Go Back   TalkBass Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Hardware, Setup & Repair [BG]
Register Rules/FAQ/CUP Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Supporting Membership
Thank You

Latest Supporting Member
Donate to Upgrade Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 11-27-2010, 10:21 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
badass vs babicz bridges

Sign in to disble this ad
this test was for sustain. basses used for this test were 3 fender jazz basses all with dr high beams. two badasses were tested against each other first. the test was pluck the string and stop the stop watch when pitch wasnt heard anymore. this was done five times. the difference between the two was 1.53 sec. for an average of 17.67 sec. for the badasses. next five tests were the babicz. the average over five tests were 33.22 sec. although the babicz is noticably lighter in weight over the badass its sustain was almost twice as long. hope this helps someone.
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.
  #2  
Old 11-27-2010, 10:32 AM
Registered User

Luthier at Rainbow Music Omaha
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
This is relevant to my interests.
  #3  
Old 11-27-2010, 10:40 AM
Registered User

Artist:TC Electronic RH450 bass system
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fort Madison, IA
Just "when" are you holding a note for half a minute?
  #4  
Old 11-27-2010, 11:16 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
why do you test anything? to see what it will do. i have a 700 hp monte carlo ss. do i use all 700 ponies. nope, buts its there when i need it. you never know when you need a 33.22 sec. note. but its there.
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.
  #5  
Old 11-27-2010, 11:23 AM
Registered User

Luthier at Rainbow Music Omaha
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Question, what was the impact on the overall tone of the basses equipped with the babicz in comparison to the badass bridge?
  #6  
Old 11-27-2010, 11:39 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
to me it seems like the notes just rang out. harmonics are much more pronounced. im a hard critic about things and i go at it with an open mind. capacitor vs orange drop cap. cant hear no differece. badass vs babicz i CAN hear a difference.
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.

Last edited by mike phillips : 11-27-2010 at 11:49 AM.
  #7  
Old 11-27-2010, 12:20 PM
Registered User

Luthier at Rainbow Music Omaha
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
I always heard that the high mass badass absorbed more string vibration before it was transfered to the guitar resulting in a accentuated high end and a very slight (if at all noticeable) loss of low end, and the sustain was simply a result of the added mass.

Now the Babicz is not a high mass bridge and it achieves increased sustain by not absorbing the vibrational energy of the string but by opening a path for the string vibration to interact with the mass of the body of the bass more than otherwise.

So that being said is anyone able to follow my train of thought when I say something like:

A stock fender bridge achieves the sound it has by have lower mass, and doesn't provide a great medium for the transfer of energy between the bass and the strings.

The badass (and other high-mass bridges) achieve their tone by providing more mass for the strings to resonate in but do little to enhance vibrational transfer between the strings and the bass

And the babicz achieves it's tone not by having additional mass but by providing a efficient medium to transfer string energy to the body of the bass thus tapping into the mass of the bass's body and thus greatly increasing sustain. This (in my mind) would also imply that the tone shaping properties of the babicz also have more to do with the density, and mass of the bass's body than the bridge itself (as is the case with the badass)

I'd like to get some opinions on this theory, as this was all an Einsteinian style thought experiment for me because I have no ability to actually test these properties.
  #8  
Old 11-27-2010, 12:39 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
you may be on to something because when i play the bass with the babicz i feel the body vibrate more than i do with the badass.
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.
  #9  
Old 11-27-2010, 01:00 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Edmonton
Send a message via ICQ to MikeM
A number of years ago I spent a sat Changing the bridge on my PBass from the stock bent plate circa 1980something to a Baddass and a Gotoh. I recorded the bass laying flat with open strings.

I could hear a difference when i was doing it, but when i looked at the wave forms they had about the same harmonic content. And when i went back and did it again i had to admit it always sounded about the same.

The recordings also showed that i picked harder on the bridges that i wanted to sound better, i suspect the same thing is happening here.

For the record The PBass has the old Bent plate back on it.
  #10  
Old 11-27-2010, 04:38 PM
Registered User

Luthier at Rainbow Music Omaha
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Bump for a discussion?
  #11  
Old 11-27-2010, 05:03 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeM View Post
The recordings also showed that i picked harder on the bridges that i wanted to sound better, i suspect the same thing is happening here.

.
i am not biased one over the other. i tried to make the tests as even as possible otherwise the test is pointless. the bridges were bought and paid for by me. nothin was given to me to sway the data one way.
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.
  #12  
Old 11-27-2010, 05:20 PM
72LML's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Burnsville, MN
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike phillips View Post
why do you test anything? to see what it will do. i have a 700 hp monte carlo ss. do i use all 700 ponies. nope, buts its there when i need it. you never know when you need a 33.22 sec. note. but its there.
Can we have some sound clips of the Monte? That's music to my ears as well.
__________________
Stingray #143, Christian P&W #686, Jazz Bass #586, 5 String #438, Crappy Bassist with Expensive Gear #31

Custom Tube Amp
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/cu...thread-736187/
  #13  
Old 11-27-2010, 05:25 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North Jersey U.S.A
yeah, this sounds like it should sound great!
  #14  
Old 11-27-2010, 05:26 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
my baby. its a T&L built engine out of a busch grand national car. i got it when we switched over to the sb2.
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.
  #15  
Old 11-27-2010, 05:29 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Missouri
Anyone tried drilling these out for string-thru?
  #16  
Old 11-28-2010, 04:55 AM
steve_rolfeca's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeM View Post
...The recordings also showed that i picked harder on the bridges that i wanted to sound better, i suspect the same thing is happening here.
I know what MikeM means about biasing an experiment to hear what you want to hear. Still, I doubt that you could double the sustain on a Jazz bass by simply picking on it a little harder.

Besides, while I don't have much comparative experience with bass hardware, I do have a lot of related experience from guitar tech work. I've installed a ton of aftermarket hardware on electric guitars, mostly for other people. And all of that experience supports the OP's Badass/Babicz comparison.

IME, the differences that many people report from otherwise identical parts made from different materials (ie; brass vs steel saddles, aluminum vs steel tailpieces) are pretty minimal. I tried various saddles while searching for more sustain on my first good bass- a '64 P-bass. Although I had high hopes going in, none of them panned out for me on the gig. Whatever minor differences I might have heard, were more in the area of tone than sustain. And IMO, those differences were small enough, that there may have been some wishful thinking going on there.

However, the differences in sustain that I've seen from lockdown hardware, have been consistent enough, and large enough, to be indisputable.

I first noticed it on a cheap import guitar with a cast ashtray bridge that had setscrews in the side rails. Tightening those screws, squeezed the bridge saddles together and locked them into place. You could pretty much change the amount of sustain on that guitar from Strat to Les Paul levels, just by tightening the setscrews. Since then, I've installed TonePros locking parts on Gibsons and Epi's (and played with some import knockoff parts as well), and the results have been remarkably consistent.

My bass experience is limited to a single example, but the results were the same. When I was building the bass that's pictured in my sig, I used a Gotoh bridge that uses allen screws to lock the saddles down. That bass has crazy sustain too, even though the Gotoh is made from cheap cast pot metal, and it's light as a feather.

Based on my experience, I would venture a guess that this is all about mass, not some sort of "vibration transfer" voodoo. But I'm talking the combined mass of the body and the bridge parts, not the mass of the bridge alone.

With the benefit of hindsight, this makes perfect sense to me. On a loose-saddle bridge, string tension is the only thing holding the saddles down. It only seems reasonable that if you're yanking on the strings with a force that's measured in pounds, increasing the mass of the saddles by fractions of an ounce, isn't going to make a huge difference in sustain.

But when you anchor the saddles down hard against the body, plucking and vibrational forces have to act against the mass of the whole instrument. No wonder sustain improves- the vibrational energy you impart to the strings has to work against pounds of mass, not ounces...

This could also explain why the OP felt more vibration through the body, with the Babicz bridge. Less energy is lost, and so there's more left to transfer into the body. Once again, the bass in my sig supports that theory. It's quite heavy, and in theory, it should feel and sound pretty dead. Instead, it's surprisingly "alive" and resonant...

Last edited by steve_rolfeca : 11-28-2010 at 05:01 AM.
  #17  
Old 11-28-2010, 05:39 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Area 51
Don't forget, the original Fender bridges were designed to be used with their OEM mutes so from the designers POV back then maybe sustain and perhaps even tone (as defined today) wasn't as big an issue as it's made out to be today since emulation of an upright was one of the design goals.

Later, with G&L Leo Fender introduced a zinc alloy cast bridge with a provision for jamming the saddles together into solid contact with each other and the baseplate using a set screw...and no mutes.
  #18  
Old 11-28-2010, 05:53 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
quite some years ago magnusguitars did abridge the mechanism of which loos very similar to that on the babicz( must be about ten years ago, or so, and still doing it).

http://magnusguitars.de/sharkey%20VII.htm

The question I have now is how the hight adjustment is decoupled from the intonation adjustment. As the wheel turns and lifts the string, the witness point changes a little also, no?
More so that on a conventional bridge.
That was the only issue with the bridge on the link I posted.
A good thing tho is, that it sits directly on the instrument with no base plate. The babicz looks like a direct copy of that mechanism at first glance.
I personally still like the naimish bridge better than anything I have tried to far as it is soo easy to set up...
Tonally the magnusguitars bridge is very good also. Set up is easy as well, just not AS easy :-) .

sustain is good on both.
__________________
it's only music...but it sure is good for you.

Last edited by cnltb : 11-28-2010 at 06:34 AM.
  #19  
Old 11-28-2010, 08:05 AM
Registered User

Luthier at Rainbow Music Omaha
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_rolfeca View Post
Based on my experience, I would venture a guess that this is all about mass, not some sort of "vibration transfer" voodoo. But I'm talking the combined mass of the body and the bridge parts, not the mass of the bridge alone.
You realize we're saying the same thing right?

I said the reason the babicz sustained was because it must be transferring energy between the strings and the body better and thus tapping into the mass of the body.

You're saying the same thing, just that this transfer and interaction with the mass of the body is due to the fact that the babicz has locked down hardware, and that makes a lot of sense to me as well.
  #20  
Old 11-28-2010, 09:26 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: under a palm tree sippin pepsi
laying down playin each bass on my chest with my eyes blindfolded and my daughter handin me basses at random i was able to pick out the babicz each time due to the vibration in the body. scientific huh
__________________
YOU'RE NEVER TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD TOILET PAPER.
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Follow TalkBass on Twitter   Visit TalkBass on Facebook  

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:37 AM.




Copyright 2011 Talk Music Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Play guitar? Visit our new sister site TalkGuitar.com [beta]
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.