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 09-18-2006, 06:41 PM
jumbosilverette's Avatar
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: L.A. (the Valley)
Supporting Member
Bridge mass

Sign in to disble this ad
I've read many people's suggestion that a bigger bridge, ie. Quan, Gotoh, etc. translates to better/longer sustain. Is this an objective fact or speculation. So my questions are...

Does greater bridge mass generally translate to better sustain? Or are the scrawny metal bridges found on most production basses sufficient?
__________________
Fender 51 Reissue Club
Quote:
Originally Posted by grisezd
That's got everything that is good, all in one spot.
  #2  
Old 09-18-2006, 06:54 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
I've never had a problem with lack of sustain on a stock bridge except for an old Guild with that sheet metal/rosewood saddle bridge contraption.

Any good acoustic guitar builder will tell you that the heavier the bridge,the less string energy reaches the body. More energy is retained in the strings. In theory that ought to increase sustain, but I suspect it depends on the particular bridge design.
  #3  
Old 09-19-2006, 03:46 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Craw
...the heavier the bridge,the less string energy reaches the body...
You are totally right "Craw". This is one reason I don't understand the need of "badass" type bridges at all. To benefit from all the different body woods used on different basses the string vibrations need to be transfered to the body. The heavier the bridge is, the less vibration is transfered. It's just as simple as that. Maby sustain is increased with a heavy bridge but you definitely loose sensitivity and color.
  #4  
Old 09-19-2006, 05:54 AM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing: Ampeg
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Apopka, FL
Supporting Member
I don't ever hear a difference between one type of bridge or another.
  #5  
Old 09-19-2006, 07:41 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppamies
You are totally right "Craw". This is one reason I don't understand the need of "badass" type bridges at all. To benefit from all the different body woods used on different basses the string vibrations need to be transfered to the body. The heavier the bridge is, the less vibration is transfered. It's just as simple as that. Maby sustain is increased with a heavy bridge but you definitely loose sensitivity and color.
I just spent an hour or so with two luthiers last week over this very question. Both are highly respected in my area and one has worked on many pro's guitars and owns a national string company. The shops will install anything you want Badass etc and for a good price. I own a new MIM fender Jazz and was questioning the bridge and wanting a Fender american repalcement before i found out the string spacing might be diffrent than the mexis. The luthiers agree too much bridge mass reduces color, and attack to the wood body and one said its more magic beans to sell to players to try to find the holy grail of sound. They said good wood , strings and tech and playing style contibute more to your tone and sound than a baddass ever could. Now these guys are in the biz to sell repairs and add-ons and both said i would be wasting money on bridge replacement of any kind unless it was faulty. I giged with this bass last weekend and i sustained notes at the end of songs and in a few times i can in a song or two and had to mute the note or choke it off everytime. I now know why would i need more and the bridge is fine...i'll save my money...which is how i felt really all along i just wanted expert advice.
__________________
MIM Club Member #24
www.myspace.com/autumnmusicinkent
  #6  
Old 09-19-2006, 11:09 AM
BrandonBass's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Supporting Member
I hav a fren who swears by badass and claims that after changing his stock bridge to a badass his sound become punchier, articulates better and has more sustain....ive considering changing to a badass
but not sure if my fren is right
  #7  
Old 09-19-2006, 01:21 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandonBass
I hav a fren who swears by badass and claims that after changing his stock bridge to a badass his sound become punchier, articulates better and has more sustain....ive considering changing to a badass
but not sure if my fren is right
Well, if you would have invested 100 - 150$ (depending on color) in a replacement bridge you sure would like to tell your friends some good news, wouldn't you?
I have a friend who put back the original Fender bridge after playing several years with a badass. He was amazed that the bass sounded that much nicer with the original bridge.

Last edited by poppamies : 09-19-2006 at 01:23 PM.
  #8  
Old 09-19-2006, 03:35 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppamies
You are totally right "Craw". This is one reason I don't understand the need of "badass" type bridges at all. To benefit from all the different body woods used on different basses the string vibrations need to be transfered to the body. The heavier the bridge is, the less vibration is transfered. It's just as simple as that. Maby sustain is increased with a heavy bridge but you definitely loose sensitivity and color.
There was an Alembic factory tour article in BP back in the mid 1990s. Mica Wickersham was explaining that they use a heavy brass bridge with a heavy sustain block underneath it so that the wood would affect the sound as little as possible and you could choose whichever exotic top you wanted without changing the tone of the bass. So obviously there are some people who like it that way, and that's okay too.

But I never understood the claims about the Badass increasing sustain. It's heavier than a stock Fender bridge but it's diecast zinc. It's really not that heavy. And Quan claims it's better at transferring more energy to the body. If it's true, that would mean less sustain.

Some bridges can waste energy because of vibration or some other bad design. I'm sure there are some that sound better than others. But I just don't buy that heavier is automatically better.
  #9  
Old 09-19-2006, 06:13 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: bezerkeley
from a physics perspective, mass really isn't the main factor

the rigidity of the bridge would probably be most important. ideally, a perfectly rigid bridge would not absorb any string vibrations (which would cause a non-rigid bridge to bend and warp and absorb energy) and 100% of the energy would be transferred to the body

of course in the practical world, with the materials being used as bridges, there probably is some correlation between mass and rigidity
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 04:56 AM.




Copyright ©2011 Talk Music Group Inc. All right reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.