Need Opinions on High Mass Bridges

[chadds]

If it gives you more adjustments for intonation etc. yes.

My experience with and without on the same Bass is that they don’t make a noticeable difference say on a Fender.

When a high mass bridge is one component of a purpose build then it’s more difficult to isolate just the bridge’s effect when structural rigidity etc all contribute to that bass’s feel and sound.

 

[EatS1stBassist]

So look, I know this isn't as hotly contested as "tonewood" or even poly vs nitro. BUT! Is a high mass bridge worth the cost?

I design water and sewer systems now, but I ran a machine shop for 15 years before and I appreciate nice machine work. I think it's cool, so a nifty hunk of metal is just beautiful to me. I really want to buy a Babicz bridge ONLY because it looks awesome - tone is not the priority here (despite the poll option).

Do you like high mass bridges? Hate them? What's your faves? Also if you have a Babicz let me know how you like it.

If you're wondering it's going on a Blonde Fender Classic 50's PBass.

I feel the bent plate would be a better choice. Especially for a 50’s style bass. IMHO.
There’s also beauty in that simple but very effective design. I also like the 4 saddle bridge as opposed to the 2 saddle vintage bridge. Anyway have fun. The Babicz bridge is a beautiful piece of art but I still love the bent plate.

 

[Manticore]

I've swapped out a number of bridges on different basses over the years. The only time it made a significant difference was on a Ric 4001, which came with an unusually terrible bridge. (No hate from the purists; I did it in '74 or '75 before it was "vintage" so I could actually intonate the instrument.)

 

[Sixgunn]

This bridge will cure all your problems. It'll cure your asthma, too!

 

[ToneMonkey]

In my personal experience, high mass anything (bridge, tuners, anything) can add some sustain (and that's not always a good thing) but always at the expense of harmonic complexity. In other words you can end up with a dead sounding instrument that sustains for days. I've played 'em and I don't like 'em. I loathe BadAss bridges in particular.

I prefer lightweight vintage style tuners and bridges on my Fender basses strictly because I think they sound better.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[TakeABreak]

I wouldn't bother change the bridge for better tone.
I would change it for improved adjustability, easier string changes, looks, and better overall quality.

 

[micguy]

In conclusion, high mass replacement would beneficial to you if you want your tone to:
1. have better sustain

I studied Acoustical Physics - the Physics of musical instruments specifically in college. A string is anchored at two ends. One end has a relatively massive block of metal anchoring the string, and it's anchored to a relatively massive piece of wood. On the other end, the string is anchored by a very small piece of metal, which is anchored in a relatively small piece of wood. Which end do you think steals string energy the most?

If you want more sustain, fix the end that's losing the energy - bigger frets anchored in a thicker, stiffer, denser neck will help much more than a heavier bridge.

 

[cataract]

Brass will always sound better, it's 'a living metal'. Aluminum is junk.

Aluminum bass (& bridge) + brass saddles = I BEG TO DIFFER KIND SIR

 

[cataract]

Also I’ve always had good luck with any Badass / Omega / Hipshot high mass bridges. Even the Fender Hi-Mass on my Mendel sig adds that bit of “snap” that I love.
Stock bent plates do the trick but I’ve gotten so used to the extra slab of mass in the bridge area that it feels / sounds weird to me when playing anything without one installed.

 

[micguy]

Brass will always sound better, it's 'a living metal'. Aluminum is junk.

Enlighten us. I want to hear your justification for this statement. While you're at it, let us know what other metals are alive - Zinc, Steel, etc.

 

[logdrum]

I scratch my head when I see a high mass bridge but using old flats and a foam and an HPF to cut the low end rumble

 

[Iridescentone]

I think it’s cool that G&L bridges are sunk into the body. The theory there is it improves sound transfer through the body (or something like that).

G&L makes a nice bridge. I'm a fan, but...

To me, that's one of Leo's "sounds good on paper" theories that, in practice, has no affect whatsoever. There is no additional surface area contacting the body, it's just that some of the contact area is a little lower into the body than the main area. In fact, the boss itself has an empty channel in its center, leaving only its thin outer rim making any contact. IOW, less contact area than if there was no boss at all.

Kinda like the claim that MFD pickups with slotted poles could be aligned in certain directions to affect tone? No one I know has ever detected any difference at all, regardless of which way the pole slots are facing. I think we can safely chalk that one up to baseless marketing hype.

What the G&L bridge design does do, is discourage tinkerers from using it on other basses. Routing out for the boss is beyond the reach of most DIY-ers, and anyone with the skill set and tools might be asking themselves "why bother?".

 

[pappabass]

My Fender P bass has a basassII bridge. Can't tell any difference. Looks pretty cool though

 

[Sid Fang]

...If you want more sustain, fix the end that's losing the energy - bigger frets anchored in a thicker, stiffer, denser neck will help much more than a heavier bridge.

While I totally respect your approach, and I do go for rigid laminated thru-neck designs - or better still, monocoque graphite designs - for myself, sometimes in engineering you attack the problem part of the problem where it's easier to get traction instead of the part of the problem with the most absolute leverage. I think the Yamaha/Alembic sustain plate scheme falls into that space. Other than such radical schemes, I'm with TakeABreak above - the effect of a more-or-less standard aftermarket bridge on tone or sustain is going to be minimal-to-non-existent, but there are other good reasons to do bridge upgrades.

 

[Jay2U]

Those bridges add mass to the system, which can be either beneficial or counterproductive.
If, with fresh strings, a bass lacks sustain and/or tuning stability, one should check the body to neck joint, as well as the bridge to body joint. Also the machine heads may require tightening.
A high mass bridge does mitigate neck dive.

 

[RodRy]

So look, I know this isn't as hotly contested as "tonewood" or even poly vs nitro. BUT! Is a high mass bridge worth the cost?

I design water and sewer systems now, but I ran a machine shop for 15 years before and I appreciate nice machine work. I think it's cool, so a nifty hunk of metal is just beautiful to me. I really want to buy a Babicz bridge ONLY because it looks awesome - tone is not the priority here (despite the poll option).

Do you like high mass bridges? Hate them? What's your faves? Also if you have a Babicz let me know how you like it.

If you're wondering it's going on a Blonde Fender Classic 50's PBass.

I like anything that's well made. I can appreciate a high mass bridge, or a lower mass one like the Hipshot A series in aluminum. I'm even curious about the carbon fiber ones from Gotoh. Of course, all of my basses have exactly the bridge that came on them, so what do I know? Always good to have options.

 

[RodRy]

Depending on what you replace it with, many aftermarket bridges can provide conveniences like greater ease of setting string height and intonation. Some even allow you to lock those settings in place. Still others let you adjust the string spacing. If those features are helpful to you, the replacement may be worth it.

As far as sustain, punch, tone, etc. those things are pretty subjective. Any improvement in those areas is likely to be small.

Totally good points. I like bridges that allow me to simply loosen the strings and take them off of the bridge. Clearly a through-body design does not allow that. My Wilkinson bridge on my old (91?) Carvin has pins that the ball ends hook on. Super easy to change strings.

 

[micguy]

A high mass bridge does mitigate neck dive.

A high mass bridge does indeed help in keeping the bass's neck from diving, but I don't appreciate the fact that it
is trying to pull my neck to the floor.

 

[Gianni "Orlandez" Orlati]

So look, I know this isn't as hotly contested as "tonewood" or even poly vs nitro. BUT! Is a high mass bridge worth the cost?

I design water and sewer systems now, but I ran a machine shop for 15 years before and I appreciate nice machine work. I think it's cool, so a nifty hunk of metal is just beautiful to me. I really want to buy a Babicz bridge ONLY because it looks awesome - tone is not the priority here (despite the poll option).

Do you like high mass bridges? Hate them? What's your faves? Also if you have a Babicz let me know how you like it.

If you're wondering it's going on a Blonde Fender Classic 50's PBass.

The thing about Jamerson for me ...

 

[JOME77]

This bridge will cure all your problems. It'll cure your asthma, too!

View attachment 3840316

Also know to generate antibodies for Coronavirus!