Which is wonderful and I'm genuinely glad to hear! But the discussion is centered around whether it will go "mainstream", hence why I said what I did.
Whether or not that issue matters to you is sort of beside the conversation.
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.
Its taken a while for the low B, how long for lower?
- Thread starter sonicnuance
- Start date
- Status
Which is wonderful and I'm genuinely glad to hear! But the discussion is centered around whether it will go "mainstream", hence why I said what I did.
Whether or not that issue matters to you is sort of beside the conversation.
- Aug 30, 2003
- 1,479
- 457
- Disclosures
- Engineer & Owner, Sonic Nuance Electronics
I see a hell of a lot of metal bassists using 6ers now days.
Don't think it will be as popular as the B, but its popular enough to be a production line "standard".
Don't think it will be as popular as the B, but its popular enough to be a production line "standard".
I'm going to try and express one of the most nebulous of the subcontrabass concerns, but I'm going to try to tie it to real world examples as a means of drawing a picture.
A P-bass with flats through an Ampeg will do something kind of interesting. The low E (41.2 Hz) and the E on the A string at the 7th fret (82.4 Hz) will both have about the same sonic impact in a mix. It's one of the magical things about the P-bass, and why it's so highly revered in recording. High or low, it kind of occupies the same sonic space...just because the lowest fundamental drops out, it wasn't the biggest part of the sonic footprint to begin with...so the impact remains largely unchanged. It's kinda neat as a player the first time you go high on the neck of a P-bass and it gets all woolly like that.
Because frequencies only as low as the low E on a standard bass guitar are already a challenge to properly reproduce, their true impact in the mix is not as great as you may be thinking. The truth is though, in part because of the way we hear (and that whole Fletcher-Munson deal) small changes in the low frequency content can be perceived as large increases. That's the magic of a sub. It may only give you 2.5 db over what you had at 40 Hz, but your stereo will sound night and day different with or without it.
So in other words, adding a little info down low CAN be easily perceived...and let's face it; mostly because you are feeling it as much as hearing it.
Now, the real magic to properly delivering subcontrabass is also being most careful to maintain a rich overtone series...because, like much of the general public must do even now for bass notes as low as just a standard bass guitar, it's really the upper overtones that define for us far more than the fundamental what effectively comprises the pitch people are hearing. Keeping the upper harmonic structure strong is key to properly delivering subcontrabass.
Thus, instrument setup, and actually keeping the lower strings as light as possible is part of the magic to making it all work.
The subcontrabass also has to be played deftly so as to make its notes properly intelligible. There has to be "room" for the overtone series to properly portray pitch in the mix, and something so profound needs to be used only when appropriate in a song.
However, if all is done correctly, and the upper harmonics are properly preserved, the bass (and even its pitch!)...even in the case of the subcontrabass, are still recognizable and easy to follow on smaller playback systems that lack subwoofers...just as sytems without subs still reproduce 4 string bass now, even though they can't really properly make 40Hz.
A P-bass with flats through an Ampeg will do something kind of interesting. The low E (41.2 Hz) and the E on the A string at the 7th fret (82.4 Hz) will both have about the same sonic impact in a mix. It's one of the magical things about the P-bass, and why it's so highly revered in recording. High or low, it kind of occupies the same sonic space...just because the lowest fundamental drops out, it wasn't the biggest part of the sonic footprint to begin with...so the impact remains largely unchanged. It's kinda neat as a player the first time you go high on the neck of a P-bass and it gets all woolly like that.
Because frequencies only as low as the low E on a standard bass guitar are already a challenge to properly reproduce, their true impact in the mix is not as great as you may be thinking. The truth is though, in part because of the way we hear (and that whole Fletcher-Munson deal) small changes in the low frequency content can be perceived as large increases. That's the magic of a sub. It may only give you 2.5 db over what you had at 40 Hz, but your stereo will sound night and day different with or without it.
So in other words, adding a little info down low CAN be easily perceived...and let's face it; mostly because you are feeling it as much as hearing it.
Now, the real magic to properly delivering subcontrabass is also being most careful to maintain a rich overtone series...because, like much of the general public must do even now for bass notes as low as just a standard bass guitar, it's really the upper overtones that define for us far more than the fundamental what effectively comprises the pitch people are hearing. Keeping the upper harmonic structure strong is key to properly delivering subcontrabass.
Thus, instrument setup, and actually keeping the lower strings as light as possible is part of the magic to making it all work.
The subcontrabass also has to be played deftly so as to make its notes properly intelligible. There has to be "room" for the overtone series to properly portray pitch in the mix, and something so profound needs to be used only when appropriate in a song.
However, if all is done correctly, and the upper harmonics are properly preserved, the bass (and even its pitch!)...even in the case of the subcontrabass, are still recognizable and easy to follow on smaller playback systems that lack subwoofers...just as sytems without subs still reproduce 4 string bass now, even though they can't really properly make 40Hz.
JAUQO III-X
Inactive
ok, i missed alot on this thread, but the low F# is also getting pretty popular with metal guitarists, and of course the metal bassists will want to keep up. in fact ESP just released one or two 8 string guitars this year with the F#.
something else to consider
something else to consider
JAUQO III-X
Inactive
the low F# is also getting pretty popular with metal guitarists, and of course the metal bassists will want to keep up. in fact ESP just released one or two 8 string guitars this year with the F#.
something else to consider
Its like everything in music, when a popular band record with it, more and more people will be intrested in it, its already gaining usage, I don't see that stopping.
+1. people can deny it all they want, but it is becoming popular, although maybe not to the extent of the low B or even the high C. actually, this thread is giving me low F# gas. i can already think of a TON of applications for it.
I think it will become a little more widespread, especially with the metal scene, solo bassists and perhaps fusion players, but definitely never mainstream. I mean, as it is the low B takes us all the way to the bottom of a piano. There's very little market for anything below that.
I'd kinda like to have one though, because from time to time I enjoy using low octaves as pedal notes, and I think it would be cool to play a low G in conjunction with a super-low G. Also, when I'm tooling around with solo stuff I like to use a harmonic on a lower string as a bass note, then have a melody over that. More low strings = more harmonics to choose from = more keys I can play in.
I'd kinda like to have one though, because from time to time I enjoy using low octaves as pedal notes, and I think it would be cool to play a low G in conjunction with a super-low G. Also, when I'm tooling around with solo stuff I like to use a harmonic on a lower string as a bass note, then have a melody over that. More low strings = more harmonics to choose from = more keys I can play in.
I've got 6-string a Knuckle Quake on order with Skip (TB'er "knucle_head") that will be tuned F# B E A D G. I'm very excited to be able to add this subcontra range to the sound palette. When I got my first 5-string back in the late 80s, it took me a few years to really incorporate the notes below E into my playing. But lately I find that the low B just doesn't sound terribly low to me anymore, and I find myself wishing I could go lower. For example, if I'm playing a low D root note (B string 3rd fret) I would like to be able to go a fifth down to the A0 (F# string 3rd fret). It may take me a while to get used to the low G and F# notes, but I'm sure I will eventually. And as long as it makes musical sense *to me*, I'm not worried about the audience getting left behind. Hopefully a few listeners will catch on that they're hearing something new and interesting -- and of course many will have no clue -- but I can't imagine anyone saying, "Hey! That bass is going too deep! I hate that! :scowl:" LOL 
As for the OP's question -- I think in 10-20 years the F# string will be a lot more common than now, but probably less than half as common as the low B is today. (In some metal sub-genres it might even become typical because of the de-tuned guitars.) I don't expect it to become as common as the low B because it seems (as you can see in this thread) that a lot of bass players just are not drawn to those lower pitches the way I am. The low B has been available for a long time now, but still the majority of players are sticking with 4 strings.
I think it's cool how we have so many options now as bass players. Depending on the "sound in your head" you can extend the bass either above or below its traditional range -- or both. I get the impression that there are more players who are interested in extending the range upwards -- but for me it's the low range that is calling. I'll be very happy to trade my high C for a low F# string!
As for the OP's question -- I think in 10-20 years the F# string will be a lot more common than now, but probably less than half as common as the low B is today. (In some metal sub-genres it might even become typical because of the de-tuned guitars.) I don't expect it to become as common as the low B because it seems (as you can see in this thread) that a lot of bass players just are not drawn to those lower pitches the way I am. The low B has been available for a long time now, but still the majority of players are sticking with 4 strings.
I think it's cool how we have so many options now as bass players. Depending on the "sound in your head" you can extend the bass either above or below its traditional range -- or both. I get the impression that there are more players who are interested in extending the range upwards -- but for me it's the low range that is calling. I'll be very happy to trade my high C for a low F# string!
Here's a fun youtube video. I think I can hear a low f# string here clearly enough on my $50 computer speakers.
Nice playing too. I noticed that when he was playing a lot of stuff high up there was quite a bit of sympathetic ringng from the lower strings though. I play 4-6 string basses with a floating thumb technique. I guess to stop the ringing on that bass you'd need a floating arm technique though!
Nice playing too. I noticed that when he was playing a lot of stuff high up there was quite a bit of sympathetic ringng from the lower strings though. I play 4-6 string basses with a floating thumb technique. I guess to stop the ringing on that bass you'd need a floating arm technique though!
Cool. I'll forget about getting a seven, and sell all of my fives and sixes. That way I can fit in the neat little box in which you expect me to fit.
Wow, I found most of that piece really, really grating to listen to. Sad, because his regular fretless playing is wonderful.
After making many assumptions*, the 5 string bass will be as popular as the 4 string bass 83 years from t=0 (ie, in the year 2033). If the rate of acceptance of the low F# with respect to the low B is roughly the same as the rate of acceptance of the low B with regard to the low E (the invention of the electric bass guitar), then... uh...
Because i have no data on what the F# take up rate is, i'm going to make some more assumptions, and say that the low F# will be as popular as the B string another 83 years after the B string becomes as popular as the E string. That's in the year 2116.
*Assumptions made
Decline of popularity of 4-string is logarithmic
Increase in popularity of 5 string is logarithmic
100% of bass players played 4 string bass 50 years ago (t=0)
5 string basses were invented 30 years ago
Popularity of individual kinds of bass is independent of each other
Talkbass poll is indicative of actual real world percentages
Maths aside, the F# will never be as popular as the B. I'm not saying its useless, i'm just saying a low B will always be MORE useful. Even people playing really low stuff like Jaquo still use low B strings.
Because i have no data on what the F# take up rate is, i'm going to make some more assumptions, and say that the low F# will be as popular as the B string another 83 years after the B string becomes as popular as the E string. That's in the year 2116.
*Assumptions made
Decline of popularity of 4-string is logarithmic
Increase in popularity of 5 string is logarithmic
100% of bass players played 4 string bass 50 years ago (t=0)
5 string basses were invented 30 years ago
Popularity of individual kinds of bass is independent of each other
Talkbass poll is indicative of actual real world percentages
Maths aside, the F# will never be as popular as the B. I'm not saying its useless, i'm just saying a low B will always be MORE useful. Even people playing really low stuff like Jaquo still use low B strings.
I really don't think that's what he was saying at all, big E.
He was saying, more or less, why worry about strings and construction, etc, when you can have any 'ol bass play in that range? The answers, of course, are numerous, like "horrible time delay even if tracked well", "muddy tone", and "electronic PITA", to name a few.
But I don't think your response really captured the spirit of his misguided intention. Or, rather, it didn't really deal with what was misguided about it, anyway.
Of course, I'm just assuming that my read of it was correct, too!
- Status
