Floppy B string , A matter of setup ???

[markdavid]

Hi All ,

I have recently strung a couple of basses BEAD with varying results, using a 130 string for the B , It kind of got me thinking, I see a lot of the time people complaining about a Floppy B string and was wondering how much of this is down to the actual bass itself and how much is down to the setup , can a bass with a floppy B string be cured by a good setup or do some basses just have a lousy B string regardless of setup etc ? What do you think ?

 

[73jbass]

No matter how it's set up,it's still a 34" scale tuned to B.Setups won't give you extra tension.I saw a kid at GC complaining about the lousy B string on a 35 " scale bass 5 string. Of,course,he was hitting the strings as hard as he could,so nothing was going to satisfy him. I have 2 basses with .135 B strings which are my regular rock basses,and another with a tapered .130. I use a lighter technique on the latter,so a .130 is plenty. If you have a heavier touch,go with as heavy a string as you can find. Especially on a 34" scale bass.

 

[202dy]

Flexibility and stiffness are a function of the string diameter, scale length, and the material used to make the string. The larger the diameter and longer the string is the stiffer they tend to be compared to other strings of similar composition. Basses with 34" scale lengths are notorious for having floppy B strings. If you research the internet, you may read that string through basses or other devices like electronics board spacers will increase the stiffness. This is not true. It is a wysiwyg situation that can only be improved by choosing a different set of strings or a different instrument.

 

[Mike Shevlin]

Paging Mr. Fullrangebass......Fullrangebass line 1

 

[GeoffByrne]

While everything said above is true, in my experience, a B with a steep break angle always feel & sounds better to me.

I have tried many 5- and 6-strings and those with some sort of string tree holding the B at a steep angle seems to work best for me.

 

[MooseLumps]

One other thing, the rest of your strings are fairly low tension compared to standard EADG 4 string tuning. Have you done through setups on all the basses? The neck might need looking at, if you have taken the tension down and treated neck relief once only, you may have had some settling. perhaps a SLIGHTLY greater relief in the neck is called for.

I'm not impuning your ability to set up your basses, just offering a suggestion.

 

[fullrangebass]

Paging Mr. Fullrangebass......Fullrangebass line 1

All other variables being equal, a longer string makes a "better" string (if uniformity in tone and great tone are the goals; that's where my love and respect fanned fret concept lies)

202dy nailed it at the "physics" description of the variables, as well as the rest of the fellow TBers. Proper setup is vital in every bass. Problem is that a bass with proper set up but with a mediocre B, won't turn into a Dingwall B (The voice of God) just by changing the set up. A proper set up will give the bass the ability to perform best it can. But it cannot do anything beyond that

 

[joplin]

Hi All ,

I have recently strung a couple of basses BEAD with varying results, using a 130 string for the B , It kind of got me thinking, I see a lot of the time people complaining about a Floppy B string and was wondering how much of this is down to the actual bass itself and how much is down to the setup , can a bass with a floppy B string be cured by a good setup or do some basses just have a lousy B string regardless of setup etc ? What do you think ?

I just put on a set of D'Addario EXL170-5, 45-65-80-100-130 (I left the G string in the bag) and tuned up my 50s p bass and the B sounds fine. I'll have a better idea of flop and slop after a few more days of playing with the bass set up this way. The other strings sound slightly brighter than the Fender 7250MH I had on there. The 7250 MH strings are real warm and real slick to slide my fingers across - the outer wrap wire seems like it's fatter and doesn't swish finger noise like the DR hi beams I have on another bass (those things are swishy).

my 2 cents. hope it helps.

 

[Billy Low]

I hate to be a fly in the butter but scale length is not as equally responsable for string tension as string length. This is part of the reasoning behind instuments being developed with string thru bodies. Stringing an instrument thru the body increases tension when tuned to pitch due to the additional length of string; without changing scale length. I am a person that prefers to play 34' scale instrument w/ light gauge strings. I do however string my B and or E string thru the body. I really dont care for high tension on my higher strings, but I don't mind a taught E and B.

By the way, I usually use a 90 E (95 if I must) and a 105 or 112 B.

I know...I'm wierd!

 

[202dy]

I hate to be a fly in the butter but scale length is not as equally responsable for string tension as string length. This is part of the reasoning behind instuments being developed with string thru bodies. Stringing an instrument thru the body increases tension when tuned to pitch due to the additional length of string; without changing scale length. I am a person that prefers to play 34' scale instrument w/ light gauge strings. I do however string my B and or E string thru the body. I really dont care for high tension on my higher strings, but I don't mind a taught E and B.

By the way, I usually use a 90 E (95 if I must) and a 105 or 112 B.

I know...I'm wierd!

String tension has nothing to do with string length. It is scale dependent. The only things that determine tension are diameter and speaking length (scale length) of the string and pitch. String-through designs may affect the feel (flexibility) of the string. Same thing goes for using PC board spacers. That is subjective and may vary from string to string, manufacturer to manufacturer, and the various materials used to construct the string. However, at a given pitch, diameter, and scale length tension is constant.

 

[bongomania]

We've had this thread an awful lot of times. The reason the "simple physics" answer is not the 100% correct answer is because the construction of the string plays a massive role in how the string flexes and sounds, irrespective of the measured tension while static. Additionally the setup and the construction of a given individual bass affects how its strings vibrate.

It is misleading to say (or imply) that scale length is the only factor worth discussing. Scale length is the only factor that contributes to static tension, but again that is only one element of what makes a low B string sound good or feel good.

 

[Brad Johnson]

We've had this thread an awful lot of times. The reason the "simple physics" answer is not the 100% correct answer is because the construction of the string plays a massive role in how the string flexes and sounds, irrespective of the measured tension while static. Additionally the setup and the construction of a given individual bass affects how its strings vibrate.

It is misleading to say (or imply) that scale length is the only factor worth discussing. Scale length is the only factor that contributes to static tension, but again that is only one element of what makes a low B string sound good or feel good.

Agreed.

 

[Billy Low]

String tension has nothing to do with string length. It is scale dependent. The only things that determine tension are diameter and speaking length (scale length) of the string and pitch. String-through designs may affect the feel (flexibility) of the string. Same thing goes for using PC board spacers. That is subjective and may vary from string to string, manufacturer to manufacturer, and the various materials used to construct the string. However, at a given pitch, diameter, and scale length tension is constant.

This is not so. We will have to agree to disagree. I do understand the scale length theory quite well and have demonstrated on several occassions why my point is valid. Mind you measuements were made utilizing same gauge strings, having the same metalurgical value, from the same manufacturer. The test was repeated multiple times using different instruments, different gauges of strings varying from .07 to .150, with scale lengths varying from 27.5" to 37".

It's really simple science. Understanding that the bridge of a stringed instrment is actually a fulcrum and you lengthen the distance between the fulcrum and the ball end of the string yet the distance between the fulcrum and the static point (the machine head) remains the same (scale length), in order to have the same kinetic charcteristics as it would with a shorter distince between the bridge and the ball end more tension is nessecary. Scale length theory is more readily appearant because in most cases of testing while the distance between the fulcrum and the machine head changes the distance between the fulcrum and the ball end doesn't: thusly giving you more string.

Think 'bout it.

If you look at the earlier post, I did not dismiss scale length as a property attributing to tension, stated that it is not as important.

 

[Billy Low]

Additionally the setup and the construction of a given individual bass affects how its strings vibrate.

It is misleading to say (or imply) that scale length is the only factor worth discussing. Scale length is the only factor that contributes to static tension, but again that is only one element of what makes a low B string sound good or feel good.

Agreed. This is why I posted. Utilizing scale length as a main determinant can be extremly misleading.

 

[202dy]

This is not so. We will have to agree to disagree. I do understand the scale length theory quite well and have demonstrated on several occassions why my point is valid. Mind you measuements were made utilizing same gauge strings, having the same metalurgical value, from the same manufacturer. The test was repeated multiple times using different instruments, different gauges of strings varying from .07 to .150, with scale lengths varying from 27.5" to 37".

It's really simple science. Understanding that the bridge of a stringed instrment is actually a fulcrum and you lengthen the distance between the fulcrum and the ball end of the string yet the distance between the fulcrum and the static point (the machine head) remains the same (scale length), in order to have the same kinetic charcteristics as it would with a shorter distince between the bridge and the ball end more tension is nessecary. Scale length theory is more readily appearant because in most cases of testing while the distance between the fulcrum and the machine head changes the distance between the fulcrum and the ball end doesn't: thusly giving you more string.

Think 'bout it.

If you look at the earlier post, I did not dismiss scale length as a property attributing to tension, stated that it is not as important.

Nothing to think about. The science is written in stone.

The problem here is one of semantics. When you say tension you mean flexibility. When I say tension I mean tension. It is physics and nothing more. Here is a link to L. Mottola's excellent explanation of the subject. It includes all of the math necessary to understand the subject.

Thanks to Stedtale for the link back in 2007.

 

[Joshua]

String tension has nothing to do with string length. It is scale dependent. The only things that determine tension are diameter and speaking length (scale length) of the string and pitch. String-through designs may affect the feel (flexibility) of the string. Same thing goes for using PC board spacers. That is subjective and may vary from string to string, manufacturer to manufacturer, and the various materials used to construct the string. However, at a given pitch, diameter, and scale length tension is constant.

I'm doubling your salary.

 

[Billy Low]

Nothing to think about. The science is written in stone.

The problem here is one of semantics. When you say tension you mean flexibility. When I say tension I mean tension. It is physics and nothing more. Here is a link to L. Mottola's excellent explanation of the subject. It includes all of the math necessary to understand the subject.

Thanks to Stedtale for the link back in 2007.

Yeah, there was documentation proving the world was flat, that the earth is the center of the universe, Columbus was the first to discover the Americas, Edison invented the light bulb, etc.

Thats why I stated we have to agree to disagree. I am not going off of preconcieved notions or theories found on the internet by supposed credible sources. I am also not here to post my credentials or have a contest to show how big my brain is. I can say that I do have the background to show that I am just as credible as any other theory spewing crackpot with academic letters behind their name. By the way, I have read Mottola's theories before, and actually found three faults in his application of his formulations. Not impressed.

In the words of Dr. Peter Venkman..."Back off man, I'm a scientist!" Ghostbusters 1984
Peace!

 

[202dy]

Yeah, there was documentation proving the world was flat, that the earth is the center of the universe, Columbus was the first to discover the Americas, Edison invented the light bulb, etc.

Thats why I stated we have to agree to disagree. I am not going off of preconcieved notions or theories found on the internet by supposed credible sources. I am also not here to post my credentials or have a contest to show how big my brain is. I can say that I do have the background to show that I am just as credible as any other theory spewing crackpot with academic letters behind their name. By the way, I have read Mottola's theories before, and actually found three faults in his application of his formulations. Not impressed.

In the words of Dr. Peter Venkman..."Back off man, I'm a scientist!" Ghostbusters 1984
Peace!

Thank you for not advancing an ad hominem argument.

If you've found cracks in Mottola's math we would like to hear. Please elaborate.

 

[Billy Low]

Just re-read Mottola's theory. Also found two places where he contradicts himself. What measuring instrumentation was used to verify his math?????? HMMM....none noted

Once again, this thread is not for that. The OP just wanted simple answers. In time I will post all data compiled in a format that would allow for more open discussion.

Stick with what works for u!

 

[73jbass]

Seems to me that a string,tuned to pitch between 2 points,will have the same tension no matter what you do behind the bridge,or in front of the nut.The only way to increase tension,all other things being equal,is to raise the pitch.You can't have a string tuned to B,strung conventionally,then string it through the body and have it increase in tension and hold the same pitch.It ain't possible.