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.
No tonal difference but I do think that they are a bit flexier when top loaded. Might just be in my head. Either way I am team top load.
Team bottom load here. Just seems like a more solid connection through the body and directly attached to the body. I also feel like it makes me a better player. 
Don't the Lakland bridges only have 3 connecting screws? I've always done through body because that's how they were new, but it seems like it'd be more solid as the strings aren't really pulling on the screws that way. Am I incorrect?
Last edited:
I wasn't trying to start a new argument with the top-load vs thru-body. To my ears, there is no discernible difference so it's not about better tone or sustain. For me it's purely about aesthetics. I don't like seeing the ball ends and think it's an all-around tidier look having them strung thru the body.
And yes, I have issues.
EDIT: I just went back and re-read the part of my post where I proclaim my love for thru-body and it's a bit misleading:
"I don't know what strings it came with but it sounds so good that I haven't changed them (which is unusual for me). The kicker is they're toploaded and I am a firm believer in thru the body but what can you do? When it sounds good, don't mess with it!"
What I meant was even though I always restring new basses, the strings that came with it sounded really good so I didn't want to change them. The top-load aesthetic bothers me but not enough to mess with the good sound the strings are providing. Not the way it's strung.
And yes, I have issues.
EDIT: I just went back and re-read the part of my post where I proclaim my love for thru-body and it's a bit misleading:
"I don't know what strings it came with but it sounds so good that I haven't changed them (which is unusual for me). The kicker is they're toploaded and I am a firm believer in thru the body but what can you do? When it sounds good, don't mess with it!"
What I meant was even though I always restring new basses, the strings that came with it sounded really good so I didn't want to change them. The top-load aesthetic bothers me but not enough to mess with the good sound the strings are providing. Not the way it's strung.
Last edited:
I wasn't trying to start a new argument with the top-load vs thru-body. To my ears, there is no discernible difference so it's not about better tone or sustain. For me it's purely about aesthetics. I don't like seeing the ball ends and think it's an all-around tidier look having them strung thru the body.
And yes, I have issues.
EDIT: I just went back and re-read the part of my post where I proclaim my love for thru-body and it's a bit misleading:
"I don't know what strings it came with but it sounds so good that I haven't changed them (which is unusual for me). The kicker is they're toploaded and I am a firm believer in thru the body but what can you do? When it sounds good, don't mess with it!"
What I meant was even though I always restring new basses, the strings that came with it sounded really good so I didn't want to change them. The top-load aesthetic bothers me but not enough to mess with the good sound the strings are providing. Not the way it's strung.
I'm certainly not arguing top nor bottom load, I just notice that my Laklands have the least securing screws for the bridges at 3 (I'm pretty sure), while my G&L's have 6 screws at the bridge, my Fender has 5.
It must not be an issue with tension pulling at the 3 screws seeing as quite a few seem to top load.
I will continue to load through the body, mostly because my other basses don't have that option and for me it makes the Laklands unique.
Ya I'd leave the strings on that are on if they sound good also, why replace em until they need it, nice bass by the way !
Funny this topic came up. I recently strung my 44-01 top load and my 44-02 thru body. No diff in tone, feel or sustain to me.
Six of one, half a dozen of another. Both good at the end of the day!
Six of one, half a dozen of another. Both good at the end of the day!
My current collection. From left, Decade, Classic HH, Decade SS, Skyline HB SS (refinished.) All through-body except the HB, BTW.
Just curious. I've never played short scale basses. Is it just a preference thing, such as comfort, ease of play or is there a different tone you get from a short scale? Thanks.
I have a G&L Fallout shorty, they feel different and have their own sound.
My 32” scale Franken P also has a different feel and sound than its full scale cousins.
Its both for me too.
I love to play my Mustang (SS Fender P-bass) because it sounds different than my P-bass, and feels different, and Tina Weymouth played one, and it's Japanese, and on and on.
I love to play my Mustang (SS Fender P-bass) because it sounds different than my P-bass, and feels different, and Tina Weymouth played one, and it's Japanese, and on and on.
Fender has used 3 screw bridges for decades on their string through American basses. I’ve had my P since ‘99 and it’s been strung both ways numerous times. I do string through more often than not (mostly because the ferrules are loose and the balls hold them in). That being said, I’ve never seen anyone complain on any Fender page about the 3 screw bridges pulling up. More does seem more secure though…
Ya the only Fender I have is a older MIM Precision, it has 5 screws for the bridge. The Lakland bridges must be pretty secure as lots of people seem to top load also
For me, the best thing about having the top load and thru-body options is being able to keep the fat part of the E and/or B strings off the tuner posts.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Do the new Rickenbacker 4003s sound like the 4001s from the '70s?
- Latest: Asllan Pizzatto