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.
String Spacing Rant and Other Musings
- Thread starter Jack Deth
- Start date
I've checked the magnetic field of dipole pickups such as the Fender style using EMG magnetic field viewing tape at the normal string to pickup distance and the field is a contiguous strip over and between the poles and not discrete pools around the poles so there is no practical reason to be concerned that moving the string within that contiguous area will effect the tone or volume. I've used bridges with adjustable spacing for years with no ill effect from moving the strings
Just to put things in perspective, Fender did adjustable bridge spacing, starting in 1957 with this very practical and effective approach. They still sell them.
Fender apparently abandoned the sensible design for a while, but have re-introduced the same principle in the last few years, but in a modern and attractive package.
Fender apparently abandoned the sensible design for a while, but have re-introduced the same principle in the last few years, but in a modern and attractive package.
Since last year Cort makes this "Jack of all trades" model named GB74 GIG with an adjustable string space Omega bridge. The price of this bass is not exactly Cort'y though.
I've swapped between several different string spacings ranging from Fender standard to Hofner and it took very little time to get used to it. Unfortunately, after a minor stroke 2 years ago that effected my right side, swapping to more narrow spacing was a problem since my fingers didn't work as well as they did and I would hit the wrong string or miss a string completely on the narrow spacing so I had to bench my Hofners while I did some healing. After about a year and a half I was able to work the Hofners back in and now it's no problem.
Couldn't care less whether the polepieces line up with the strings. That's all OCD stuff to me, and I don't have it. And there are plenty of bridges that have adjustable string spacing, starting with this one that first appeared in 1958, I believe:
My all time favorite bridge. Elegant and genius in it's simplicity.
Definitely with different string gauges. I used to be a fan of 130+ B strings until I tries the low B flat that Fender used to make. It would have been nice to be able to slide the big B string a little further away from the E string
My Fender Precision’s saddles have several grooves each spanning 3/8”. My Warwick, have saddles that can be moved side to side and locked in place with a set screw.
I’m going to venture a guess the saddles on my PJ could have been and aftermarket acquisition, but something like that is a quick fix.
Right? Dunno if Fender thought of it first (he may have), but when it debut'd in 1957 I can imagine other guitar builders thinking...."threaded saddles, why didn't we think of that!"
As much as I love the old Fender design, it is not pretty by today's standards, but it was never meant to be seen. I admit that the new one is a handsome piece of metalwork and should be just as functional. It also satisfies players who want a bridge with more mass.
I feel the same way about obsessing over "tight neck pockets". As if some tiny bit of lateral tightness is going to add one iota of clamping force to 4-6 torqued-down wood screws. It's not, and I could pose a question to the tight pocket believers that would be very hard to answer. And I'm not even an engineer!
US Robotics. It’s real. Scary stuff they have for sure. They made a dog, and what looks like a pack mule too.
Right? Dunno if Fender thought of it first (he may have), but when it debut'd in 1957 I can imagine other guitar builders thinking...."threaded saddles, why didn't we think of that!"
As much as I love the old Fender design, it is not pretty by today's standards, but it was never meant to be seen. I admit that the new one is a handsome piece of metalwork and should be just as functional. It also satisfies players who want a bridge with more mass.
I really like these Fender HMV bridges. They're solid, their sound is true, they're rugged and all adjustments are very precise. I like how the ball ends of the strings can only mount to the back of the bridge one way which locks them in place and helps to avoid twisting the strings upon install. I also like the allen wrench adjustability of the bridge pieces forward/back screw ... it adds precision and prevents the screw from tightening/loosening on it's own. I have that HMV bridge on four of my basses and consider it to be about as good as anything, IMHO.
Last edited:
I guess nobody informed DARPA that they were fake:
Invalid Link Removed
Side note: I was wrong, just only about the company name. It’s actually Boston Dynamics, my apologies.
Home | Boston Dynamics
[EDIT: the contest for DARPA is what resulted in those robots. The one in my original post was not a winner back then because it is more recent, but that company had one that was really eerie.]
[EDIT 2: Atlas (robot) - Wikipedia]
Last edited:
I realize robots are real, I'm just saying the ones in the first video you showed is clearly fake.
Did you look at the Atlas robot from that DARPA research? Let’s assume the first video is in fact CGI generated. The Boston Dynamics Atlas robot by itself is proof enough.
[EDIT: that first vid was in fact a spoof, you are correct. I still stand by my statement though that they are real.]
[EDIT: that first vid was in fact a spoof, you are correct. I still stand by my statement though that they are real.]
