How long between bridge and tailpiece?

[Rosenfield]

On my bass (a 19:th century flat-back German 3/4 instrument) the tailpiece (or rather, the tailpiece wire) is set so that the piece of string below the bridge of the G-string sounds approximately two octaves and a fifth above the open string (that is a d2 for the G-string, for instance - the sixth semitone).

Some players mute the strings below the bridge. I find this improves the sound from the pickup, but it also removes some briliance from the bass itself.

I've asked two very skilled luthiers about this, and they had rather different opinions.

I have a threaded nylon tailpiece wire, so there is room for some experimentation. I am going to change strings, so this would be the right occassion. I would be intrerested in hearing your opinions on this.

[Eric Hochberg]

I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with this. Moving the tailpiece up or down, from my experience (which is only on one bass), will only make very subtle changes, to the feel of the strings and to the sound. Moving it up on my bass seemed to lessen the tension of the strings and also made the sound a bit darker.

If you experiment with the tailpiece and change strings at the same time, you won't know which element is causing any perceived change. Change one thing at a time.

[Rosenfield]

Originally Posted by ehochberg

If you experiment with the tailpiece and change strings at the same time, you won't know which element is causing any perceived change. Change one thing at a time.

Now that's a good point :-)

I would still be interested in hearing what the principles behind are (if any).

[Rodger Bryan]

Do you find that muting the strings focuses the tone? What changes to you percieve?

Search some of the older threads on this subject for specifics on after-length. I had the string length behind the tailpiece shortened to lessen the impact of a wolf tone on my bass.
Regarding the impact on tone- I like the way Arnold S. described the effect of the tailpiece & afterlength as being like a spring reverb.

Some people notice a difference with the way the bass responds, but IMO, once you amplify with a pickup, the difference would be difficult to detect. Add an ensemble to the mix and the net result would be nuttin. If you were recording solo, with a mic, that might be different. peace!

[Rosenfield]

Originally Posted by Rodger Bryan

Do you find that muting the strings focuses the tone? What changes to you percieve?

Search some of the older threads on this subject for specifics on after-length. I had the string length behind the tailpiece shortened to lessen the impact of a wolf tone on my bass.
Regarding the impact on tone- I like the way Arnold S. described the effect of the tailpiece & afterlength as being like a spring reverb.

Some people notice a difference with the way the bass responds, but IMO, once you amplify with a pickup, the difference would be difficult to detect. Add an ensemble to the mix and the net result would be nuttin. If you were recording solo, with a mic, that might be different. peace!

What happens when using amplification is that there is too much of the spring reverb thing. Om the other hand, when playing without amplification it adds ... something! This isn't anything of a problem (and, I agree, probably the only one noticing any difference when playing with other instruments would be me...), but I was interested in the theory behind. One of the luthiers who have worked on the instrument says it should be two octaves and a fourth above the open string, period. The other one (who replaced the tailpiece, by the way) says he sometimes uses it to correct for wolf tones.