• 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.

Do solid body basses losen up?

#61
For one person to say that their bass guitar sounds better now than 10 or 20 years ago is fine, and I don't doubt it. Seriously though string changes, set-ups, amps, technique, perception, there's just too many variables. When I bought my first good, new bass in 1983(Jazz) it wasn't set-up perfectly well and their was a learning curve on my end in terms of string spacing and the tone/pick-up selection. When I had to sell it 10 years later the bass and I were totally dialed-in, and yea it sounded a whole lot better.(active pick-ups, high-mass Fender bridge, graphite nut, de-fretted) :ninja:
 
#62
What about the time the bass was raw wood - growing in the forest and the birds were singing and thunder and the sound of chainsaws cutting it down? I suppose that all had an effect on the wood too.

What about the trip it took from South America as planks and rode trains, ships and trucks and then was unloaded by noisy forklifts and placed in a lumberyard where I bet someone had a radio playing loudly - or perhaps they whistled while they worked?

What about that day the firetrucks went past the lumberyard with their sirens blaring? Does that count too?

Then the wood arrived at the place that makes the guitars and I bet it wasn't the public library.

All day - every day and all the time wood is subject to sounds and that is never thought of as traumatic to the wood nor is it considered benevolent to it.

Sorry - teasing a piece of wood with musical sounds to make it resonate better is just fantasy.
 
#66
SurferJoe46 said:
What about the time the bass was raw wood - growing in the forest and the birds were singing and thunder and the sound of chainsaws cutting it down? I suppose that all had an effect on the wood too.

What about the trip it took from South America as planks and rode trains, ships and trucks and then was unloaded by noisy forklifts and placed in a lumberyard where I bet someone had a radio playing loudly - or perhaps they whistled while they worked?

What about that day the firetrucks went past the lumberyard with their sirens blaring? Does that count too?

Then the wood arrived at the place that makes the guitars and I bet it wasn't the public library.

All day - every day and all the time wood is subject to sounds and that is never thought of as traumatic to the wood nor is it considered benevolent to it.

Sorry - teasing a piece of wood with musical sounds to make it resonate better is just fantasy.
Click to expand...

Of course a piece of wood does dry out and "age" which can change it's tone. But acoustic guitars and upright basses are a different animal in there is a LOT of bare wood exposed on the inside of the instrument. A solid body is pretty much sealed in by the finish. Thinking that sounds change the wood is fantasy.

But let me say this: I HAVE had a solid body bass change it's tone with age! Usually for the WORSE! I"m talking about bolt-on necks here. I have done a complete setup on one of my older basses and noticed the neck screws were not all that tight. Cranking them all down again seemed to bring the bass back to life although it had changed so slowly and so little that I hadn't noticed the difference. So it was probably the vibrations that loosened the screws, so I guess you can say the "sounds" did something to the bass, just not to the wood.
 
#67
tinkerbell.png


.
 
#68
I'm with SurferJoe on this one.

If it can be heard, it can be measured, and until someone does I'm not having any of it.

This sort of stuff exists over all manner of music/hi-fi/instrument and audio engineering forums.

Double blind testing usually puts paid to the hogwash.

However, there's no discounting Mojo, just don't try to explain it with science please!

Jim
 
#69
jimcroisdale said:
I'm with SurferJoe on this one.

If it can be heard, it can be measured, and until someone does I'm not having any of it.
Click to expand...

You guys are working on the assumption that the level and methodologies of science we've achieved to this point are unquestionably capable of explaining EVERYTHING. Agitate too hard to see an explanation and you may miss hearing the truth.

Do you believe everyone has the same way of hearing and the same depth of ability to hear? I don't hear solid bodies opening up with playing but if someone else says they do who am I to say they're not hearing something I can't?
 
#70
jeff arddun said:
You guys are working on the assumption that the level and methodologies of science we've achieved to this point are unquestionably capable of explaining EVERYTHING. Agitate too hard to see an explanation and you may miss hearing the truth.

Do you believe everyone has the same way of hearing and the same depth of ability to hear? I don't hear solid bodies opening up with playing but if someone else says they do who am I to say they're not hearing something I can't?
Click to expand...

+1!
 
#71
KJung said:
I'm sure your bass sounds fabulous. Attributing that to a Nitro finish is a bit silly IMO. The current poly finishes are just as thin as the old Poly.

The funny thing is that if you read any decent history of Fender, they were pretty much cutting lumber and bolting these things together:D
Click to expand...

Nope, not attributing the tone of the '65 to the nitro finish, though it is an integral component, to my thinking. I have to agree that the trend towards thin poly finishes is a step in the right direction. I'd be speaking out my butt if I said that the current poly finishes degrade the tone quality, as I really have no experience in that regard. Given a choice, I would go nitro any day of the week, but that is not based on extensive experience with poly. It's based on my experience with nitro.

Mike Tobias is of the belief that solid body bolt on neck basses open up tonally in time. But what does he know?
 
#72
jeff arddun said:
You guys are working on the assumption that the level and methodologies of science we've achieved to this point are unquestionably capable of explaining EVERYTHING. Agitate too hard to see an explanation and you may miss hearing the truth.

Do you believe everyone has the same way of hearing and the same depth of ability to hear? I don't hear solid bodies opening up with playing but if someone else says they do who am I to say they're not hearing something I can't?
Click to expand...

one could also say just as much that you're going through a "placebo effect" and your belief in the phenomenon is making said phenomenon happen. I can't recall who said it, but one of the founders of a sociological theory stated that " if it is percieved as real, then it becomes real in its consequence."

In other words, surferjoe has his opinion, and you have yours. Let's respect each others opinions given that neither side actually has enough OBJECTIVE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE (ie. spectrographic analysis, double blind tests) to prove/disprove their arguments. Arguing over the internet is like running in a rat race - even if you win, you're still a ******* rat.

and on to the beer topic, my faves are Hobgoblin, Mill St. Tankhouse ale, and lucky lager. The last one tastes terrible, but for some strange reason I like to drink it in spite of that.
 
#73
kcole4001 said:
The wood will eventually reach a balance with regard to moisture content, and it does affect tone, but as to how much, it's pretty much impossible to say with any authority.
Click to expand...

disagree. on any subject you'll someone who can say with authority, regardless of whether they're correct.

as far as the tone goes my moneys on getting adjusted to what that particular bass "requires".
 
#74
pie_man_25 said:
one could also say just as much that you're going through a "placebo effect" and your belief in the phenomenon is making said phenomenon happen. I can't recall who said it, but one of the founders of a sociological theory stated that " if it is perceived as real, then it becomes real in its consequence."
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I don't think anything I've said up to this point should have led you to believe I disagree.
In other words, surferjoe has his opinion, and you have yours. Let's respect each others opinions given that neither side actually has enough OBJECTIVE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE (ie. spectrographic analysis, double blind tests) to prove/disprove their arguments. Arguing over the internet is like running in a rat race - even if you win, you're still a ******* rat.
Click to expand...

Oh fellow ******* rat I've never argued "I'm right and the SurferJoes are wrong" or "disrespected" as you imply anyone's opinion. From a purely scientific stance if you don't experience something you can't necessarily say it doesn't exist...you can say you haven't found evidence for it and that's VERY different. Given SurferJoe hasn't even attempted to present any real evidence maybe you should point your preaching to him instead. See, I already "got" everything you said....read my posts more thoughtfully and you might understand that.
 
#76
jeff arddun said:
I don't disagree with anything you say here. I don't think anything I've said up to this point should have led you to believe I disagree.


Oh fellow ******* rat I've never argued "I'm right and the SurferJoes are wrong" or "disrespected" as you imply anyone's opinion. From a purely scientific stance if you don't experience something you can't necessarily say it doesn't exist...you can say you haven't found evidence for it and that's VERY different. Given SurferJoe hasn't even attempted to present any real evidence maybe you should point your preaching to him instead. See, I already "got" everything you said....read my posts more thoughtfully and you might understand that.
Click to expand...

fair enough, I have a tendency to point fingers, but it seems that the whole stupid argument started between surferjoe and johnk10, and you just chimed in and were the last person to actually speak on the whole matter. I was just getting kinda p.o.ed on the whole thing, we've all got our opinions, and until some guy can express it in numbers from a satisfactorily "blind" experiement, I'm going to say that all of these are simply opinions. You are right in that I did point the finger at you specifically - which is pretty jack*** of me, I am sorry about that, my intention was more so to point out the stupidity of the whole argument - I shouldn't have quoted you in that post.
 
#78
It's all good though - dontcha think?

Opinions are specifically likened to an orifice or another - but I really enjoy the engaged discussion, and I don't think of it as an 'argument' except in the most civil and chivalrous way.

It's good to be of an opinion or we'd never make a decision in life and the turn to the left or the turn to the right could never be decided.

Thanks all who support the axiom of the proposed ideas (and those who never said so) but I am sure that there are many others who believe what they believe and I sincerely don't want any to walk away with a bent nose or bad attitude.

Empirically - everyone's right here and that's, like I say, to the betterment of understanding our own wants, desires and choices.

Good on ya all - and thanks for the spirited display of opinions - I cherish them all. I certainly learned something.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back