• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Club Sadowsky!!!

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.

Now that I think of it, the full tension of the string should provide all the necessary coupling -- no set screw (or whatever) necessary.

Same as you, I think the Ross design is clever. Even so, I won't run out and replace the bridges on most of my basses -- definitely not my Sadowskys, they don't need fixin'.

That said: I happen to own a bass built for me by a local guy. Sounds great, plays great, but I've never liked the bridge because it's thru-body only. :meh: So, that would be the perfect place to experiment with a Ross bridge. Won't happen anytime soon, but I'll think about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bucephylus
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...

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...
i agree. i didn't think of that.
 
A)this is TB, and B)this is TB during quarantine...

Allow me to present my dissertation on the coupling efficiency of bridge mounting screws in alder versus mahogany versus swamp ash.

Wait, scratch that: all I meant to say was "Guilty as charged!" :bag:
 
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.
Unfortunately, the chrome is out of stock. The brass is $140 and they have a 15% off spring sale going on. I'm not affiliated with this company, just be exporative due to quarantine. Well, at least I have something to blame it on!
 
Time on my hands—quarantine (5-21 JJ Blue Flats) pic...
3AF3DECD-737F-4C29-83E4-EF3C4689F7CB.jpeg
 
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.
Can I get the free body diagram on that ;)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: soflbass
For you all using Cobalts on your Sadowskys are you still liking them? I have had them on my G&L 25000 and love them so much on that bass that I want to put them on my Verdine White. The thing that stood out is that I had a slap part I recorded on the 2500 with them and it sounded alive like rounds would and not dead like with flats. But when I play finger style that big tubby low mid punch is there as well. Hoping that translates to the Sadowsky P/J.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElMon
My alder/Brazilian NYC P5 is my flats bass. It's had Cobalt flats on it for months now. I definitely prefer TI flats, but the Cobalts have pretty good tone, very good string-to-string tonal balance (and much lower price).

But I assume you're asking about rounds. I own a set of Cobalt rounds, but haven't yet tried them.
 
My alder/Brazilian NYC P5 is my flats bass. It's had Cobalt flats on it for months now. I definitely prefer TI flats, but the Cobalts have pretty good tone, very good string-to-string tonal balance (and much lower price).

But I assume you're asking about rounds. I own a set of Cobalt rounds, but haven't yet tried them.

Sorry no, I mean Cobalt flats. Im not really a fan of TIs, I did have a set. I like more tension and a bit different tone.
 
New Sadowsky Day! Got this bad boy two days ago and am just getting around to letting you fine bassists tell me how much you like it. Lol. '98 modern with stock EMGs and a pope pre. The sound is absolutely fantastic. Had a Fodera Monarch for a minute before this one, and I just didn't jive with it. Traded it for this bad boy and am much happier! Plays great.
IMG_20200423_192830.jpg
IMG_20200423_192836.jpg
IMG_20200423_192858.jpg

It was described as mint condition, but upon receiving it I noticed some very small cracks(?) in the fingerboard. My finger nail doesn't catch any of them, but wanted to run them by you cats and see if you have encountered this before.
IMG_20200423_153052.jpg
IMG_20200423_153058.jpg
IMG_20200423_160035.jpg
 
It was in the Sadowsky case, and then your typical box with some bubble wrap. It's over 21 years old, so wasn't sure if it was a shipping issue, or a lacquer drying out like Todd mentioned.
Very sweet bass you have there - I don't mind the weather-checking at all. Adds character!