• 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.

Fodera: 34" w/ Extended B, or 35" Regular B???

#41
Joker, my Elrick's B seems less floppy than the Fodera... but the Fodera's still sounds amazing.

You know what's better though? The Sadowsky B. And that's 34".

If I were you i'd go for the 35" scale w/ regular tuners. If you believe Anthony Jackson, he says overall clarity is improved with scale length, a'la grand piano.

but i've never really heard the difference. I have 2 35" basses & 2 34" basses. Never screws me up, I really don't even notice.
 
#43
Lamarjones,

Here is the experiment.

We have the low B string at a set tension. Now, instead of a nut, there is a fret, in the same location, and when it is fretted there, it produces a B.

The string is now allowed to vibrate from the tuner to the saddle. This note is lower than a B.

1st case: Lets say that the distance is 37.08", so that the first fret (nut) is in a position 35" from the saddle. Now, the open string is tuned so that the string will vibrate at a Bb or A#. The B will occur at the first fret, 35" from the saddle.

2nd case: Now the distance from the tuner to the saddle is 39.2". The open string is tuned to A. The Bb occurs at the first fret (37.08" from the saddle) and the B occurs at the second fret, again 35" from the saddle.

Now, both of these basses have identical strings on them, ie the linear mass densities are the same. It should be apparent, that since both Bs have a wavelength of 70", and they are both propagating along identical strings, that the tension of these two strings must be the same.

Now since the tension is the same everywhere on the string, the two basses' strings are at the same tension.

This fretting is no different from simply placing a nut. The string isn't allowed to vibrate behind the nut, just as it can't vibrate behind a finger or a capo.

I hope you can see that the length of the string beyond the nut has no effect.

For the cases I described, there is a 2.12" difference in the distance between the nut and tuner between the two basses. These lengths were chosen because they gave 35" as the location where the B occured, they made the math easy. This is applicable to any length, but the numbers I chose made it easy to work out in my head.

Geoff
 
#44
Originally posted by Geoff St. Germaine
Lamarjones,

Here is the experiment.

We have the low B string at a set tension. Now, instead of a nut, there is a fret, in the same location, and when it is fretted there, it produces a B.

The string is now allowed to vibrate from the tuner to the saddle. This note is lower than a B.

1st case: Lets say that the distance is 37.08", so that the first fret (nut) is in a position 35" from the saddle. Now, the open string is tuned so that the string will vibrate at a Bb or A#. The B will occur at the first fret, 35" from the saddle.

2nd case: Now the distance from the tuner to the saddle is 39.2". The open string is tuned to A. The Bb occurs at the first fret (37.08" from the saddle) and the B occurs at the second fret, again 35" from the saddle.

Now, both of these basses have identical strings on them, ie the linear mass densities are the same. It should be apparent, that since both Bs have a wavelength of 70", and they are both propagating along identical strings, that the tension of these two strings must be the same.

Now since the tension is the same everywhere on the string, the two basses' strings are at the same tension.

This fretting is no different from simply placing a nut. The string isn't allowed to vibrate behind the nut, just as it can't vibrate behind a finger or a capo.

I hope you can see that the length of the string beyond the nut has no effect.

For the cases I described, there is a 2.12" difference in the distance between the nut and tuner between the two basses. These lengths were chosen because they gave 35" as the location where the B occured, they made the math easy. This is applicable to any length, but the numbers I chose made it easy to work out in my head.

Geoff
Click to expand...

A very cool experiment, took me a couple of reads to get it, kind of hard to picture, and still wonder how you can tell what the note is from the tuner to the saddle. But that is not really a real question.

How can you tel that the tension is the same? Is it because a 35", it produces a b? Or did I miss something?

Another question, and this may be directly related to tension or not, do you think the max length the string can vibrate (at 17.5 " from the saddle) is the same?
 
#45
Originally posted by lamarjones
I'm up for education here....

so what makes it floppy? Cause, we all agree there are floppy b's and tight b's, not necessarily saying the sound coming out of either is better....
Click to expand...

First of all, Geoff is correct. For a given string mass, there is only one tension that will produce a specific frequency when limited to a specific length.

With two basses at rest, a $199 Samick and a $1,000,000 custom-made, titanium neck, NASA-approved astrobass, if they are strung with the exact same strings and are of the same scale length, the string tension is going to be the same.

The issue comes when you play them.

Basses aren't perfect. There are all sorts of places where energy is lost. At the nut, bridge, etc. Otherwise any note would sustain forever.

The one factor that most impacts "floppiness" is deflection.

Try this: Grab any of the strings on your bass and pull straight up REALLY hard. Notice that the neck of your bass will bend.

Well, even when you pull the string to pluck it, the same thing happens. The neck bends. In addition, as a string oscilates, it further forces the neck to blend or "deflect."

The deflection is most obvious in the neck, but is really a property of the whole structure of the instrument. For example, a thin-plated, bent bridge (cheap Fender style copy) is more likely to deflect than an ABM that has a 3/8" think, solid brass base plate. Throughbody helps this in that relieves the bridge of this stress, not because it changes strings tension.

The less susceptible an instrument is to deflection, the less "floppy" a string is going to feel. It will also sustain longer and ring more clearly.

Ever notice that a string feels less floppy as you play it higher up the neck? The tension hasn't changed, but the bass deflects less. Why? Ever noticed it is easier to bend a 6-foot pipe than a 6-inch one?

This is why you most often see the least floppy B strings in 5-piece necks, neckthroughs and composites.

This effects the feel of a string MUCH more than tension. In fact, the difference in tension between a 34" and 35" scale (assuming a linear operation. I am not a physicist) is only 2.9 percent.

As for the original question of the Fodera, I guess they know more than I do, but I would think their tuner placement of the B would make things worse, since it is making the break angle over the nut more shallow.
 
#46
Originally posted by lamarjones


A very cool experiment, took me a couple of reads to get it, kind of hard to picture, and still wonder how you can tell what the note is from the tuner to the saddle. But that is not really a real question.

How can you tel that the tension is the same? Is it because a 35", it produces a b? Or did I miss something?

Another question, and this may be directly related to tension or not, do you think the max length the string can vibrate (at 17.5 " from the saddle) is the same?
Click to expand...

At 35", a string with a specific linear mass density will require a certain tension to create a B. This is independent of anything else. On every bass, with the same string and the same scale length, the same tension produces a B.

For the question about the max length, do you mean would the maximum deflection of the string from rest be the same on the two theoretical basses at the antinode of the fundamental (ie the centre of the vibrating length of the string) I described?

Geoff
 
#47
Originally posted by Geoff St. Germaine


For the question about the max length, do you mean would the maximum deflection of the string from rest be the same on the two theoretical basses at the antinode of the fundamental (ie the centre of the vibrating length of the string) I described?

Geoff
Click to expand...

Yes

I am laying down much of my original argument. One thing is for sure, my 34" scale R bass has a tight b, and all of the strings are a lot tighter than most other 34". Very noticeably. Any idea why?
 
#48
The maximum deflection could be different based on the fact that the string that is longer overall would be more elastic. The increased elacticity may allow it to deflect more, but this would also be a function of the friction at the nut, which would to a certain degree oppose the increased elasticity. It probably wouldn't be a significant difference, and differences in attack on playing between successive notes could have a larger effect on the deflection.

As for the 34" B on the R bass, there a couple of reasons why it may sound tighter.

The elasticity effect is one I heard from Sheldon Dingwall, it was basically that the tension on the string didn't increase as much with the deflection of the string, as the string was more elastic. He suggested this gave a more focused and constant sound and that the note would go less sharp with aggressive attack, making it sound tighter.

Also, the neck rigidity can have an effect, it would prevent energy loss to the neck. I think maintaining energy in the string has an effect on the perception of a tight sound. This is where the entire bass plays a role. Bridge, tuners, nut, headstock angle, neck joint quality all affect this.

A concrete bass would probably sound really tight, but I would imagine that the tone wouldn't be what most would consider good tone. There is a trade off between rigidity and keeping energy in the string and tone, where you want the body et al. to vibrate.

Geoff
 
#49
Originally posted by Geoff St. Germaine
A concrete bass would probably sound really tight, but I would imagine that the tone wouldn't be what most would consider good tone. There is a trade off between rigidity and keeping energy in the string and tone, where you want the body et al. to vibrate.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that Ned Steinberger's goal with the original L-2 was to replicate the sound of a string whose break points were attached to a heavy work table bolted to a concrete floor.

Of course, not everyone likes Steinberger tone.
 
#50
Originally posted by Geoff St. Germaine
The maximum deflection could be different based on the fact that the string that is longer overall would be more elastic. The increased elacticity may allow it to deflect more, but this would also be a function of the friction at the nut, which would to a certain degree oppose the increased elasticity. It probably wouldn't be a significant difference, and differences in attack on playing between successive notes could have a larger effect on the deflection.

As for the 34" B on the R bass, there a couple of reasons why it may sound tighter.

The elasticity effect is one I heard from Sheldon Dingwall, it was basically that the tension on the string didn't increase as much with the deflection of the string, as the string was more elastic. He suggested this gave a more focused and constant sound and that the note would go less sharp with aggressive attack, making it sound tighter.

Also, the neck rigidity can have an effect, it would prevent energy loss to the neck. I think maintaining energy in the string has an effect on the perception of a tight sound. This is where the entire bass plays a role. Bridge, tuners, nut, headstock angle, neck joint quality all affect this.

A concrete bass would probably sound really tight, but I would imagine that the tone wouldn't be what most would consider good tone. There is a trade off between rigidity and keeping energy in the string and tone, where you want the body et al. to vibrate.

Geoff
Click to expand...

You know, I don't know if what I am thinking 'tight' means, and what everyone else theink tight means are the same.....

I physically can't bend some of these tight stings as much as a floppy one. A floppy B in my opinon is one that is rather loose, when you slap it hard, it virbrates way too much, and ends up touching a fret or the neck at some point. A tight b, to me, doesn't give as much, and I am thinking the would not 'deflect' as much.

OK, tired of beating around the bush, I think Smiths are wonderfully constructed basses, but their b has always been floppy to me. I can tak that b and bring near the d string. On a roscoe, IMO the tightest b around, I really couldn't bend it as much. Just too 'tight'. Same strings and all, that I know. In terms of neck rigidity, I was pretty sure it had it. I've owned three, one bolt on, 2 neck throughs, all with the same type b, all from different years (bolt on and neck through were kind of recent).

To me, its not a matter of sound. I can bend the mess out of any string on a smith, but my mtd and R bass are like the roscoe, just to tough to do it.

So, we are still on the same page, eh?
 
#51
Without getting bogged down in academia and text book references, the reality is that the longer nut-tuner length makes a difference in B string performance. Though many of us may incorrectly be using the words "tight", "tension", "floppyness", etc in our posts, the reality is that is you do as I suggested two pages ago with a standard Jazz bass you'll witness the benefit of an extended B yourself.

The idea of trying to turn art into science is ludicrist. If you don't want and extended B, don't get one. I can say from my personal experience that it works, but as always "to each his own."
 
#52
Originally posted by Joelc73
The idea of trying to turn art into science is ludicrist.
Click to expand...

You're going to be somewhat suspect on this since you're a Fodera fanatic, and thus more likely than others to engage in wishful thinking concerning the value of this dubious marketing ploy, but you're making yourself look ludicrous here with a comment like this.

Several things are true, whether you fell asleep in AP Physics or not:

1. Tension can be measured objectively.
2. The distribution of tension can be measured objectively.
3. The harmonic content of a sound wave or sinusoidal electrical signal can be measured objectively.

The burden of proof is on the extended-B advocates to demonstrate the effectiveness of their strategy, because while Fodera may not be charging extra for it now, someone is bound to declare it an "upgrade" and do so in the future. The behavior of vibrating strings and of sound waves in air is exhaustively documented, so don't be a guitarist and take the "sounds good to me, man" route.
 
#53
My intent is certainly not to get into a pissing contest over the ojectivity of science experiments. I'm simply pointing out the fact that the nuances of what causes the perception of a "tight" string are vast. I have no doubt that the text book references that you and others are quoting regarding physics are correct. My point in the art vs science reference is that the above metioned nuances (and the world that bass players live in) are far from measurable.

And I'm hardly taking a "sounds good to me" attitude; rather I'm relating my experience. You peg me as a "Fodera" fanatic. While that is partially correct in that I'm a huge fan of many of their basses, I'm much less the mindless groupie you make me out to be in your post. I use what works for me; I've had basses made by other builders with extended B strings as well. I've noticed a difference; but no I have not measured the length of the sound wave - in case that was your follow-up.
 
#54
Originally posted by Peter McFerrin


You're going to be somewhat suspect on this since you're a Fodera fanatic, and thus more likely than others to engage in wishful thinking concerning the value of this dubious marketing ploy, but you're making yourself look ludicrous here with a comment like this.

Several things are true, whether you fell asleep in AP Physics or not:

1. Tension can be measured objectively.
2. The distribution of tension can be measured objectively.
3. The harmonic content of a sound wave or sinusoidal electrical signal can be measured objectively.

The burden of proof is on the extended-B advocates to demonstrate the effectiveness of their strategy, because while Fodera may not be charging extra for it now, someone is bound to declare it an "upgrade" and do so in the future. The behavior of vibrating strings and of sound waves in air is exhaustively documented, so don't be a guitarist and take the "sounds good to me, man" route.
Click to expand...

hmmm.. to a certain extent I agree. I also believe there is much science to it. I also think I have been hearing a lot of experiments (Geoff, your points are very interesting and sound), but yet I think some factors are unaccounted for.

I totally believe that my R bass has a tighter b string, in the fashion that I mentioned before. I believe smith basses are every bit as solid as all of the other basses I have played, so now my biggest question is about neck stiffness. If it accounts for so much, why are the smith neck throughs usually not as tight?

Geoff mentioned something about the elasticity on the string may be different. And someone said something about a 2.9 percent difference in tension between a 34" and 35" scale bass. maybe that is all the difference we are feeling, maybe not. Something is going on though, and it kind of sounds like we are not 100% on this. However, I have heard good arguments all around.

Today though, I am unsure of what to think. So I thought I'd confuse you guys a little more. I didn't fall asleep in AP physics, I aced it and all the physics available in college. Which is why some stuff makes sense, and some stuff I am unsure of...

If I could only figure out what the terminolgy is for the factor that measures how much force it takes to bend a string...
 
#55
It's not unfeasible to bench-test this stuff, FWIW. Using identically-sized steel necks (eliminates stiffness differences between wood necks) and automatic string-plucking machines (they do exist, believe it or not) could figure this stuff out once and for all.

Like I've said before, I think there's a lot of wishful thinking involved with a lot of things involved with music gear in general--after all, while waveforms and tension can be measured objectively, what "sounds good" varies greatly between individuals--and so when some innovation comes along for which the science just isn't there, I am going to wait until the science comes along to show me.
 
#56
2 cents ...... THIS IS GREAT

I also feel and from experience have concluded the extended B does nothing for the B string.
As for the jazz bass demonstration, That's a hard one considering the angel which the string pulls over the E nut is sharper then the angel the string pulls over the A nut position. Using the A string or whatever in both places doesn’t demonstrate this experiment.

I've argued this point before. I think it was split then, now it seems to be pretty one sided.

These are the type of things that help people understand the reality of physics in an instrument.
 
#58
I think Dingwall's are real nice basses, but I've had two and neither one have a very clear B. Both very tight, but not clear and articulate,l not even really thick.

I think it might have been just those Dingwalls. I do think their nice and I'm not dogging them.

PS, Hey Funk :D You still coming to NAMM....


Oh, by the way, I'm having a dual coil dropped in the vortex in place of the P. I want something thicker even though the bottom is HUGE! I'm looking for a sharper snap.
 
#59
Originally posted by Brian Barrett
I think Dingwall's are real nice basses, but I've had two and neither one have a very clear B. Both very tight, but not clear and articulate,l not even really thick.

I think it might have been just those Dingwalls. I do think their nice and I'm not dogging them.
Click to expand...

If you put a wood neck that thin on any musical instrument, you're gonna get some "slop" no matter how much tension you have on each string.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back