Double Bass poor mans 3 string conversion

[groooooove]

i saw this yesterday, which i really enjoyed;



particularly the details on his string orders, and that he preferred 3 string basses so much, specifically for their sound.

he mentions that if you simply remove your E string and relieve the ~80lbs of pressure you'll achieve the same results, and if you like you can put notches in your bridge and nut to make it work.

i'm quite curious about this and would love to try it. before i go putting notches in my bridge i'd like to just take the E string off and leave everything where it is- would this achieve the same sound characteristics, just without the wider spacing between strings you'd have on a properly converted 3 string bass?

are there any downsides to taking off my E string and playing the bass like that for a month or two? would the bridge pressure be uneven/problematic if i dont move the other 3 strings?

i'm sure there must be other threads on this that i just couldn't find, please redirect me if you can!

thanks,

T

 

[A. Munk]

 

[bassmastan]

You may also want to swap out the nut and tailpiece, they make a 4/3 tailpiece with an interchangeable nut and bridge ( i think there was a locking mechanism on the nut)

 

[Nathan Levine]

Here are some bridge and tailpiece options.

 

[groooooove]

can anyone give any oppinions about weather or not it changes the sound? (or, in what ways, ext)

i'm interested to hear from anyone whos played the same bass, both as a 3 or 4 string.

going to take my backup bass to a luthier in the morning for a soundpost adjustment, i'll ask him about the 3 string thing for my good bass.

 

[robobass]

Definitely try it out if you're interested. You aren't doing anything non-reversible, risky, or expensive to make this conversion, and you might really dig it. I once broke my Eudoxa E just before a concert and had to play A-D-G for the night. I couldn't believe how much livelier the bass was without the fourth string. Since it was Haydn, there weren't many low notes anyway. Of course you would miss the E if you were playing like Strauss and Mahler, but returning to a four string setup would take only a few minutes. As for first experimenting without moving the strings, I don't see any harm.

 

[iiipopes]

80 pounds? More like 50 to 70, depending on which make, model and gauge of string.

Sweet spot on the tension: we all know basses enough tension to drive the top, but not so much as to choke it. Taking a string off a bass may drop the tension down so that it doesn't drive the top efficiently. It does present some options, like changing out a typical A string for a stark A string, and then tuning it down to G for GDG, and/or using a weich or solo G string for A for ADA or GDA tunings, like the top three strings of a T-I "Red Mitchell Quint" set, or similar.

 

[groooooove]

Definitely try it out if you're interested. You aren't doing anything non-reversible, risky, or expensive to make this conversion, and you might really dig it. I once broke my Eudoxa E just before a concert and had to play A-D-G for the night. I couldn't believe how much livelier the bass was without the fourth string. Since it was Haydn, there weren't many low notes anyway. Of course you would miss the E if you were playing like Strauss and Mahler, but returning to a four string setup would take only a few minutes. As for first experimenting without moving the strings, I don't see any harm.

thats the kind of thing i'm interested in hearing, thanks