What are the tonal differences between String Through body or through bridge?

Agito · #1 03-08-2010, 01:32 AM

Hey
I just wanted to know, what are the differences between using strings through body or through bridge (mainly tonal differences, thanks)

Jazz Ad · #2 03-08-2010, 02:00 AM

There is very little to no difference most of the time.
In the cases I could notice any (typically, fresh strings and a tin Fender-like bridge), through body gave a fuller, richer tone with more harmonic content at the expense of clarity.
Pretty much what you get when boosting low mids on the amp.

TomB · #3 03-08-2010, 02:40 AM

None that I could ever tell.

Agito · #4 03-08-2010, 02:57 AM

and what are the non-tonal differences?

ZolkoW · #5 03-08-2010, 03:34 AM

Some time ago I made a comparison on my Jazz, with normal Fender-like bridge:
I modified it to be able to use in both ways.
what I noticed:
tone-wise: ~nothing
otherwise: the start of the notes seemed to be less peaky top-loaded, like I used a slight compression. I may be wrong, of course, but that was what I felt.
and it was very little difference, if any..

BrettTheThreat · #6 03-08-2010, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZolkoW

Some time ago I made a comparison on my Jazz, with normal Fender-like bridge:
I modified it to be able to use in both ways.
what I noticed:
tone-wise: ~nothing
otherwise: the start of the notes seemed to be less peaky top-loaded, like I used a slight compression. I may be wrong, of course, but that was what I felt.
and it was very little difference, if any..

I love TalkBass... It answers questions I never knew I had!

JTE · #7 03-08-2010, 08:50 AM

Nada, nothing, nichts. It's all in your head.

I USED to think there was a very slight sonic difference and a subtle but tangible difference in how they felt. Then I tried a true side-by-side experiment on my two Lakland 4-94 basses. On one I strung the E and D top-load, the A and G through-body. I reversed this on the other. Played 'em like that until it was time to change strings, then reversed which had the E and D top-loaded...

There's no difference. Comparing different basses with two different stringing methods doesn't tell you that any perceived differences are due to anything because it's a whole lot of variables that create the ultimate sound. Even comparing the same bass with different stringing isn't valid if you're doing it at different times. That's because you're comparing new strings to what you recall old ones sounding/feeling like, and the reported difference are quite subtle. Heck, just loosening strings and retuning them can make a small difference in how "dead" they sound.

So, I did that experiment, and even though I was convinced before that there was an advantage to string-through, there just isn't any in the real world. Being a musician however, allows logic and proportion to fall sloppy dead

. I still string my Laklands through the bridge 'cause it looks cooler and I won't risk loosing the ferrules on the back of my basses...

John

ZolkoW · #8 03-08-2010, 03:14 PM

Laklands and Musicmans (for example) have massive bent-plate bridges, but a normal Fender bridge (I have a noname one, but I think, it's the same) is more flexible.
that can have an effect on the attack of the note.
but again, it was more of a feeling (in my plucking hands) than a sonic difference.
I don't want to convince anyone, though.

NickRich · #9 03-08-2010, 03:37 PM

Always had the feeling that strings through body were stiffer. Am I wrong ?

stflbn · #10 03-08-2010, 03:40 PM

Physics say no. The tension of a string between the nut and saddle of the bridge will not change based on how much longer you make the string after the bridge saddle.

It gets argued regularly though if that extra string length effects tone.

jasper383 · #11 03-08-2010, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickRich

Always had the feeling that strings through body were stiffer. Am I wrong ?

I have felt this too.

I might argue that because the string goes over the saddle at a far sharper angle when strung through, the feel of a strung through bass is stiffer. I guess this is because there is more downward pressure of the string on the saddle.

I had a Lakland that I could go string through or top load, and I always thought the feel was stiffer when strung through the body. Soundwise, no discernible difference.

Of course this may have all been in my head.

darkstorm · #12 03-08-2010, 09:58 PM

Yup, unless its a thin low mass bridge like early fenders, tone diff is gonna be practically none. A so so string thru body bridge compared to very nice high mass and locking saddles bridge, is gonna be lacking in my experience. So on to what I find diff about thru body versus top load useing very nice high mass bridges for both. A little more perceived string tension with thru body.

Hoover · #13 03-09-2010, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agito

and what are the non-tonal differences?

With thru-body stringing, you can switch between taper-core and non-tapered strings without having to readjust your saddle height. Then again, this completely defeats the point of a taper-core string in the first place, so don't jump to the conclusion that this is necessarily an advantage...

fretlessguy · #14 03-09-2010, 08:42 PM

Not enough difference to warrant paying more for a body through if it is more expensive, unless you just plain want it. I own two Carvin Bolt 5 basses, one fretted and one fretless. The fretless one is bridge thru and the fretted one is body thru. When playing open strings on both you cannot tell any difference whatsoever.