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.
I find no solace in saying, it's all behind me, now.
FWIW, B strings tend to be prone premature “deadness;” and my take on it is that at least one significant issue is the location of the saddle, dictated by intonation, which places a severe bend on the string going over the saddle. The core of the string is made up of hardened steel, which does not respond favorably to permanent deformation. Kind of like when you bend a paper clip too many times.
Anything you can do to decrease that break angle is good for the string’s lifetime.
Anything you can do to decrease that break angle is good for the string’s lifetime.
Break angle can be dictated by other factors. One is bridge type and bass design: I have a bass where the saddles sit really high, probably due to how the neck sits in the pocket. Probably needs to be shimmed, but the bass plays great as is. Only downside is the sharper-than-usual break angles over the saddles.
Another is string-thru versus top-load. String-thru-body break angles are almost always sharper (and always sharper on bridges that offer both methods). That's the second reason I don't like string-thru. (First is that it's a PITA with no discernable benefit that I've ever observed).
+1 and +1.
Break angle is definitely dictated by a whole bunch of setup factors. I don’t actually know whether setup maestro Roger @Sadowsky takes that into account or not. It’s a bit deceptive, because the B string will often sound ok when first bent, but then will degrade rapidly. The string vibrations actually increase the damage. E strings tend to be less prone, because there is usually more distance between the tailpiece and the saddle.
I’ve assembled and messed with a sufficient number of instruments that I will take semi drastic steps; such as moving the bridge back as far as intonation on the G will allow, and definitely shimming the neck until I get exactly what I need. Send the bass to someone like Pat Wilkins if the neck pocket needs to be slightly deeper. Whatever it takes.
And, completely agree on the string through body thing. That was a well intentioned huge error. But,in all fairness, string metallurgy wasn’t well understood when that first came on the scene.
I didn't get on with Dunlop Superbrights either. I had dull strings and intonation issues. Haven't tried them again. Much prefer D'Addario NYXL's with taper B or Sadowsky Blue label Steels.
Does the Sadowsky B-string taper at the end help these issues? I know they are easier to string and intonate when compared to a non-tapered B-string.
I've had great luck with Sadowsky tapered B strings.
In general, I usually get better response from tapered B strings. The main exception is on string sets where the taper extends waaaay past the saddle - I'm guessing that's to accommodate thru-body stringing.
I've also gotten great response from non-tapered B strings, so I don't want to imply that tapered is always superior.
yeah, such as the DR "long necks" and maybe some Fender strings.
just sometimes with tapered, you can get a "sprung" string where that outer winding pops a bit loose from the inners, which creates a nasty result (not to mention lost money unless the vendor replaces it free). rare, but if it happens, it's most typically on the bigger strings.
projectapollo, the main thing with tapered strings intonation-wise, is you'll find yourself moving the saddles towards the nut compared to non-tapered, so you have to not be freaked out about that as it breaks the "normal pattern" of saddles in a mixed set. other than that, pretty straightforward. i like them.
ditto that.
My anecdotal, can't back it up with anything other than his own ears ...
I don't like tapered b-strings. D'Addario pro-steels and chromes on my Sadowski basses. The feel and integration with other strings just sounds better, and especially on the b-string.
But ...
I feel that when I slap on Low Eb down to Low C, the pitch clarity is better on the tapered b-string sets I've used.
Clinically I'm probably wrong, but live, in a mix, playing loud, I can always tell, and that is the hill I will die on.
I don't like tapered b-strings. D'Addario pro-steels and chromes on my Sadowski basses. The feel and integration with other strings just sounds better, and especially on the b-string.
But ...
I feel that when I slap on Low Eb down to Low C, the pitch clarity is better on the tapered b-string sets I've used.
Clinically I'm probably wrong, but live, in a mix, playing loud, I can always tell, and that is the hill I will die on.
Strings are a fo sho compromise of a whole bunch of things. I spent literally two hours discussing various aspects of bridge design and string break angle with Ron Wickersham. He’s not all that accessible; but, when you get him going on something in which he has an interest, he’ll talk your ear off. We both agreed some kind of straight pull collet design would be heaps better but no way to practically make it.
Though, there was an attempt at it that someone was discussing a few years back here on TB... IIRC it eliminated the saddles and had intonation adjustment via sliding tailpiece blocks. Clever, but it seemed to suffer infant mortality. I remember the aspect about that which seemed uncertain to me was having the core loops at the brass end disk as part of the note vibration. Maybe ok; but just seemed odd?
Anyhow, I gave up trying to solve that particular puzzle, and just opted to make the setup to minimize the break angle. Too many other cars to chase. Plus, the Jazz Bass is just about perfect with Roger’s refinements.
Though, there was an attempt at it that someone was discussing a few years back here on TB... IIRC it eliminated the saddles and had intonation adjustment via sliding tailpiece blocks. Clever, but it seemed to suffer infant mortality. I remember the aspect about that which seemed uncertain to me was having the core loops at the brass end disk as part of the note vibration. Maybe ok; but just seemed odd?
Anyhow, I gave up trying to solve that particular puzzle, and just opted to make the setup to minimize the break angle. Too many other cars to chase. Plus, the Jazz Bass is just about perfect with Roger’s refinements.
Last edited:
yeah, the issue is if the taper ends over a pickup, instead of ending between the bridge and the pickup, it can create some really strange overtones and possibly also affect some playing styles. icky.
As recently as last year (?), a TBer posted a pic of a bridge that was only bottom plate and saddles -- no "tailpiece", so to speak. The strings went straight through the saddles, with the ball end resting against the saddle. String height and intonation were still controlled by the saddles.
Perhaps saddle is the wrong term because the string went through rather than sitting on top (like rider on horse) but it painted a better picture to me. You said "sliding tailpiece block"... perhaps that refers to the very same thing.
Anyway: clever design, and the advantage is obvious: no more break angle to worry about. OTOH, same as you, I was concerned that the last inch or so of string near the ball end was now part of the speaking length of the string. Windings are often messy there... maybe that's not relevant to string performance (tone, intonation, chance of breakage), but I think those are valid factors to worry about.
i see two (potential) problems with that design. the windings issue you mentioned, and ALSO (ironically) the lack of a break angle... i guess depending on tonal pref. if you take that break angle out, then there's essentially very little to no downforce at the bridge, which means the body construction has less affect on tone due to the reduced "coupling". this may or may not be desirable, so i don't think the lack of a break angle is a categorical advantage for everyone.
The non-standard bridge may have had clamps/thumbscrews to secure each string, which would have been at least as effective as break angle. I don't recall, though.
Here is the web page for Ray Ross straight pull bridges:
Ray Ross Bass Bridge
According to the site:
"Every bridge has a problem. You need only observe the instrument you currently play. If you notice, from the anchor position of the string, the string itself goes "up the hill" to the saddle, then completes its journey to the nut in a downhill fashion. I suspected that this "kink" was a hindrance to at least vibration, if not overall tone. As it turns out this is correct. By making the anchor and saddle one piece, the "kink" was removed and what followed still amazes me to this day."
Ray Ross Bass Bridge
According to the site:
"Every bridge has a problem. You need only observe the instrument you currently play. If you notice, from the anchor position of the string, the string itself goes "up the hill" to the saddle, then completes its journey to the nut in a downhill fashion. I suspected that this "kink" was a hindrance to at least vibration, if not overall tone. As it turns out this is correct. By making the anchor and saddle one piece, the "kink" was removed and what followed still amazes me to this day."
Vic, I believe you have accurately stated what most think, as a first perception. The reality is that the interaction between the string and the bridge on a monolithic bridge including the tailpiece produces a rotation moment in the bridge, into the body at the front of the bridge, and away from the body at the screws. Which is obviously partly down force and partly up force. Anyhow, it’s just a bit complex. But, I believe that a straight through design should have a similar rotational moment, since the net forces between the strings and the bridge are the same. In other words, the free body diagram for both cases is the same, from a Mechanics perspective.
Having a separate tailpiece, as in the Alembic design or on an upright does produce the simple downforce into the body you are referencing. FWIW.
Thanks! That’s the one. I like that design in principle. I don’t like the look of the string construction near the end ball being in the field of play. But, I confess, I’d have to try it to see whether that matters or not.
