If a longer 'B' string length is better...

[LutherHeggs00]

... for tension and sound, why don't we see more reverse headstocks?


Invalid Link Removed

 

[iamlowsound]

Because the length of string that matters is only the length between the nut and the bridge.

lowsound

 

[Sane]

Thats not really doing much for string length.... the connection at the nut cuts that... I may be wrong though.


Well someone beat me to it...

 

[iamlowsound]

Can this thread be closed now before a fight starts?

lowsound

 

[Nino Valenti]

Why is a fight gonna start.

Why I ought knock you out!!!!!!

 

[iamlowsound]

Why is a fight gonna start.

Why I ought knock you out!!!!!!

People will disagree with physics and start an argument.

lowsound

 

[tbone409]

i like em for the look, really classy in my opinion
if you want real results, go with fanned frets...

 

[RAM]

Quite frankly, longer B strings may be better, in terms of tightness, but good luthiers have construction skills that do not require a longer scale to have a solid B string. Furthermore, the theory that reverse headstocks create a tighter sounding B string have not been proven to the point of getting entire industry buy-in.

In fact, I have played a few 33" scale basses with better B strings than some 35" scale basses. Furthermore, very few builders have employed the method you inquire about, but very many have developed basses with great sounding B strings.

In other words, if it works, it ain't broke.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Physics will tel you that the additional length after the breaking points on the nut or bridge will do nothing to add tension. If it did, we'd all have 2-foot long extenders on our headstocks for the B string tuners to attach to.

 

[iamlowsound]

Physics will tel you that the additional length after the breaking points on the nut or bridge will do nothing to add tension. If it did, we'd all have 2-foot long extenders on our headstocks for the B string tuners to attach to.

Unless you like a floppy B. Also, I would take a floppy B over neck dive anyday.

lowsound

 

[SteveC]

There's nothing to disagree with. Sting length starts at the bridge and ends at the nut. You can have all the headstock you want.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Ah, then how about a 3-foot extender at your bridge then?

 

[iamlowsound]

Ah, then how about a 3-foot extender at your bridge then?

Barker bass? I would go for it.

lowsound

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

If only for those pesky physical laws.....

 

[iamlowsound]

If only for those pesky physical laws.....

I for one am glad that I don't just start floating off into space, although that would be interesting for a bit.

lowsound

 

[SpankyPants]

I actually often have dreams that gravity changes direction.


That's almost on topic. ^

 

[Poop-Loops]

Quite frankly, longer B strings may be better, in terms of tightness, but good luthiers have construction skills that do not require a longer scale to have a solid B string. Furthermore, the theory that reverse headstocks create a tighter sounding B string have not been proven to the point of getting entire industry buy-in.

In fact, I have played a few 33" scale basses with better B strings than some 35" scale basses. Furthermore, very few builders have employed the method you inquire about, but very many have developed basses with great sounding B strings.

I've heard this over and over on here. Always vague stuff like you said. "Good construction", etc. But what exactly is it? Type of bridge? Type of nut? Type of string? What factors contribute?

 

[ehque]

I've heard this over and over on here. Always vague stuff like you said. "Good construction", etc. But what exactly is it? Type of bridge? Type of nut? Type of string? What factors contribute?

well, it's not just about the nut, bridge or string.

When the string is not vibrating, tension is the SAME on all 34" scale basses, no matter what the construction.

However, i believe what affects the feel of the tension on the string is not just static tension, but the play of forces involved when the string is vibrating. The string is "stretched" (because its longer when it's vibrating), and some of that tension is used to pull the string back into its original position... Many forces are involved that i do not know how to calculate.

(You can see this when you pluck hard into a tuner, the pitch drops slightly as the string vibrates less, stretching less)

The stiffness of the neck can affect this play of forces. IMHO this can have an effect on how the string feels, which is what laymen call tension.

 

[DEEPENDMUSIC]

Physics will tel you that the additional length after the breaking points on the nut or bridge will do nothing to add tension. If it did, we'd all have 2-foot long extenders on our headstocks for the B string tuners to attach to.

I can tell you, as someone who taught physics lab in college, that the additional length after the nut does affect the tension. Tension is going to be equal on both sides of the nut. There are different things that bass builders do to add to the quality of the B-string. Guiding the string downward after the nut will help with the tension a little, for example.

I actually had a conversation with Roscoe Beck about his signature basses. He told me that he wanted a reverse headstock to help especially his 5 string model but Fender thought it would hurt sales. So they feel looks are more important.

 

[FCM3]

I think the extra string length past the nut does impart something special (as does my luthier), but the "look" is a compromise to traditionalists

frank