High mass vs low mass bridge

[-Asdfgh-]

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.

I was taking about during, in case of string breakage. That is where you would, unless you have taken a back up bass, would be in a hurry.

I've never had an issue with a twisted string on traditional bridges apart from a Rotosound Trubass on an ABG once with through bridge stringing.

 

[ra0ulduke]

It's quite simple: these bridges don't live up to the promises made by manufacturers and self-proclaimed experts in online forums. Because many people have realized this, this trend has long since faded away.

 

[Geri O]

It's quite simple: these bridges don't live up to the promises made by manufacturers and self-proclaimed experts in online forums. Because many people have realized this, this trend has long since faded.

This is all great, but there’s something to the fact that many bass makers are using a heavier-style bridge on their new basses (avoiding the “high-mass” term to be avoid triggering).

Is Fender, Music Man, Mike Lull, Sadowsky, Roscoe, and the many other makers wrong for their choices of bridges to use? My position is that they all build great basses and I don’t. So I’m confident that they’ve made the right decision on their choices of bridges.

I realize that this topic is mainly about the aftermarket bridges and the idea of replacing one style of bridge with the other after a bass is bought. But the aftermarket bridges that some love to put down finding their way onto new basses has some meaning somewhere.

 

[koppinjo]

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.)

I’m sorry oh holy keeper of online forums!!! If you read my post I explained it right there - I couldn’t help myself! Thanks for taking the time to police my participation in a thread/forum where we all try to have a good time - sometimes that involves making jokes. I bet you’re a blast at parties

 

[Makten]

Calm down. For those of us who are genuinely curious, what was it Tony Franklin said that you agreed with?

What makes you think I'm not calm, and who the heck is Tony Franklin? Are you new on the internet?

 

[Geri O]

What makes you think I'm not calm, and who the heck is Tony Franklin? Are you new on the internet?

Funny question from someone who doesn’t know who Tony Franklin is….

I know, I know….

 

[Phreaky Phriday]

I have a bad-butt bridge on a bass that was a bit neck heavy (bad math on my part meant the balance was a bit off) - by far my favorite bridge to adjust stuff on and it looks great, but normally i go for minimal mass. Moving the e tuner to a 1+3 configuration probably had a much bigger impact on the overall balance fix (boy was i happy that usa Hipshot ultralights are reversible)

 

[Guitalia]

What makes you think I'm not calm, and who the heck is Tony Franklin? Are you new on the internet?

Sorry! Somehow managed to reply to the wrong post!

 

[Makten]

Funny question from someone who doesn’t know who Tony Franklin is….

I know, I know….

What's funny? I really love pointless replies.

 

[ra0ulduke]

This is all great, but there’s something to the fact that many bass makers are using a heavier-style bridge on their new basses (avoiding the “high-mass” term to be avoid triggering).

Is Fender, Music Man, Mike Lull, Sadowsky, Roscoe, and the many other makers wrong for their choices of bridges to use? My position is that they all build great basses and I don’t. So I’m confident that they’ve made the right decision on their choices of bridges.

I realize that this topic is mainly about the aftermarket bridges and the idea of replacing one style of bridge with the other after a bass is bought. But the aftermarket bridges that some love to put down finding their way onto new basses has some meaning somewhere.

The fact that many manufacturers use these bridges is no proof that they are better. That's a so-called argumentum ad populum.

I myself fell for the hype at first, but had to admit that these bridges make no audible difference.

It's similar to the discussion about the (non-existent) influence of wood types on the sound of electric instruments or the (inaudible) differences between a VT Bass DI and a Noble in a mix: Anyone who has spent a lot of money has to justify it somehow. This is perfectly understandable psychologically, but it's often not consistent with the facts.

Incidentally, I'm not triggered at all; I actually find it amusing. I myself invest (too) much money in instruments and accessories. The difference is that I don't make baseless claims.

 

[Makten]

The fact that many manufacturers use these bridges is no proof that they are better. That's a so-called argumentum ad populum.

I myself fell for the hype at first, but had to admit that these bridges make no audible difference.

It's similar to the discussion about the (non-existent) influence of wood types on the sound of electric instruments or the (inaudible) differences between a VT Bass DI and a Noble in a mix: Anyone who has spent a lot of money has to justify it somehow. This is perfectly understandable psychologically, but it's often not consistent with the facts.

Incidentally, I'm not triggered at all; I actually find it amusing. I myself invest (too) much money in instruments and accessories. The difference is that I don't make baseless claims.

I think you are confusing your personal hearing inabilities with facts.
And yes, you just made a bunch of "baseless claims".

 

[Snibborwocky]

I've swapped bridges back n forth on my p-bass a couple times, BAII to Fender vintage bent plate, I'm not sure I completely here a major difference on my bass but I do know the weight difference in drastic lol. I ended up putting the BAII back on if nothing more than for 70's modded type aesthetic purposes.

 

[Bent77]

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.

This is why I like specifically the newer Fender American style bridges
All the noise about et al means nothing to me

I think it looks better and find it more comfortable to play. That’s enough for me

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Interesting video. I like the tone of the high mass better.

I’m glad you can hear difference and find that difference meaningful to you. In my case it’s not often that I listen to my bass solo’d. It’s usually got a bunch of tracks or an ensemble going on to notice.

 

[IronLung1986]

For me high mass = more sterile, tighter, "modern" tone. Low mass = more resonant, open, "vintage" tone.

For most purposes I prefer a simple plate of bent.

That's my experience as well. High mass bridges take away some of the hair around the notes. There's less harmonic content or air to the tone. I've found this multiple times when replacing low mass with high mass and then switching back almost immediately because high mass seems to shave off a lot of what I liked about the bass's tone, namely that sort of hairy top end with a lot of harmonic content that jumps out when you punch the strings.

 

[ElectricBass72]

Added HiMass to Fender Vintera Jazz, Fender Player P and Squire Antigua P. Honestly, I couldn't tell much difference in tone... but the functionality (intonation, saddle height) is better than originals, especially on the Vintera. Plus, I think they look cooler.

 

[ra0ulduke]

I think you are confusing your personal hearing inabilities with facts.
And yes, you just made a bunch of "baseless claims".

That is completely inaccurate.

 

[Makten]

That is completely inaccurate.

We've understood that you think your opinions are facts. Good luck with everything.

 

[ra0ulduke]

We've understood that you think your opinions are facts. Good luck with everything.

It's telling that you believe you speak for the majority. I also wish you the best of luck for the future.

 

[crazycloud]

I make no claim for them making any difference at all in tone, but the machined solid bridges (some of which are Al and even Ti and therefore not all that heavy) just look better to me, not as I think someone said earlier, bent plates look like a high school shop project. I also have no nostalgia for the original series of P and J basses from back whenever, so their aesthetics aren't anything to me. My playing started in the 80s and lots of basses of that time had 'high mass' bridges so they were what I grew up with and my 'nostalgia' is for more modern instruments. The 'quick release' style also appeals to my engineer's mind as a better design, even though 'string through' styles have never really been that much of an inconvenience.

One of my old 4s is an Ibanez P style that had some broken tuners, common for the 'Velve-tune' types, so they got some Hipshot U/Ls and a barely used Hipshot Kick-Posterior bridge came up cheap, so a snagged it and it's going on the bass. The original parts are in a box so I can return it to stock if I ever want to make it uglier. No claims for performance improvements, but I think it looks better now.