• 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.

Great Bridge Debate Revisited...

groucho

groucho

Commercial Seller
Sep 28, 2005
467
356
Ringwood NJ
www.zero-mod.com
#1
I was reading posts about the "full contact" Babicz bridges and the debate in general about what effect
a bridge has on the sound. Since I was in the market and had the "upgrade itch" to replace the no name
bent plate bridge on my put together P Bass I decided to get the Babicz bridge.

What I did here is interesting (I hope!) as I made sound files of the tones before and after installation -
NOTHING is different except the bridge. Same strings same height off the pickups same action.
These files were recorded painfully dry - no EQ, no compression.

The bass - A Fender Japan 1962 Reissue P Bass neck on an aftermarket Basswood body.
Delano (Germany) pickups and DR Neon strings 45-105.
The original bridge - a "bent plate" no name Chinese 4 barrel bridge.

The original - 3.2 OZ The Babicz - 3.7 OZ in weight.

I did not do this to stick a finger in anybodies eye, and the results are not necessarily conclusive
on the whole topic, but they sure surprised me. I have been playing 40 years, used to work in
a pro shop for 6 years building and modding basses - installed hundreds of Badass Schaller Gotoh
and Hipshot bridges in place of "stock" in those years.
I own several Fenders with Schaller and Badass II bridges myself.
One of the big things here is "no new strings"!!!
Typically a new set is always going on with a new bridge, and
that may be the source of much of what people here.


The Files: This one is really the most interesting as it is a
stereo file made of a single "E" note played
with a pick - LEFT is the original bridge the RIGHT
is the Babicz...The notes were aligned to start
together and normalized to start at the same level
the original difference in the note strikes was only
.5db ! But I wanted to have a totally fair comparison.
You will see on a L/R meter, that the Babicz does
have more sustain. BUT it is only many seconds out
where it would rarely be noticed and easily erased
by even a little compression. The most interesting
(to me) thing is the spectrograph of the file -
you can see minor variations in the response of the
two bridges...

Left Right comparison of single E
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

The other files are one bridge or the other - did my best to emulate the playing of the original. This is NOT musical but
technical so please don't "judge" my playing by this :D

The original bridge - struck notes with pick then finger.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

The Babicz bridge - struck notes with pick and then finger
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Some exceedingly simple playing - original bridge
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Some exceedingly simple playing - Babicz
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Thumping with the thumb - original
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Thumping with the thump - Babicz
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]


Hope you all enjoy it!
 
#4
The sound clips with the Babicz seem to be louder than the original. But it almost seems like the the strings were attacked harder with the Babicz. Interesting sound clip, I cant say which I prefer because like you said they were not musical, but you did a good job in showing a clear difference.
 
#5
I hear small but useful difference. Same as when Ive replaced bridges on basses myself for other then asthetic color change with similiar bridge. My fave are high mass brass bridges, least fave is baddass (to much zingy treble) and aluminum which somehow seemed less lively then std bridges like gotoh 201.
 
#6
darkstorm said:
I hear small but useful difference. Same as when Ive replaced bridges on basses myself for other then asthetic color change with similiar bridge. My fave are high mass brass bridges, least fave is baddass (to much zingy treble) and aluminum which somehow seemed less lively then std bridges like gotoh 201.
Click to expand...

Having used 5 different bridges on the same P-bass, I've always come back to my bent plate bridge. I never notice enough tonal difference to justify the change.

The only changes I'll make going forward will be for cosmetic reasons. My latest P project is getting a Mustang bridge conversion. ;)
 
#7
Honestly I expected to hear way more of a difference.
In the past, when I put the Badass II and the Schaller 463 on
a bass I "believed" I heard a noticeable boost in sustain and fullness.
But that was always with a new set of strings as well - And often
DIFFERENT type of strings.

The conclusion I came to here is: the sonic differences are so modest
they could fall within the range of variation due to the playing. As it is almost
impossible to play something the same with utter exactitude.

That being said - Is the Babicz "not such a much" of a bridge?
Or is the Chinese bent plate special a hell of a buy?

I do not feel I wasted my money on the Babicz. It's a beautifully made
piece of hardware. And certainly beats the hell out of the CBPS for
palm muting! No pointy hex screw tops :)

And FWIW I "think" the Babicz notes sound somewhat fuller in the lower mids upper bass
register....BUT that could be "psychoacoustic" influence due to what I saw on the
spectrograph of the matched compared "E" note file - Which was some minor variation
in the 80 hz to 300hz range - Not across all frequencies, but some different "bumps".

A great audio engineer (Walter Sear) once said : "People listen with their eyes".
 
#10
Not sure what you mean by "kind of brutal" ?

I looked at the two "E" notes with the spectro in
Sound Forge 9 and saw some variations but they
were not more than a few DB. And did not appear
harmonic (as in building in ratios -2nd 3rd 4th )
Really hard to know if that amount of variation
was simply what inevitably occurs in two separate notes.

Using the same strings was key to giving some kind of
comparison, as I said most often people put new strings on
with a new bridge, which certainly would give you variations.

All in all nothing like the difference between say - a DiMarzio
ceramic magnet hot wound pickup and an alnico vintage wound pickup!

If you can say there is any meaningful difference ?
I would say it's subtle at best....

Still begs the question:
Does this speak poorly of the Babicz
or speak well for the $5 bent plate bridge?

:hiding:
 
#13
FWIW, I heard a difference. I like the samples with the Babicz bridge better. I heard something in the low mids that makes the tone a bit fuller. Is it as much of a difference as changing pickups would make? No, but I like it better.

I have a 70's spacing Jazz here that I've had the bent metal style and a BadAssII on. It has Fralin singles in it. I can really hear a difference between the bridges on that bass. The bent metal bridge has a warmer sound, almost like a natural scoop and the BadAssII brings out the mid content more. Is it make or break? To me, on that bass, it is, tone-wise. The bass sustains so long with either bridge that sustain differences don't even matter.

I have to wonder if some of the people who say they don't hear a difference when they change bridges aren't hearing it due to EQ settings on their amps. I know the differences can be minimal, but they are definitely there.

Edit: I don't own a Babicz bridge.
 
#14
Here's what would be fun. Edit your post to just list the bridges as "Bridge #1", "Bridge #2" and so on. THEN see if anyone can pick out the high dollar one. That would be a real blind test. And the results would be FUN to read! Either way, thanks for all of your effort, groucho. It is nothing if not interesting.

Also, if I have gained nothing else form your posts, my new favorite word is "exactitude". I shall use it to the point of annoyance for the next few days!
 
#16
What kind of finish is on your bass? The difference would probably be much more significative in a nitro finished or even unfinished bass. A poly finished bass would not show it so much.
Disclaimer: haven't listened to the clips, can't now.

two fingers said:
Here's what would be fun. Edit your post to just list the bridges as "Bridge #1", "Bridge #2" and so on. THEN see if anyone can pick out the high dollar one. That would be a real blind test. And the results would be FUN to read! Either way, thanks for all of your effort, groucho. It is nothing if not interesting.
Click to expand...
+1
 
#19
I have an opinion based on personal experience.
I have no sound clips, but I do have knowledge, and the bent plate vintage style bridge lays waste to any hi-(dollar) mass bridge. I have tried a couple of different brands and the difference in sound is negligible, if not worse.
This is not just an opinion, it is also a fact.
The only benefit to a hi-mass is it may lengthen the string, giving you a through body length on a non-through body bass.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back