Absolutely. That is why I stick with the 4. I never used anything below the D...which I would like to have. Not enough to use a 5 all the time.
I tried the hipshot but could never get it to tune right. I'm sure it was me and not the machine.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Anyone moved away from bothering with a B-string?
- Thread starter topo morto
- Start date
Absolutely. That is why I stick with the 4. I never used anything below the D...which I would like to have. Not enough to use a 5 all the time.
I tried the hipshot but could never get it to tune right. I'm sure it was me and not the machine.
The Hipshot tuners seem to sound better when detuned if you have an angled headstock. Unfortunately, it doesn't toggle back and forth reliably if you have an angled headstock. They work alright, but should probably be adjusted after a few flicks if you really like being in tune.
I still have a good active J 5:er for those moments, but after 25 years of strictly 5 strings I'm back to passive, vintagey 4-stringed J's and P's. Since I don't play neither gospel nor modern metal 4 strings is enough for 99% of what I do.
GASing for a 5-string passive P though, to keep a great and functional sound while covering the last percent ;-)
GASing for a 5-string passive P though, to keep a great and functional sound while covering the last percent ;-)
Yeah, a good passive 5 is what I want - I do wonder if a lot of people who reckon their B is fine would feel the same with no EQ/pre.
That's funny, considering bassists got along for many, many years just fine without a B string.
Played nothing but 5 B-G for a decade, then went back to 4 to relearn the instrument. These days I'm playing a fair amount of 5 as well, but strung E-C with a drop D tuner. I'm able to function fine without the B, though once in awhile I wish I had it, usually when playing in F (so I could be up at the 6th fret).
All basses are a compromise, and I approach 4 different from 5. For the stuff I'm doing I find the C to be quite useful. There are times I could use the B as well, but then in reality I should go 6 and I'm not willing to do that at this point in time for a variety of reasons.
All basses are a compromise, and I approach 4 different from 5. For the stuff I'm doing I find the C to be quite useful. There are times I could use the B as well, but then in reality I should go 6 and I'm not willing to do that at this point in time for a variety of reasons.
That's a good question. My 5er is active, and I wouldn't have it any other way. It seems to me that a B string on a passive bass would sound like it's seriously missing the earth shaking lows of an active bass IMHO.
Am I wrong?
Not all that valid, really. You'll need more than five strings to cover the "whole" range.
With a low B you're merely covering "more" of the bass range than with four strings.
Besides, a "real" bass only has four strings, commonly known as... The double bass, the string bass, upright bass, bass fiddle, bass violin , doghouse bass, contrabass, bass viol, stand-up bass or bull fiddle.
They look like this...surely you've seen one?
Yeah, within a week of getting a 5-string.
There are just so many cumulative hassles innate to the concept relative to any compelling advantages that to blow off 5s was a very easy and obvious decision.
I think if people understood the traditional, formal role of bass instrumentation in ensemble music, they would make a lot more conservative and sensible choices in their gear.
"Modern bass guitar" has become something very different from bass.
Don't care - I like both my passives and actives, so it's a non-issue for me...
- georgestrings
