basses?