Talkbass Rules said:
Respect: it's what's for dinner.
If the tone of this thread doesn't improve, I'll have no choice but to respectfully close it. It's a bridge, gentlemen. A bridge.
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.
Double Bass How can a bridge be so perfect?
- Thread starter timobee4
- Start date
- Status
Respect: it's what's for dinner.
If the tone of this thread doesn't improve, I'll have no choice but to respectfully close it. It's a bridge, gentlemen. A bridge.
Chris Fitzgerald said:
Chris!!!! It's not the bridge that is getting people all hot and bothered!!! It's the idea that it is somehow better than a traditional bridge that got people worked up!! I know because I have had this opinion for a long time!! And if it really was BETTER, it would show up on lots of REALLY NICE basses, wouldn't it? No, I have never seen one. I wonder why that is?
Better?? So what makes people think that way I wonder????? Time and time again I stressed that it is ONLY an Adequate Functional Substitute for people in trouble far from luthiers!!!! How simple that is and how forum flies 
blew it out of whack just to satisfy the group mentality and put a little spice in their life's, NONE of the guys posting on this thread are in my position having a split useless bridge 2000 miles from a nearest luthier and I say shame on them to attack me in such pathetic way! Seem like I put a thread into some mental institution forum.
It's a coincidence that I happen to like it on my bass as it gives me a nicer growl on all strings. Mea Culpa!!
D & G grove bit larger to accomodate my usual gut strings!
blew it out of whack just to satisfy the group mentality and put a little spice in their life's, NONE of the guys posting on this thread are in my position having a split useless bridge 2000 miles from a nearest luthier and I say shame on them to attack me in such pathetic way! Seem like I put a thread into some mental institution forum. It's a coincidence that I happen to like it on my bass as it gives me a nicer growl on all strings. Mea Culpa!!
D & G grove bit larger to accomodate my usual gut strings!
timobee4 said:
You really think you never said that this bridge is better? I'll put my 30 years experience as well as that of other players and Luthiers I know up against yours any day my friend. Glad it has worked for you, but don't rush to cast off opinions of others who refute the idea that it will be better than a well made and professionally installed bridge. The above quote, taken with your statement that this bridge worked as well on every bass you tried it on, clearly would lead one to believe you said " it is better".
In my opinion that bridge is hideously ugly. What I would like to know is how does it effect the tone compared to a "traditional" bridge?
Greg Clinkingbeard
Commercial User
Timmy,
Is the pic you posted actually of the bridge on your bass? The reason I ask is that the bass is strung with steel and you mentioned that you use gut?
Sorry if this question comes across as a pathetic attack from a pesky fly.
Is the pic you posted actually of the bridge on your bass? The reason I ask is that the bass is strung with steel and you mentioned that you use gut?
Sorry if this question comes across as a pathetic attack from a pesky fly.
Greg Clinkingbeard
Commercial User
I went back and read the entire thread and missed what might be the important factor in the reported tonal improvement. Not the design or shape of the feet but the fact that the bridge is an Aubert Mirecourt, one of the better bridges available.
After fitting one to my bass I was amazed at the improvement over an unmarked cheaper bridge. My bass produces a deeper and clearer low end, is louder and just generally sounds better.
Although this: http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f3/upgrades-better-sound-657225/
thread doesn't reference my findings as it preceded my changing the bridge, it may be interesting to some.
I value the experience of professional luthiers and realize some prefer using other bridges to the Aubert but I only have my experience to go on.
After fitting one to my bass I was amazed at the improvement over an unmarked cheaper bridge. My bass produces a deeper and clearer low end, is louder and just generally sounds better.
Although this: http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f3/upgrades-better-sound-657225/
thread doesn't reference my findings as it preceded my changing the bridge, it may be interesting to some.
I value the experience of professional luthiers and realize some prefer using other bridges to the Aubert but I only have my experience to go on.
Of course it is! The reason why I mentioned earlier the D & G grove bit larger to accomodate my USUAL gut strings is because two days ago I put my Spiro D&G on. It looks funny to me. Nothing come across as a pathetic attack anymore, I am used to being ridiculed, it suggests that I am either making this up or cant tell the difference between gut and steel strings. Nice. Thanks a lot.
My pleasure Don, you are very easily pleased. I know very well that my statement was strong but it's true all the way! I might be a lucky person but this bridge abomination does fit air tight all around for some reason with NO visible gap anywhere, same when I look at the bridge of my brethren's bass fitted with the same make garbage So if something somehow turns out that no one can improve on it any further like the mating between belly and bridge in this case than my statement is simply stating the fact, hard as it may be to except!
So if something somehow turns out that no one can improve on it any further like the mating between belly and bridge in this case than my statement is simply stating the fact, hard as it may be to except!
Stick to playing the bass!
Gravity doesn't affect water any differently than any other material. The reason we have tides is that oceans and seas are interconnected large masses with viscous properties. If they were filled with Mountain Dew, mercury, Mrs. Butterworth's or lava, they'd still have tides!
Full moons have no physical effect on people at all, but psychological effects... Let's just say if you believe you get cranky during a full moon, you're going to get cranky during a full moon. - j
Stick to playing the bass!
Gravity doesn't affect water any differently than any other material. The reason we have tides is that oceans and seas are interconnected large masses with viscous properties. If they were filled with Mountain Dew, mercury, Mrs. Butterworth's or lava, they'd still have tides!
Full moons have no physical effect on people at all, but psychological effects. - j
Very interesting.
I think I was in third grade when we learned that the tidal motion of the water mass on this planet was indeed effected by gravitational forces imposed by the moon orbiting said planed. I have yet to hear or read the updated data supporting or disproving this theorum. Can you post a link to it please? I'd be very interested in reviewing that information.Thank you.
Very interesting.
Thank you.
Tides are caused by the Moon, but the fact that it's water is irrelevant. It's because it's an immensely huge interconnected mass that's important.
Invalid Link Removed
- j
I just read this entire thread. A good chuckle.
Regardless of any other claims, true or false, I would be concerned about the durability of the vertical section of the swivelling foot. The cross section seems to be but a fraction of that on the leg of a conventional bridge, and there's a lot of pressure on that little bit of maple.
Regardless of any other claims, true or false, I would be concerned about the durability of the vertical section of the swivelling foot. The cross section seems to be but a fraction of that on the leg of a conventional bridge, and there's a lot of pressure on that little bit of maple.
+1! That was my own initial thought too! Took me a while to convince myself but as I said my friend had no problems with it after using it for over 5 years and if you look at Tornado's old bridge with additional adjusters and he seem happy! So I think its just the usual fear of the unknown. It worked out as an emergency bridge and I rather have it on my bass than have nothing. I have a master luthier friend in Europe and he told me once that I would be surprised to see all the different hand made bridges gypsy musicians from the villages bring in and when offered a proper bridge they laugh telling him that " If my grand father was happy with the bass with this bridge I am happy too" Also convinced after seeing such crazy variety of bridges that us here in the western world perhaps a little old fashioned about all this so called traditional shape and so on when other shapes can transmit vibration just as well prehaps?! In fact after this thread and the reaction of some I would love to see a study of bridges of all kind, I reckon a whole lot of them would have to reconsider their ideas possibly after finding out that the difference is so marginal it's not worth mentioning! One thing is for sure traditional bridges look far better! All the other assumptions are based on fishcake and underpants rosin. In any case it sure saved me and it seem to have a positive effect on opening up my sound as my bass does growl and I have a blister from playing so much enjoying it, I haven't had on of those for many years. Strange because I do have callouses like a mutant
about all this so called traditional shape and so on when other shapes can transmit vibration just as well prehaps?! In fact after this thread and the reaction of some I would love to see a study of bridges of all kind, I reckon a whole lot of them would have to reconsider their ideas possibly after finding out that the difference is so marginal it's not worth mentioning! One thing is for sure traditional bridges look far better! All the other assumptions are based on fishcake and underpants rosin. In any case it sure saved me and it seem to have a positive effect on opening up my sound as my bass does growl and I have a blister from playing so much enjoying it, I haven't had on of those for many years. Strange because I do have callouses like a mutant I believe this type of bridge will take care of business better than a regular bridge that was NOT properly fitted. However, in terms of perfect fit to the top, it will not match a properly fitted bridge.
I fitted my first bridge by using sandpaper only. I played on it for the first few months, and it looked like it fit perfectly - all around. Then I read (here) about properly fitting bridges. After reading about a trick that Bob Branstetter used, involving using lipstick (some use graphite) on the bass top before pressing (not rubbing) the bridge into it, I discovered that my "perfect" fit was only about 60% perfect. About 3 hours of scraper/chisle action later, I ended up with a fit that was perhaps 90-95%, and good enough for me.
Then again, I saw my friend's bass this weekend, where the there is a visible gap under the bridge feet in some places, and that bass sounds good enough to me. So the question "How important is a perfectly fitting bridge" is a fair one. And like I said, this bridge would probably fit my friend's bass much better than his current bridge. But it's not a perfect fit.
EDIT: Timo, I just read your very last post regarding the gypsy musicians, and you're 100% correct - and that is what I mean when I ask just how important a "perfect" fit is. You could classify my friend's bass as a "gypsy" bass (because actually it is). And this is the type of music where we use that bass. Plus the bridge looks like it's about to take a dive toward the fingerboard. Yet it sounds exactly like we need it to sound. My take is, though, make things as perfect as you can make them, if you have the resources. These gypsy musicians often don't have the resources. So I keep my own instruments in top notch shape, and this is the forum that helps me keep them there.
Off topic: You'll love this gypsy violin bridge :
George
I fitted my first bridge by using sandpaper only. I played on it for the first few months, and it looked like it fit perfectly - all around. Then I read (here) about properly fitting bridges. After reading about a trick that Bob Branstetter used, involving using lipstick (some use graphite) on the bass top before pressing (not rubbing) the bridge into it, I discovered that my "perfect" fit was only about 60% perfect. About 3 hours of scraper/chisle action later, I ended up with a fit that was perhaps 90-95%, and good enough for me.
Then again, I saw my friend's bass this weekend, where the there is a visible gap under the bridge feet in some places, and that bass sounds good enough to me. So the question "How important is a perfectly fitting bridge" is a fair one. And like I said, this bridge would probably fit my friend's bass much better than his current bridge. But it's not a perfect fit.
EDIT: Timo, I just read your very last post regarding the gypsy musicians, and you're 100% correct - and that is what I mean when I ask just how important a "perfect" fit is. You could classify my friend's bass as a "gypsy" bass (because actually it is). And this is the type of music where we use that bass. Plus the bridge looks like it's about to take a dive toward the fingerboard. Yet it sounds exactly like we need it to sound. My take is, though, make things as perfect as you can make them, if you have the resources. These gypsy musicians often don't have the resources. So I keep my own instruments in top notch shape, and this is the forum that helps me keep them there.
Off topic: You'll love this gypsy violin bridge
:George
- Status
