Adding Sustain

[Jack Butler]

View attachment 2986966

Just an FYI…there’s no solid emperical evidence to support the belief (because that’s what it is - a belief) that through body stringing increases sustain. Same goes for high mass bridges.

seems the post just above yours is a good test...

 

[Jack Butler]

Sludgy, drudgy, doomy, dirgey metal?? Just a guess..

the vocals I didn't care for, but that riffage was sweet!

 

[Fender_Bender]

The first thing you’d want to do is check the neck/pocket connection and tighten the screws if necessary.

 

[FugaziBomb]

Sustain is a time function. It’s the duration of the note from its initial attack to the moment where it becomes inaudible.

What I think you’re talking about is timbre which is defined along the lines of:



Timbre can affect the perceived overall musical quality or complexity of a sustained note. But it’s not the same thing as sustain in the technical sense. A synth playing a pure sine wave with no envelope applied to it has infinite sustain despite its complete lack of harmonic overtones.

Semantically and technically, you are 100% right. I have been thinking about sustain differently the past few years, though. With a high gain amp, most electric guitars and basses can sustain ad infinitum, but the tail of that sustained note usually is reduced to just one or two harmonics of the actual note. I don't think of the resulting harmonic resonance as true sustain. To me sustain is a function of time over timbre, or let's say sustain can be expressed by an equation like:

S=T/t

Where S is sustain, T is timbre and t is time. I know it's not technically defined as such, but that is how I see sustain.

 

[physics]

It's easy to fall for the belief that if something is good then more of it will be better. The Gibson T'bird that I got a few years ago was advertised as being designed to have greater sustain, and it certainly seemed to deliver on that claim to me. Later, as I was playing more fast-tempo 1/4 and 1/8 notes and needed a more stacatto rhythm for certain pieces, I discovered the necessity to develop good muting skills on my bass.

My personal belief is that it's good to have more sustain than what you actually need, as you can mute the excess but you can't add what isn't there without adding compression.

 

[Dan B]

I mean if you REALLY are hurting for sustain, invest in a Sustaniac system.

 

[Sixgunn]

A solid maple body rather than a hollow balsa one.

Don't be knockin' balsa wood basses!!!

 

[40Hz]

Semantically and technically, you are 100% right. I have been thinking about sustain differently the past few years, though. With a high gain amp, most electric guitars and basses can sustain ad infinitum, but the tail of that sustained note usually is reduced to just one or two harmonics of the actual note. I don't think of the resulting harmonic resonance as true sustain. To me sustain is a function of time over timbre, or let's say sustain can be expressed by an equation like:

S=T/t

Where S is sustain, T is timbre and t is time. I know it's not technically defined as such, but that is how I see sustain.

Nothing wrong with creating new definitions. In some respects it raises some interesting ideas in that the overtones can sometimes excite certain frequencies as some of the other interfering overtones decay. Possibly that's what accounts for things like note bloom and resonance?

On one chambered bass I recently got, you can hit a note and let it decay. It slowly fades out to a very soft tone before a differently timbred (is that an actual word?) but same tone suddenly swells back to life before the final decay. Almost like a using a segment control generator where you can create an ASDADR envelope.I don't have (nor have I ever played) another bass that does that.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Body-through strings have more sustain than top-loading bridges, right? So, would a Badass bridge essentially give the added sustain of body-through stringing?

You want sustain? Change your strings often. IMO, fresh strings provide a more profound effect on sustain than a bridge, how and where the string is routed. I get the economics of a bridge being a one and done deal as opposed to an ongoing expense, but there are some posters here that claimed they haven’t changed their strings since 1776...

 

[J-wall]

As far as different bridges go ans string loading methods, I will share my experience. My bass: 2015 Am. Std. Precision. My strings: T.I. Jazz Flats. I originally strung those through the body. Everything was good. Then I wondered what would change if I strung it through the bridge. The increase in volume was impressive and I have no desire to string through the body now. I had plenty of sustain either way, but my experience is a louder and livelier bass when toploaded. Bass was entirely stock and now only sports a stealth retainer on the A string.

 

[Usidore T Blue]

Heavier strings, too.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

I love the sustain of my 2015 string-through Fender pbass. I've read that top-loaders have less. Thinking about picking up a vintage pbass. Would a high mass bridge do much here?

You can have some of my sustain.
I got chunks of foam full of the stuff.

 

[MichaelPatrick]

Good conversation. I'm playing in a folk band and we do some slower material where I need to hold the whole notes. I'll try a compressor and see if that helps.

 

[SJan3]

How much sustain do you need?
I've NEVER played a bass that didn't have enough sustain. For my money, heavy bridges do little more than isolate string vibration from the body wood.
I HATE hi mass bridges. No discernible difference and maybe less organic sounding than say a vintage bridge.

 

[bwildt]

I don't see the need for massive sustain. That's not the characteristic envelope of a bass. It's a bass, not an organ. My basses all have a reasonable amount of sustain. Most of my playing requires me to chop notes short or mute to get some space between each note. This minimizes mud and gives each note a nice, healthy attack.