• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Double Bass A Different Kind of Laminate vs. carved Question

thirtyhz

thirtyhz

Apr 5, 2001
145
119
Visit site
#1
I am a current long time electric bass player looking to get back into DB. I had previously owned a fully carved bass of questionable origin that was OK but not great. In considering my next bass purchase I’ve looked through all the usual channels and have tried out a great many basses. A conclusion that I have reached is that in the carved vs. laminate question, carved does not always win, regardless of price. I have observed that pedigree may be a predictor of quality and sound but not a guarantee. My question is this: In the construction of the bass how can one invariably say that a laminate with a carved top is always inferior to fully carved, without actually knowing the “contribution” this construction aspect of the instrument contributes to the sound. Aside from the player, a bass sound is based on the sum of the parts, so how much do the strings contribute vs. the bridge vs. the end pin etc. Obviously some parts contribute a great deal and some virtually nothing. Given that how much can one say that the back and sides contribute? Why ask? I am considering a hybrid with a carved top. So it seems to me that the carved top, bridge, post position, strings and neck of a good quality bass contribute more to the sound then the back and sides. Given that, a hybrid would seem to be the ideal choice in terms of stability and bang for the buck. Another observation is that the point of diminishing returns relative to price seems to happen a lot sooner than many bass prices warrant. Also from an un-subjective viewpoint is carved always better because of bias and does that bias effect ones perception? Comments?
 
#2
It's more like this: there are a variety of factors that influence the quality of a bass, and carved vs ply is one of them. Carved is, all other things being equal, better than ply. But, all other things are not likely to be equal, so a really top quality laminate bass can be much better than a poor carved bass. Pretty much equally important is the quality of construction. Setup has a major contribution too.
 
#3
There have been many threads devoted to this question. Do a search on "ply vs. carved" or the like.

As I've said many times before, think of ply, hybrid, and carved as three overlapping distributions (skewed bell-curves, if you will), with the mean value of "quality" being lowest for the plys, intermediate for the hybrids, and highest for the carved ones. Ply tops just don't produce the complexity of tone of a carved top and that complexity of tone is usually highly desirable. I've never encountered a fully-ply bass that even came close to producing the tone of a good hybrid or carved bass. I'm excluding cheapo hybrids and carved basses from consideration here. In other words, I agree with Andrew.

Hybrid vs. carved can be a little trickier. Again, excluding the cheapos, one can certainly encounter some hybrids that will beat some fully carved ones. It's the distribution again.
 
#4
drurb said:
There have been many threads devoted to this question. Do a search on "ply vs. carved" or the like.

As I've said many times before, think of ply, hybrid, and carved as three overlapping distributions (skewed bell-curves, if you will), with the mean value of "quality" being lowest for the plys, intermediate for the hybrids, and highest for the carved ones.
Click to expand...

Understood, and I've read many of the links which pretty much all say the same thing. What I'm really trying to get at is probably too mathmatical e.g.:

Top = a%
+ Strings = b%
+ Back = c%
+ Ribs = d%
+ Bridge = e% etc etc etc
_____________
= Total Sound

So how much does each aspect REALLY contribute. If I'm building an instrument then there are specific areas I will focus on to get the optimal sound. In order to do that I need to know WHAT those areas are.
 
#6
I think I appreciate what you're after. Been there. If you're looking for answers that come from solid empirical investigation, tested and re-tested over decades, maybe even centuries, that will let you focus in on the contribution of each component to sound quality -- just forget it. For many reasons, that body of information doesn't exist. Why not? For one thing, it's difficult and expensive to do that work properly; that's a job more properly undertaken by institutions with resources, and they tend to work on more practical and/or profitable projects. But don't discount the idea that, time and again, knowledgeable people have judged it not to be worthwhile to do that work.

There's no substitute for playing individual basses. If you're thinking of buying from a distance, as so many do these days (including myself), then you're going to have to be satisfied with the sort of information generalities one finds in this area (and be prepared to deal with an instrument you don't like.) The only real definitive, uncategorical advice you'll find is, which almost all TB'ers would endorse: "play a lot of basses; the one you like the most is the one you should buy."

Don't forget about practical, non-sonic issues. Do you gig a lot? Are you comfy moving your delicate carved bass from place to place, risking all the hazards that go with that? Do you aspire to orchestral playing? Do you use amplification? Do you have humidity issues in your life?

Your questions show intelligence and a rational approach to research and decision-making. But at the end of the day this is more a love and intuition thing.
 
#8
drurb said:
...think of ply, hybrid, and carved as three overlapping distributions (skewed bell-curves, if you will), with the mean value of "quality" being lowest for the plys, intermediate for the hybrids, and highest for the carved ones....
Click to expand...

This is the most concise and rational mindset I have seen to this question.

Now that your expectations are appropriately set, you then move on to actually playing basses to find one that meets your particular application.

Almost any bass can be improved substantially with top shelf components and a set up performed by a talented luthier. Over time you'll develop the ability to recognize how an otherwise unremarkable instrument has the potential to be more.
 
#9
Here's another part of the "forgotten factors" side of this: get someone else to play your bass whilst you position yourself in the right spot to actually hear it. It's amazing what we *don't* hear when we're: a) positioned with our heads directly over the bass; and b) concentrating on playing the d*mn thing.

In my newbie phase, I was worried my Christopher hybrid was too ignoble an instrument to be proud of until I heard my teacher play it. I knew at that point that it sounded just fine.
 
#10
Trix Miller said:
This is the most concise and rational mindset I have seen to this question...
Click to expand...

I even drew a chart to illustrate DRURB's description:

QualityCurve2.jpg
 
#11
Bass said:
I even drew a chart to illustrate DRURB's description:

QualityCurve2.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks, I was looking for your picture! Now, imagine the distributions to be skewed. For example, I think the distribution of fully-carved basses probably has a longer tail on the right than on the left. :)
 
#12
Hello, new to TalkBass so please bear with me. I have an itch to play bluegrass bass again after 30+ years of not playing at all. I don't have a lot of money to spend but I want a decent bass. I also would prefer a 1/2 size bass due to my size and physical abilities. Can anyone out there suggest a brand or a good distributer to talk to? Thank you.
 
#13
thirtyhz said:
Understood, and I've read many of the links which pretty much all say the same thing. What I'm really trying to get at is probably too mathmatical e.g.:

Top = a%
+ Strings = b%
+ Back = c%
+ Ribs = d%
+ Bridge = e% etc etc etc
_____________
= Total Sound

So how much does each aspect REALLY contribute. If I'm building an instrument then there are specific areas I will focus on to get the optimal sound. In order to do that I need to know WHAT those areas are.
Click to expand...

Well, you left put the largest percentage contributor to the overall sound, the player! ;)

The player is probably 90%, the top wood comes next.
 
#16
crowsmengegus said:
This can hardly be overstated. If we are talking about arco sound, the bow IME is as important, if not more important than the bass.
Click to expand...

Which, I have to say, continues to amaze me. I understand the importance of wood in an acoustic space--you've got resonances going on there, shaping the sound that's physically contained in the structure before it emerges through the sound holes.

But how does the material matter so much in a solid stick, which doesn't come into direct contact with the strings? I'm sure there's some solid physics behind it, but I'm not grokking it.
 
#17
Because it's not just a solid stick. At the very least, the bow has to be considered as having mass and flexibility that couple with the vibrating string through the hair. Also, those qualities of the bow couple with the player's technique.
 
#18
The bow is a flexible stick, not a solid one, and has to have a very specific kind of flexibility at that. The feel of the strings through the bow can vary greatly... switching bows on the same bass can make it feel like a totally different instrument. Since music is all about the feel... well, that means it IS a totally different instrument.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back