• 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.

heavier bass = better tone?

#161
This old saying keeps popping into my head during this thread...

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$#!+."

party0019.gif
 
#162
nostatic said:
Usually the person who slaps the price tag on it.
Click to expand...

With that, Sir, you may very well have hit the formula.

I really wasn't ignoring you or your comments - and I certainly apologize for missing the opportunity to speak (together) with you.

Groups of woods may typically exhibit certain qualities that are needed to bring to the fore musical values to satisfy some ears.

Certainly the 'ears or the buyers' are the most necessary to tickle - but if we look at the cause/effect of just this very discussion - we can absolutely see that there is absolutley no way to be absolutely sure that the wood in our bass isn't doing it's own thing ...............

.........and that may or may not be in the top 50% of the bell-curve of the rest of the wood that arrived on the same ship

- from the same forest

- cut by the same chainsaw

- during the same full moon.

Absolutely then, all else is absolutely non-absolute.
 
#167
SurferJoe46 said:
Funny you mentioned a split-wood for the body. Going along with what I believe is another of those dumb inconsistencies in instruments: possibly the glue line between the body halves could have been an isolating factor, not allowing migration of the E-string notes to cross over into more resonant wood.

Don'tcha love it?
Click to expand...

This is one reason that I stay away from instruments that have multi-laminate bodies, or necks. I love the craftsmanship and the beauty of the woods, but it is my opinion that the variations of the wood properties and the layers of glue affect the frequencies in ways that I find unusable for certain desired results. Many of the multi-lams have a compressed or somewhat dull sound that relies more on the characteristics of the electronics than the wood to achieve certain tonal aspects. Not that this is bad, I just find it limiting for most of my applications. I have noticed that the thickness of the lams also play a part in this as well.

I could go into this forever, so let me stop now! :rolleyes:
 
#171
cnltb said:
Sustain;
I want an instrument does solid, long sustain.
That way I can decide when to stop the note rather than hoping for the bass to hold on long enough for certain passages.
Click to expand...

+1
This is why longer sustain might be prefereable to some. I prefer choosing when my notes end too. I also like to have that note be relatively even while it sustains vs. rapidly tapering off. For example, holding a note for a couple of measures during a quiet passage of a song. Or playing moving chords or melodies over an open string.
 
#172
kai_ski said:
This statement I agree with. Higher grade woods are SAID to resonate better than their lower graded counterparts, when the luthier is selective about their resonant qualities.
Click to expand...

Careful with that statement! I laugh at the term "higher quality wood" because it's so subjective. Usually the "quality" of wood is based on appearance and exclusivity, not resonance.

I hear and read of people bashing basswood, for example, calling it a low quality wood for solid bodies, yet it's tonal properties in most cases sit right between alder and ash (closer to alder IMHO). Some of the same people couldn't tell you the difference if you put their favorite manufacturers label on it and put it int their hands and let them play it! The best example of this is the Music Man Bongo. I see people here all the time praise the Bongo but swear off basswood as the crappiest wood in existence and find it shameful for any human to create or posses an instrument made out of such an abominating substance!


kai_ski said:
I'm not sure how any of this applies to a solid-body instrument. I can't imagine any difference being detected in resonance of an slab of wood more than a few cm thick.
Click to expand...

It is of my opinion that it can make a MAJOR difference! I'm quite sure at somepoint the thickness will become negligible to the tonal aspect, but4cm of purpleheart with 1.5 cm of maple will have a different sonic profile than 4 cm of maple with 1.5 of purpleheart! . It can be noticeable, but I doubt anyone will say "that instrument with all of the purpleheart sucks" mainly because most people in the listening audience cannot discern the wood types when you play your instrument. Hell, most don't even know what a bass is supposed to sound like or the job of the bass in the first place! I find that only musicians, mainly bass players, are overly consumed with this.
 
#173
Brad Johnson said:
I also like to have that note be relatively even while it sustains vs. rapidly tapering off. For example, holding a note for a couple of measures during a quiet passage of a song. Or playing moving chords or melodies over an open string.
Click to expand...

^^ This. And an idividual can have basses that sustain, as well as basses that don't sustain. Such variety is the spice of life. Or dogmas to argue about on Talk Bass.

:hiding:

:D
 
#174
Brad Johnson said:
+1
This is why longer sustain might be prefereable to some. I prefer choosing when my notes end too. I also like to have that note be relatively even while it sustains vs. rapidly tapering off. For example, holding a note for a couple of measures during a quiet passage of a song. Or playing moving chords or melodies over an open string.
Click to expand...

That's what we all do (chose when to end our notes). I find it hard to believe anyone ever needs more than the tens of seconds or more a note will sustain on any electric bass I've ever played...
 
#176
Billy Low said:
Careful with that statement! I laugh at the term "higher quality wood" because it's so subjective. Usually the "quality" of wood is based on appearance and exclusivity, not resonance.

I hear and read of people bashing basswood, for example, calling it a low quality wood for solid bodies, yet it's tonal properties in most cases sit right between alder and ash (closer to alder IMHO). Some of the same people couldn't tell you the difference if you put their favorite manufacturers label on it and put it int their hands and let them play it! The best example of this is the Music Man Bongo. I see people here all the time praise the Bongo but swear off basswood as the crappiest wood in existence and find it shameful for any human to create or posses an instrument made out of such an abominating substance!




It is of my opinion that it can make a MAJOR difference! I'm quite sure at somepoint the thickness will become negligible to the tonal aspect, but4cm of purpleheart with 1.5 cm of maple will have a different sonic profile than 4 cm of maple with 1.5 of purpleheart! . It can be noticeable, but I doubt anyone will say "that instrument with all of the purpleheart sucks" mainly because most people in the listening audience cannot discern the wood types when you play your instrument. Hell, most don't even know what a bass is supposed to sound like or the job of the bass in the first place! I find that only musicians, mainly bass players, are overly consumed with this.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with basswood other than the one basswood bass I owned, the bridge screws stripped out. I assumed it's because the wood is a little too soft. am I off on this, is it just as solid as any other wood?
 
#179
taurus1 said:
I have no problem with basswood other than the one basswood bass I owned, the bridge screws stripped out. I assumed it's because the wood is a little too soft. am I off on this, is it just as solid as any other wood?
Click to expand...

The bass just wanted to have a Kahler tremolo all along. Is that so wrong?

;)

But seriously, basswood IS softer. Whether it's a little too soft? Hmmm....
 
#180
taurus1 said:
I have no problem with basswood other than the one basswood bass I owned, the bridge screws stripped out. I assumed it's because the wood is a little too soft. am I off on this, is it just as solid as any other wood?
Click to expand...

It is indeed softer. It definitely dings easier. I wouldn't think that the bridge screws should have stripped out, though.

[Oops, thunderthumbs lapped me ... ]
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back