IMO, another BS feature on some basses...

[awilkie84]

How can it not, it's science and science is absolute. A stronger connection and the instrument acts more as one.

You're forgetting about pivot points playing a bigger role than the anchor point.

 

[Ric5]

I'd like to see people blindfolded, play a bass guitar and then just from the sound alone, tell which ones are string through body and which ones are not. I think 99% of the bassists wouldn't be able to.

This would be pretty hard though as they would have a 50/50 chance regardless.

String through body increases your chance of breaking a string

 

[non]

i have strung through and not strung through. here is a test i did when i bought the strung through: put the same strings on all four basses. standard tuning. all basses different woods. i didn't play through a amp so no electronics involved just the resonance of the wood. i just held each bass with my ear against the wood in the same spot on all four basses.pluck strings. could barely tell a difference in tone if there was one. some people say you get more sustain with strung through but that could be more due to the mass of the bass.
conclusion (and this might make some upset) but there is no or so little difference in tone woods that it would not make a difference in tone once you throw the electronics into the mix.
sorry tone wood believers.
i will say i like the idea of strung through.

i just wanted to add that even though i don't think strung through makes a difference it has kind of become a factor in my bass buying decisions.
weird right?

 

[navijaz]

How can it not, it's science and science is absolute. A stronger connection and the instrument acts more as one.

From a mechanical point of view, the part of the string after the saddle is out of the equation as far as transfer of vibration goes. In theory, there might be a small difference because of the sharper break angle, though. That is science.

 

[elgecko]

Mitch Hedberg

Stupid spiel checkers!

 

[nostatic]

The bass playing community isn't interested in the results of proper double blind studies. Personal anecdotal evidence is far more compelling.

Unfortunately the bass playing community also doesn't understand when/where "double blind studies" are warranted, and where they are irrelevant.

 

[guy n. cognito]

This guys is starting some fun threads...

 

[andruca]

Genlemen, years pass and I keep reading people infer the more tension thing. WRONG, if there was more tension, scale being the same, pitch would simply go up. NO HIGHER TENSION when string thru' the body, let's get rid of this myth, please!

Also would really like someone to technically enlighten us on this as one could also, counter-argumenting, infer the ball end of the string being on a more solid point (such as the bridge holes -specially on a bridge with a big "contact patch"-) could be better at transmitting vibration to wood than a smaller and softer point (such as a washer on bare wood). Not saying it is so, just conjecturing, exactly as those that spread the higher tension nonsense.

 

[superheavyfunk]

Considering that the vibration is dampened by the saddle, I doubt any transfers to the body when strung through.

There's a lot more things at play than simply whether or not Vibrations are happening behind the bridge and/or saddles. There's also the potential fact that now a significantly thicker (and more even from saddle to nut) part of the string is vibrating. There's also the fact that there is more tension across the string when strung thru, according to some. I'm sure there are lots of others that the more scientific among us could mention but none of that matters a whit, as far as I, or my post are concerned.

I'm talking about how perception changes reality. If I BELIEVE that running my bass string thru is gonna make it sound and feel better, then I will FEEL and PLAY better each and every time I pick that instrument up, and THAT is what is quantifiable, as captured on a recording. That is where a double blind test would need to be done to settle this once and for all but frankly, almost nobody outside of talkbass gives a poop about this stuff, so it'll almost certainly never happen.

This debate will likely continue thru the ages, or until a DJ comes and takes all of our jobs away while we were all busy not practicing. Lol

 

[navijaz]

Genlemen, years pass and I keep reading people infer the more tension thing. WRONG, if there was more tension, scale being the same, pitch would simply go up. NO HIGHER TENSION when string thru' the body, let's get rid of this myth, please!

Also would really like someone to technically enlighten us on this as one could also, counter-argumenting, infer the ball end of the string being on a more solid point (such as the bridge holes -specially on a bridge with a big "contact patch"-) could be better at transmitting vibration to wood than a smaller and softer point (such as a washer on bare wood). Not saying it is so, just conjecturing, exactly as those that spread the higher tension nonsense.

Yup. Spot on. More break angle could mean more pressure on the saddle, though. That might (in theory) have a minor influence. Like a string holder, basically. But like you said, nothing to do with tension. Ultimately, vibration in wood is vibration lost to pick-up, anyway.

 

[Jay2U]

The saddles and the bridge plate form the connection between strings and body. Behind that point the strings should be firmly held in place by whatever is suitable.

How about the nut? Shouldn't we have string-through nuts with tuners at the back side of the headstock?

 

[jamro217]

Hey my nose is in my phone now

I think all phones should come with a complimentary supply of tissues.

 

[jamro217]

I think how firmly the bridge is anchored down has more to do with tone and sustain than how the last inch and a half of unused string is held stationary. Now, how tort influences tone is beyond comprehension.

 

[bolophonic]

Guys, am I missing something? How would an extra inch of string on the other side of the witness point cause an increase in the tension of the string between the nut and bridge? I think some of you really need to read a science book.

 

[Axstar]

I have a strongly polarised opinion on this very subject. I'm not going to do the hard bit of citing any scientific evidence, just simply denigrate you for your lack of scientific comprehension. Smart people share my opinion. Are you a dummy?

It must be near the holiday season, and the thought of spending a week with our families is bringing out all these muck-slinging threads.

 

[jamro217]

The saddles and the bridge plate form the connection between strings and body. Behind that point the strings should be firmly held in place by whatever is suitable.

How about the nut? Shouldn't we have string-through nuts with tuners at the back side of the headstock?

Yes. The dreaded Floyd Rose non-tremolo nut. Tune the bass, then crank down the ratchet. This would be a great success on Gibson basses with the angled "removable" headstock. D'oh!

 

[jamro217]

I have a strongly polarised opinion on this very subject. I'm not going to do the hard bit of citing any scientific evidence, just simply denigrate you for your lack of scientific comprehension. Smart people share my opinion. Are you a dummy?

It must be near the holiday season, and the thought of spending a week with our families is bringing out all these muck-slinging threads.

And the elections are over now, so there is a void of targets for your harbored angst.

 

[cnltb]

I'd like to see people blindfolded, play a bass guitar and then just from the sound alone, tell which ones are string through body and which ones are not. I think 99% of the bassists wouldn't be able to.

This would be pretty hard though as they would have a 50/50 chance regardless.

So; blindfold yourself and try it. Don't forget to use the same instrument when doing the test.

 

[Spidey2112]

"If one is not feeling song, stand closer to amp."

... and now, back to the fortune cookies.

 

[Bassmunnky]

Science said bye bye here a long time ago replaced by "I said so"