Pickup on rails? :)

[Arx]

Wow.. I got really behind not reading this yesterday.

Don: thanks for the info.

Joe: As Don said, the series/parallel difference just causes the effective total capacitance, inductance, and resistance to add differently. Without entering a whole lot of parameters for each pickup, there would be no way to do this.
Out of phase is pretty simple, though as you say, it's not used much on bass. I have been playing with it a little bit though, and you can get some interesting sounds by putting the pickups out of phase, and then strongly attenuating one. Mostly useless though.

Regarding my pickup close to the bridge idea. I'm not looking for the most even response, just the most predictable. I did say that the EQ would be tricky, and noise/microphonics are likely to be a problem because of the huge boost required.

If I picked a point further away, I would get more fundamental and low harmonic content, but I would have to deal with the comb filtering effects. Also I would have to deal with the nulls, unlike the pickup at the bridge, where I'd be closer than the first null of the highest frequency I care about.

I should be able to get away with a 6dB/octave lowpass filter, with 20dB or so of overall gain. It'll take some careful design/shielding to keep the noise out, but it should work.

If I moved it further away I would need an inverted version of the comb filter. It would require more precise tuning, and would still need some pretty big peaks to cancel out most of the nulls. They would theoretically need infinite gain, which sounds like a pain. Any noise picked up at that frequency would be hugely amplified too.

PS: If you look at that first screenshot, you should notice that I have a 6dB/octave slope from sub-audible to a couple kHz.

 

[lemur821]

I don't see how I am reading the chart wrong, but please clear it up if you can. (Your post does not help me so far.)

You're reading it wrong because you're saying that the 12th-fret position gives good harmonic response, when in fact there are massive gaps starting just above 200Hz in the picture you posted. The bridge-position picture, on the other hand, doesn't have these gaps until almot 5kHz. While specific harmonics aren't generally significant, I would bet that the first two or three are!

I base my statement about the quieter fundamental and low harmonics on the difference between J-bass bridge position and P-position, because those are the most extreme positions commonly used. The difference between the two was about 10dB for the fundamental, and I assume you have EQ with +/-15dB or so which is precise enough to boost where you want.

 

[WarriorJoe7]

Thanks for chiming in Don. Thanks for clearing all that up for me. There are a few things I misunderstood. I need to read the article now before I ask more questions. I will probably have more suggestions and maybe I should email them to you or you could see them here. You can explain them away and not do them as you like since you know more than us obviously. And it's not like you HAVE TO update anything but if you do they would be mere suggestions from an actual player.

What could "all the harmonics in the best pattern" possibly mean? And
why is it a myth?

Well I guess I could have phrased this a whole lot better but I was thinking that the picture with the .1 wide pickup was best because it has the best potential to capture all the harmonics evenly. You have too understand a few things about us bassplayers. Frequencies below about 600-800Hz are really by far the most important to us and generally we know that, but not much more. We want to have a thick sound characterized by a heavy low end. The myth pertains to this... by having more even upper harmonic content we can still have a really thick sound. the truth is that it may may us sound thin and we may have to roll off all those highs anyways.

Why is that counterintuitive? Wavelength is inversely proportional to
frequency. Tweeters are small, woofers are large. A wide pickup is
not going to be able to sense short wavelength action on a string.

Oh yeah the reason I said that having a wide pickup not capture as much seems counterintuitive, well not to you, but to us a bassplayers. Most of us here are not engineers When we think about basses that we know we generally think of pickups sounding how they look. A thin jazz bass pickup sounds thin, and a thicker musicman pickup sounds more powerful. Soapbars are somewhere in between. What is counterintuitive is that the smaller thinner pickup captures more frequencies. This is obvious to you but not to us. (us bassplayers would probably tend to think that the more powerful sounding pickup captures more frequencies, but in truth it captures more LOW frequencies as compared to high frequencies.

Anyways hope you understand why we didn't know.

So I need to read the article before i comment on the applet anymore. Thanks for the links. It is good that you mention the article on your page. It should have been a cue to go read them (maybe emphasize it more so you could encourage the user to read them LOL Not your fault but I genuinely tried to figure it out by using them. The setting defaulted to 110Hz is probably what threw me off on my understanding of it.)

 

[WarriorJoe7]

At the same time, the 12th fret pickup gives much better response than the bridge pickup because, the bridge pickup is rolled off to -20dB at 110Hz. (-20dB is 1/100 as loud as 0dB. No EQ will fix this.) As a matter of fact under the gray bar where most of the 1st, 2nd and third harmonic lie, it only reaches -10dB which is still only 1/10th as loud as 0dB. You may be able to boost that -10dB part of it, but because EQs aren't perfect it is going to sound SUPER muddy. I could probably explain this better if needed.

IMO having that lull after the fundamental is A LOT better (for bass in particular) than having a -20dB drop at 110Hz. Which means that it gives better harmonic response for a bass (or that is what I meant when I said it.)

Don does point out that having a pickup near the bridge gives the best response for synth converters and it makes sense for that application. A synth converter is only reading for one frequency between say for example 220Hz and 880Hz (or whatever they optimized it for.) Only that band of frequencies is important. And since the one near the bridge has the most even response over that range, it is the most suitable for that application.

However the sound you want out of your bass to go into an amp is not just in this small band. You want to catch as much harmonic content as possible, especially at the low end. Since this is a bass the first few harmonics of a given note are way more important than the rest. So the one that works for synth would noth be best for this application. The one near the 12th fret would be much much better.

The bridge-position picture, on the other hand, doesn't have these gaps until almot 5kHz. While specific harmonics aren't generally significant, I would bet that the first two or three are!

The bridge position pickup is SEVERELY LACKING until around the 4th or 5th harmonic of A. The first harmonic is -20dB down and the 2nd not much better. The 3rd start to show up at -10dB which is STILL 10 times less volume than 0dB. An eq will not fix the first and 2nd harmonic and would be a stretch for the 3rd.

Now I understand an eq will not fix the null in the 12th fret pickup either but atleast the fundamental is nice and strong there.

As a matter of fact I just noticed this but it's a nice pattern. The 12th fret cuts the scale length in half. If you just look at the A note for the 12th fret pickup, the crest is on the 1st, 3rd and 5th harmonic, with nulls on the 2nd, 4th, and 6th harmonic and I believe it goes on the same pattern as ou go up.

The 4th picture shows the thin pickup at 8.5 inches which is 1/4 of the scale length. Once again looking at A (multiples of 110Hz,) the 1st and 2nd harmonic are near the crest and the 3rd harmonic is a null. I can't tell about the 4th harmonic because there is no yellow line and it gets all scrunched up.

Anyways it's funny how if you put the pickup at certain nodes of the string it puts nulls at certain harmonics. I never knew that until now.

Well all in all Don says that harmonics are not important. I need to go read his article. I am not entirely convinced of that right now for myself though he very well could be right. It makes me wonder why we have eq if certain harmonics aren't important. Now I understand that upper harmonics would not be very important to most instruemnts beside some cymbals, but the first few harmonics would seem to be very important (I am also not talking about the mix of a whole group of instruments but the singular voice of one particular instrument.) The first few harmonics does alot to change the character of that instrument in the mix. I could be wrong but this is what makes sense to me. If harmonics didn't matter than it wouldn't matter at all if you used the bridge or neck pickup in a certain application, and we can tell by the activity here that this is not at all true in real life.

You're reading it wrong because you're saying that the 12th-fret position gives good harmonic response, when in fact there are massive gaps starting just above 200Hz in the picture you posted. The bridge-position picture, on the other hand, doesn't have these gaps until almot 5kHz. While specific harmonics aren't generally significant, I would bet that the first two or three are!

I base my statement about the quieter fundamental and low harmonics on the difference between J-bass bridge position and P-position, because those are the most extreme positions commonly used. The difference between the two was about 10dB for the fundamental, and I assume you have EQ with +/-15dB or so which is precise enough to boost where you want.

 

[Arx]

At the same time, the 12th fret pickup gives much better response than the bridge pickup because, the bridge pickup is rolled off to -20dB at 110Hz. (-20dB is 1/100 as loud as 0dB. No EQ will fix this.)

As a matter of fact under the gray bar where most of the 1st, 2nd and third harmonic lie, it only reaches -10dB which is still only 1/10th as loud as 0dB. You may be able to boost that -10dB part of it, but because EQs aren't perfect it is going to sound SUPER muddy. I could probably explain this better if needed.

The a pickup at the 12th fret will give you the strongest fundamental, and strongest odd harmonics, with nulls on all the even harmonics. at the 24th fret will give you the strongest even harmonics, but with nulls at the fundamental and all odd harmonics. In theory, if you could put your two pickups at those locations you'll get all of the harmonics at good strength. The problem is that as soon as you put a finger on a fret, you're not at the 1/2 and 1/4 points anymore, so it doesn't work.
regarding no "EQ" fixing that, it's certainly not impossible. When I say EQ, I mean equalization in general, not your conventional 3 band pre-amp. A 6dB per octave slope is about the simplest filter out there and should manage easily. My main worry is making it too sensitive to other non-string-related sounds. for example, if I thump on the pickup with my finger, how loud will it be in the low frequencies... Things like that.

And yes, if you try and boost it with your bass knob, or 9 band eq on your amp, it'll probably sound pretty gross.

IMO having that lull after the fundamental is A LOT better (for bass in particular) than having a -20dB drop at 110Hz. Which means that it gives better harmonic response for a bass (or that is what I meant when I said it.)

No doubt about that, but if I equalize out the drop, I have a (theoretically) flat response. I don't know if that's awesome or not, but I plan to find out.

The bridge position pickup is SEVERELY LACKING until around the 4th or 5th harmonic of A. The first harmonic is -20dB down and the 2nd not much better. The 3rd start to show up at -10dB which is STILL 10 times less volume than 0dB. An eq will not fix the first and 2nd harmonic and would be a stretch for the 3rd.

yep. Might want to call it "at the bridge" pickup or something, or you're going to get comments from people who play their j-bass soloed on the bridge pickup.

But yes... WIthout purpose designed equalization, it'll sound awful.

Now I understand an eq will not fix the null in the 12th fret pickup either but atleast the fundamental is nice and strong there.

As a matter of fact I just noticed this but it's a nice pattern. The 12th fret cuts the scale length in half. If you just look at the A note for the 12th fret pickup, the crest is on the 1st, 3rd and 5th harmonic, with nulls on the 2nd, 4th, and 6th harmonic and I believe it goes on the same pattern as ou go up.

The 4th picture shows the thin pickup at 8.5 inches which is 1/4 of the scale length. Once again looking at A (multiples of 110Hz,) the 1st and 2nd harmonic are near the crest and the 3rd harmonic is a null. I can't tell about the 4th harmonic because there is no yellow line and it gets all scrunched up.

Yep, the pattern works indefinitely.. That's what makes it harmonic.

Anyways it's funny how if you put the pickup at certain nodes of the string it puts nulls at certain harmonics. I never knew that until now.

Well all in all Don says that harmonics are not important. I need to go read his article. I am not entirely convinced of that right now for myself though he very well could be right. It makes me wonder why we have eq if certain harmonics aren't important. Now I understand that upper harmonics would not be very important to most instruemnts beside some cymbals, but the first few harmonics would seem to be very important (I am also not talking about the mix of a whole group of instruments but the singular voice of one particular instrument.) The first few harmonics does alot to change the character of that instrument in the mix. I could be wrong but this is what makes sense to me. If harmonics didn't matter than it wouldn't matter at all if you used the bridge or neck pickup in a certain application, and we can tell by the activity here that this is not at all true in real life.

I think what Don probably means is that calculating the harmonics won't really get you anywhere. the harmonics are certainly important, but you can't possibly align everything to the harmonics unless you have a string and pickup for every note you want to play. At that point you'll have something a lot less like a bass, and more like a harp.

The spectral content is a little easier to calculate and is probably a better way to look at things. It looks crazy when you graph it, but that comb filtering effect is a lot of what makes a bass sound like a bass.

-Nick

 

[WarriorJoe7]

Cool Nick. Please if you can (if you are using any kind of decent sound program like soundforge or even better) please capture the spectrum analyzer shot of the before and after and sound clips also. I am talking about your "at the bridge" pickup and trying to eq out a flat response. You can rig up a bridge pickup ABOVE (on the other side) of the strings as close to the saddles as you want to get for the "at the bridge" pickup. just tape some blocks of wood to your bass and then the pickups to the blocks of wood, polepieces down towards the strings. I guess the trick would be to get the wood the right height since it only takes a little space to make a big differerence. (You probably know all this. I am just trying to be clear for everyone else.) Then it's only a matter of going into a DI if necessary then into your computer or computerized mixer into a decent program with an good eq and spectrum analyzer graph. Let us know how it goes.

I actually agree that calculating the harmonics will probably not help anything but it would be nice to kinda see what is going on.

 

[WarriorJoe7]

Also I must not one very important thing that seems by experience to be just as important as pickup placement... wher you strike the string. I wonder if there is a formula for that and it can be put into the applet. doubtful but worth asking.

If you have an "on" neck pickup (which has more fundamental) but play near the bridge it can sound thinner then playing directly over an "on" bridge pickup. Vice versa. If you play an "on" bridge pickup at the 12th fret it can sound thicker than playing directly over an "on" neck pickup. But if you have control over both the pickup placement and the playing placement then you have more tonal flexibility overall. Is it worth it? who knows? and that would probably be a question for each of us individuall anyways.

 

[Arx]

Cool Nick. Please if you can (if you are using any kind of decent sound program like soundforge or even better) please capture the spectrum analyzer shot of the before and after and sound clips also. I am talking about your "at the bridge" pickup and trying to eq out a flat response. You can rig up a bridge pickup ABOVE (on the other side) of the strings as close to the saddles as you want to get for the "at the bridge" pickup. just tape some blocks of wood to your bass and then the pickups to the blocks of wood, polepieces down towards the strings. I guess the trick would be to get the wood the right height since it only takes a little space to make a big differerence. Then it's only a matter of going into a DI if necessary then into your computer or computerized mixer into a decent program with an good eq and spectrum analyzer graph. Let us know how it goes.

I actually agree that calculating the harmonics will probably not help anything but it would be nice to kinda see what is going on.

Yep, I'll certainly be doing some sound clips. It'll be buffered well enough that I won't need a DI box.

I'll be building my own pickup for that one, since its ideal characteristics will be different from a conventional pickup. It'll likely be an extremely high output active stacked humbucker. I think that would be the best suited for the job.

-Nick

 

[lemur821]

At the same time, the 12th fret pickup gives much better response than the bridge pickup because, the bridge pickup is rolled off to -20dB at 110Hz. (-20dB is 1/100 as loud as 0dB. No EQ will fix this.) As a matter of fact under the gray bar where most of the 1st, 2nd and third harmonic lie, it only reaches -10dB which is still only 1/10th as loud as 0dB. You may be able to boost that -10dB part of it, but because EQs aren't perfect it is going to sound SUPER muddy. I could probably explain this better if needed.

The difference in the fundamental between normal bridge position and neck position pickups is around 10dB, which is not extreme and can be easily compensated for. You seem to be thinking that it's desirable to have as much fundamental as possible in your tone, which I can assure you is not the case. The 12th fret gives ludicrous response which you would probably hate. If innate low end is what you are interested in, you need to be comparing your bridge position pickup to nothing lower than the 24th fret, which is still more extreme than any popular model of bass.

IMO having that lull after the fundamental is A LOT better (for bass in particular) than having a -20dB drop at 110Hz. Which means that it gives better harmonic response for a bass (or that is what I meant when I said it.)

For a 12th fret pickup, that dip is right on the second harmonic of the open string. If you cut that out, you're cutting out all your punch.

However the sound you want out of your bass to go into an amp is not just in this small band. You want to catch as much harmonic content as possible, especially at the low end. Since this is a bass the first few harmonics of a given note are way more important than the rest. So the one that works for synth would noth be best for this application. The one near the 12th fret would be much much better.

What I really need is to have the fundamental and the first two or so harmonics represented. What you're not grasping is that the further you go from the bridge, the lower the point where you lose these. At the 12th fret, you're losing open-string harmonics that really count. If they're a little quiet they can be turned up if need be, but you can't EQ back in a complete lack of one of these important harmonics. I also need some harmonics in the high mids and would like some highs as icing as well, but the exact higher harmonics are not important.

The bridge position pickup is SEVERELY LACKING until around the 4th or 5th harmonic of A. The first harmonic is -20dB down and the 2nd not much better. The 3rd start to show up at -10dB which is STILL 10 times less volume than 0dB. An eq will not fix the first and 2nd harmonic and would be a stretch for the 3rd.

Now I understand an eq will not fix the null in the 12th fret pickup either but atleast the fundamental is nice and strong there.

It's nice and overpowering. You'd need to EQ it down quite a bit to get a usable tone your amp can reproduce. Your ideas about what kind of harmonic balance sounds best are skewed.

 

[WarriorJoe7]

You seem to be thinking that it's desirable to have as much fundamental as possible in your tone, which I can assure you is not the case. The 12th fret gives ludicrous response which you would probably hate.

Well I could actually rig up a rail pickup at the 12th fret to see what it sounds like. I know I don't have it all down perfect and I am learning as the thread goes along... however I think some of your ideas are not quite right either... like how you can just eq in a 20dB drop that varies upwards over a range. You might be able to do this in a software program but not on any cheap common hardware that I know of. IMO if you really think a pickup at the bridge and any kind of normal EQ on a bass or an amp is going to correct it and sound good, then clearly your idea of a good sound is skewed. But this would be just an opinion too. Ultimately I can't tell you what will sound good to you.

At the 12th fret, you're losing open-string harmonics that really count.

At the 12th fret the chart doesn't even apply. You have to do a new chart with a 17 inch scale. This is a point I was going to make to Tillman also (which is why I am still going to request a fret clicking feature.)

The difference in the fundamental between normal bridge position and neck position pickups is around 10dB, which is not extreme and can be easily compensated for.

if you are talking about regular jazz bass pickup positions, then yes I agree with you, and have already said this exact thing in a previous post. If you are talking about the pickup "at the bridge" then I disagree (-20dB is not easy to correct. OK it might be on a computer but what bass player is going to run his bass into a computer to EQ it live?)

or a 12th fret pickup, that dip is right on the second harmonic of the open string. If you cut that out, you're cutting out all your punch.

On this point I may agree with you. A simple test would be to measure the distance from the saddles to the middle of the neck pickup. If it is 5 inches then go another 5 inches and see which fret you land near. Play that note. Though this is on a very short scale (which may skew the result in some way) it would have the same type of effect effect on the open string with the 12th fret. (I could see how this might lose punch as it is often the case that this is true on basses when played in the higher frets.) But a test would need to be done to prove this conclusive.

you need to be comparing your bridge position pickup to nothing lower than the 24th fret, which is still more extreme than any popular model of bass.

This was the very next picture that I did, and I said even then that it was more realistic. Taking a closer look at the frequency chart I could see how this would be better than the 12th fret IF your idea about losing punch holds up, which it might. Nick (Arx) brought up the interesting point about if you mixed the 12th fret pickup and the 24th fret pickup together.

I hope that you don't think that -20dB or even -10db is only "a little quiet." I also hope that you don't think that any simple on board EQ or bass amp EQ can really handle a boost of 10dB exactly where you need it if you were to have a pickup right "at the bridge."

It's nice and overpowering. You'd need to EQ it down quite a bit to get a usable tone your amp can reproduce. Your ideas about what kind of harmonic balance sounds best are skewed.

Really then? Well go look at the musicman sized pickup that is in the jazz neck position. I bet that this would sound pretty thick but not unusable. As a matter of fact there are people who put mudbuckers near there neck and I have played an MM bass in the neck position and it never stuck out as being wrong (I usually use flat EQ because I usually hate it. This is why i wish for a moving pickup for moe natural tone versatility.)

 

[DonTillman]

WarriorJoe7:

Well I guess I could have phrased this a whole lot better but I was
thinking that the picture with the .1 wide pickup was best because it
has the best potential to capture all the harmonics evenly.
​

It's not clear that "capturing all the harmonics evenly" is a good thing. This is a musical instrument after all, and you want it to be expressive and to have character. Equal harmonics is not going to get you there. Heck, a short pulse waveform has all harmonics evenly, and that's not a good sound. And acoustic instruments have resonances all over the place.

You have too understand a few things about us bassplayers. Frequencies below about 600-800Hz are really by far the most important to us and generally we know that, but not much more. We want to have a thick sound characterized by a heavy low end.
​

Dude, you've mentioned "bass players" a bunch of times as if you think I'm unfamiliar with the craft. Heh, I've probably been playing bass longer than most of the folks on this board have been alive (30-something years). I'm mostly into progressive rock, jazz, fusion and 60's pop.

That said, what I like in a bass sound is not necessarily what anybody else wants in a bass sound.

-- Don

 

[Arx]

Well I could actually rig up a rail pickup at the 12th fret to see what it sounds like. I know I don't have it all down perfect and I am learning as the thread goes along... however I think some of your ideas are not quite right either... like how you can just eq in a 20dB drop that varies upwards over a range. You might be able to do this in a software program but not on any cheap common hardware that I know of. IMO if you really think a pickup at the bridge and any kind of normal EQ on a bass or an amp is going to correct it and sound good, then clearly your idea of a good sound is skewed. But this would be just an opinion too. Ultimately I can't tell you what will sound good to you.

To EQ in the 20dB at a 6db/octave slope will require a $1 op amp, A small <$1 capacitor, and some $.02 resistors. Pretty cheap common hardware IMO. Whether I have noise problems and stuff is is completely separate issue, and is yet to be determined.

On this point I may agree with you. A simple test would be to measure the distance from the saddles to the middle of the neck pickup. If it is 5 inches then go another 5 inches and see which fret you land near. Play that note. Though this is on a very short scale (which may skew the result in some way) it would have the same type of effect effect on the open string with the 12th fret. (I could see how this might lose punch as it is often the case that this is true on basses when played in the higher frets.) But a test would need to be done to prove this conclusive.

But it won't sound punch if you're playing it at the top of your fretboard, even if the harmonics are proportional.

This was the very next picture that I did, and I said even then that it was more realistic. Taking a closer look at the frequency chart I could see how this would be better than the 12th fret IF your idea about losing punch holds up, which it might. Nick (Arx) brought up the interesting point about if you mixed the 12th fret pickup and the 24th fret pickup together.

Yes, though I also stated that fretting stuff changes the picture entirely, so it's not really practical.

I hope that you don't think that -20dB or even -10db is only "a little quiet." I also hope that you don't think that any simple on board EQ or bass amp EQ can really handle a boost of 10dB exactly where you need it if you were to have a pickup right "at the bridge."

It will be a very simple EQ. Pretty much the simplest practical EQ possible. But if you mean a canned, off the shelf standard guitar EQ, then you're correct. It won't give you the adjustability needed.

WarriorJoe7:
It's not clear that "capturing all the harmonics evenly" is a good thing. This is a musical instrument after all, and you want it to be expressive and to have character. Equal harmonics is not going to get you there. Heck, a short pulse waveform has all harmonics evenly, and that's not a good sound. And acoustic instruments have resonances all over the place.

You have too understand a few things about us bassplayers. Frequencies below about 600-800Hz are really by far the most important to us and generally we know that, but not much more. We want to have a thick sound characterized by a heavy low end.
​

Dude, you've mentioned "bass players" a bunch of times as if you think I'm unfamiliar with the craft. Heh, I've probably been playing bass longer than most of the folks on this board have been alive (30-something years). I'm mostly into progressive rock, jazz, fusion and 60's pop.

That said, what I like in a bass sound is not necessarily what anybody else wants in a bass sound.

-- Don

I don't know, I think having all the harmonics even might be kind of cool. It'll certainly be unique. I could also introduce an electronic comb filter, which should allow me to simulate pickup(s) in any position(s).

And re: the "Bass players" thing, I agree entirely. Not all of us can be so easily characterized. Some of us are bass players AND physics/audio/electronics geeks.

-NIck

 

[WarriorJoe7]

To EQ in the 20dB at a 6db/octave slope will require a $1 op amp, A small <$1 capacitor, and some $.02 resistors. Pretty cheap common hardware IMO. Whether I have noise problems and stuff is is completely separate issue, and is yet to be determined.

Nick I agree with you totally. Yes yours cheap common hardware, what I meant is that you will not find this in cheap common hardware THAT IS ALREADY BUILT. Sure you can do it cheap, but is anyone else offering this? If you searched hard enough maybe you would find something but for all practical purposes, yours is close to a one-off.

But it won't sound punch if you're playing it at the top of your fretboard, even if the harmonics are proportional.

I don't know that I necessarily agree, plus we could get in an argument over what sounds punchy and what doesn't (no thanks!) But I have to say IMO of punch, that when you play up high many basses loses punch when soloing the neck pickup, but gain atleast some of it back if you solo the bridge pickup. Once again a real life test is in order. This one can be done without modifying the bass but it comes down to our definitions of punch, so the results will vary individually (not to mention the particular bass and plenty of other things about it being different.)

Yes, though I also stated that fretting stuff changes the picture entirely, so it's not really practical.

I agree plain and simple for most realistic applications. If you had an actuator though it'd be interesting. I don't think I will be able to pull this off though. LOL. STill being able to fret it would be more practical than what currently exists. If that is not practical then neither is the whole applet.

It will be a very simple EQ. Pretty much the simplest practical EQ possible. But if you mean a canned, off the shelf standard guitar EQ, then you're correct. It won't give you the adjustability needed.

This is the point I was trying to make, not that it can't be done cheaply, but that it hasn't been done cheaply in commonly available hardware for bass. What regular bass player out there will be able to do this? Well if your results are cool then maybe someone will make this common!!!

I don't know, I think having all the harmonics even might be kind of cool. It'll certainly be unique. I could also introduce an electronic comb filter, which should allow me to simulate pickup(s) in any position(s).

I agree with this too. Your comb filtering is beyond me (I wouldn't know how to implement this) but I was just thinking a low pass filter used with something with even level harmonics would give something cool. Honestly I would think it was really super cool if you could have a bass that NATURALLY sounded like a bass synth, instead of triggering some delayed midi junk. So these ugly noises (like short pulse waveform) do have a purpose, and in today's dance music driven world these noises are more common then ever, probably to more than half the forum's dismay, but are we playing for oursleves or what the crowd wants? (though to be honest I think it would be cool for myself.

And re: the "Bass players" thing, I agree entirely. Not all of us can be so easily characterized. Some of us are bass players AND physics/audio/electronics geeks.

-NIck

Sorry Don, I did not mean to exclude you as a bass player. I figured you played guitar (which is way different don't get me started on my opinion here LOL.) I could have phrased it better had I known this. I would have said the same thing about you being an engineer and musician, versus a large majority of us being non-engineers and bass players. What is obvious to you is not obvious to us, and it's just because we haven't studied what you have. I wasn't trying to insult you, but you ARE in a different camp than most of us... and apparently so is Arx. I am somewhere in between, having worked as an Engineer but not really designing any electronics/audio things.

 

[DonTillman]

Arx:

I could also introduce an electronic comb filter, which should
allow me to simulate pickup(s) in any position(s).
​

Actually no, and that's a major point of the first of my articles.

The frequency response you get from a pickup at a given location scales with each string, so each string effectively gets its own comb filter tuned in parallel with the string's open frequency.

That characteristic is unique to the electric guitar and bass; you won't find it in any other instrument, acoustic or electric. It's an intrinsic part of the character of the instrument. It's there to enjoy!

You can't fake it with filtering... unless you had a separate pickup, preamp and comb filter for each string... which is what the Roland VG thing does... which I describe in the article.


-- Don

 

[DonTillman]

WarriorJoe7:

I agree with this too. Your comb filtering is beyond me (I wouldn't
know how to implement this) but I was just thinking a low pass
filter used with something with even level harmonics would give
something cool.
​

A comb filter is a filter whose response curve looks, hey, like a comb; a series of peaks and nulls, equally spaced. As an analog filter they're difficult to implement, because each peak and null ups the complexity. On the other hand time delays, and digital filters, which are basically time delays internally, naturally exhibit comby behavior.

But, if you really really want to have even harmonic level, if that's really your goal, I'll be happy to tell you exactly how to do it:

1. Start with a Steinberger instrument, or equivalent, without body
resonances.

2. Use a piezo pickup. Piezo's have a flat response, from almost DC
to ultrasonics, and instead of sensing the displacement of the
string at a given point, they measure the pressure on the bridge.
No comb fiter action, no nodes.

(Note that piezo's naturally double the harmonics.)

3. Then you'll want to set the tone controls to flat, or bypass.

4. And play through a PA cabinet, as guitar/bass cabinets usually
have lots of resonances.​

Problem solved... go nuts, man.

I on the other hand will be doing it old school.

-- Don

 

[Arx]

Arx:

I could also introduce an electronic comb filter, which should
allow me to simulate pickup(s) in any position(s).
​

Actually no, and that's a major point of the first of my articles.

The frequency response you get from a pickup at a given location scales with each string, so each string effectively gets its own comb filter tuned in parallel with the string's open frequency.

That characteristic is unique to the electric guitar and bass; you won't find it in any other instrument, acoustic or electric. It's an intrinsic part of the character of the instrument. It's there to enjoy!

You can't fake it with filtering... unless you had a separate pickup, preamp and comb filter for each string... which is what the Roland VG thing does... which I describe in the article.


-- Don

WarriorJoe7:

I agree with this too. Your comb filtering is beyond me (I wouldn't
know how to implement this) but I was just thinking a low pass
filter used with something with even level harmonics would give
something cool.
​

A comb filter is a filter whose response curve looks, hey, like a comb; a series of peaks and nulls, equally spaced. As an analog filter they're difficult to implement, because each peak and null ups the complexity. On the other hand time delays, and digital filters, which are basically time delays internally, naturally exhibit comby behavior.

But, if you really really want to have even harmonic level, if that's really your goal, I'll be happy to tell you exactly how to do it:

1. Start with a Steinberger instrument, or equivalent, without body
resonances.

2. Use a piezo pickup. Piezo's have a flat response, from almost DC
to ultrasonics, and instead of sensing the displacement of the
string at a given point, they measure the pressure on the bridge.
No comb fiter action, no nodes.

(Note that piezo's naturally double the harmonics.)

3. Then you'll want to set the tone controls to flat, or bypass.

4. And play through a PA cabinet, as guitar/bass cabinets usually
have lots of resonances.​

Problem solved... go nuts, man.

I on the other hand will be doing it old school.

-- Don

Good point about the individual string thing... I never thought of that. OTOH, it might not sound bad either. It might make the higher strings sound too different from the lower ones, though. I'll experiment with it and find out.

As far as comb filter implementation goes I haven't thought about it too much. Off the top of my head, I'd say a digital time delay is probably ideal. I'm planning to do a programmable digital effects box sometime in the future, so I'll play with it then. It's a few projects down the road though.

Really, my goals are pretty loose sound wise so it'll be hard for me to fail. I consider it play, like grown-up lego. I'm going to build something a little bit "outside the box" and see how it sounds. After that I'll decide what that sound is good for.

-Nick

 

[lemur821]

if you are talking about regular jazz bass pickup positions, then yes I agree with you, and have already said this exact thing in a previous post. If you are talking about the pickup "at the bridge" then I disagree

Of course I'm talking about normal jazz bass positions. I don't think a pickup much closer to the bridge will give you a good enough signal to noise ratio. Not just for low frequencies, but for highs as well, where a boost will produce audible hiss. Especially not with a single coil.

Really then? Well go look at the musicman sized pickup that is in the jazz neck position. I bet that this would sound pretty thick but not unusable. As a matter of fact there are people who put mudbuckers near there neck and I have played an MM bass in the neck position and it never stuck out as being wrong (I usually use flat EQ because I usually hate it. This is why i wish for a moving pickup for moe natural tone versatility.)

My point exactly. Standard pickup positions are standard for a reason, and most basses don't even come with what I consider a proper neck pickup (I think of the J-bass neck position as "middle"). While it's quite possible that a neck pickup positioned similarly to the one on a Strat would be useful, I don't think going much past there will be fruitful.

 

[DonTillman]

Additional bit...

A flanger, with the sweep action held still, is a comb filter.

(That's pretty much the definition of a flanger.)

-- Don

 

[Arx]

I've been playing with this. There's a new thread here:http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6079836

 

[Son of Magni]

Additional bit...

A flanger, with the sweep action held still, is a comb filter.

(That's pretty much the definition of a flanger.)

-- Don

If it's not at the zero delay point