Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
High mass vs low mass bridge
- Thread starter ics1974
- Start date
I try live my life by Ozzy's precepts so when he sings, "Just like witches with high masses", I know what get for my basses. /s
Tony Franklin said so (sorry I know that is snarky and seems disrespectful but I mean no disrespect...I have been influenced by what other famous musicians have said so many times I can't even count).
“Hearing” with your eyes is a pretty well known human perception issue, if a great looking hi-mass bridge “sounds” better to your eyes, maybe reason enough to buy it anyway, like fancy rims for your car that “look” faster. I like roller bridges because it’s easy to adjust the string spacing, and most of them are Hi- Mass anyway, good enough without expecting tone miracles.
I can confirm that bias. 
One more observation re high-mass bridges no one ever seems to make - I have never scraped my wrist on one nor had my forearm hair pulled out, which has happened with OEM bridges on various instruments (typically from vertical saddle screws).
Some "L" bridges on cheaper axes can be annoying that way.
One more observation re high-mass bridges no one ever seems to make - I have never scraped my wrist on one nor had my forearm hair pulled out, which has happened with OEM bridges on various instruments (typically from vertical saddle screws).
Some "L" bridges on cheaper axes can be annoying that way.
I like a big solid bridge as it looks less like "my first metalwork project"
Ahh, but if the bridge has more mass than a duck, then it's made of wood…ergo, it does not have the mass of a witch!
I learned this from a knight who is very wise in the ways of science!
High mass bridges are a very clever marketing mechanism to get you to part with cash for no appreciable benefit. Unless quick release is included
IMHO
IMHO
Quick release or "a pain to put the strings on in the first place". What you might gain on stage by releasing quickly, you lose getting the new one on. And you're only replacing a string on stage if it's snapped so quick release seems to be irrelevant. I do you two basses that came with high mass quick release, but I'm not a fan. High mass generic bridges without quick release are good. The high mass on my Fender Precision Plus or whatever it is is ugly
Huh? How could it be more difficult to put the string on there on a "quick release" bridge? For me it's a lot faster and more convenient both ways.
Having to thread the whole string through a hole is just stupid IMO.
About the only Hi-Mass bridges I don’t like visually is the ones with big logos etched or stamped into them (babiczcoughbabicz). Not my job to advertise their bridge, but it’s otherwise very well made. I have Bada## 2’s on a couple basses, works fine, but I could do without the logo.
You have to ensure tension on one end or other. I find that annoying and if under pressure, prone to error. I find the time saved over a traditional bridge is next to zero.Huh? How could it be more difficult to put the string on there on a "quick release" bridge? For me it's a lot faster and more convenient both ways.
Having to thread the whole string through a hole is just stupid IMO.
I would agree, given the strings are new from the package; smooth and fast. For me, threading through a traditional bridge only becomes a pain when it's with curled, previously installed strings.
Yep, remove from package, put slight kink on one end (which you will trim off anyway), thread, up to headstock, put in tuner. If at a gig then finding the clippers isn't happening, so string with end across the tuners, not in the little hole, tighten, do gig. You can do it with the bass still on.
After the gig, loosen, trim, put in the hole properly and that kinked end goes in the bin.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but with quick release it's either
(a) attach at the headstock and wind on, guess length of string that's enough to provide enough tension to anchor at the quick release end, maintain enough tension to stop the headstock end, insert at bridge, hope the calculation was right, tighten to pitch. Potentially possible with the bass on but ideally best if you have a third hand.
(b) Attach at quick release end and maintain tension while winding on. I see no way of doing this without removing the bass to aid maintaining the tension. Ball end tends to fall out. Works best if you can maintain tension and have minimal winds on the tuner, but if you don't have a string tree on the A, that's not the best angle over the nut compared to some extra winds. You can add more Winds later, but you'll have kinked the string, which isn't ideal.
I still like my Precision Lyte, but luckily I've never had to restring it in a hurry.
Why did you revive a zombie thread to apologize to a poster from 2 years ago who was addressing someone other than you? (And why you wrote the post, other than to apologize needlessly, is unclear, to put it mildly.)
Last edited:
I wouldn't change strings before a gig (new strings sound like crap to me), so all of that doesn't apply in my case.
A bridge with open attachments for the strings is very useful if you want to avoid twisted strings though, or if you ever change between sets of used strings (I do, sometimes). Maybe it's a slight drawback if you are really in a hurry. I just don't see when that would happen.
