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.
Tech advances in basses since the early days
- Thread starter JimmyM
- Start date
The power and value in amplification, the improvements in consistent construction methods for basses, and the implementation of digital capabilities for effects units. These are the three things which I’ve noticed to be super useful improvements since I started playing in the early nineties.
Not many huge improvements in the overall construction of quality basses. A few innovations that are a tad niche, though.
Not many huge improvements in the overall construction of quality basses. A few innovations that are a tad niche, though.
I thought about including this, but I think that while Ned Steinberger was the first to use it to make guitars and basses, he didn't invent the materialAnd though I do think the rods do possibly help with stability and dead spots, I don't think it's been proven beyond doubt. I still have to tweak the bass I have that has rods in winter and summer (I live in central Florida...spring lasts about a week here) just like the rest.
Innovative for the manufacturers for sure, and doesn't bother me in the least like it does some.
I predict this is going to be the big "controversy" in this thread. Other than you, I think the lovers of Dingwalls and other multi-scale basses are going to argue that it is an innovation on the basis that Ralph Novak got a patent on it, and they might have a point. It had long fallen into disuse in modern instruments, too. But the reasons for using it in medieval times are the same reasons Ralph Novak did it, so I'm leaning toward how you think about it, but you have to hand it to the guy for making it happen either way.
I have owned a couple of multi-scale basses. They were cool but I never saw a benefit towards playability and sound, especially the low B string. I believe, based on the 5-strings I have played and currently play, manufacturers have figured out how to get a good sound from the B string with a standard 34” scale.
Lightweight 800 watt bass combos and amps!
My new amp weighs 20 lbs and is good with electric and upright.
Basses are getting less expensive at entry level and stupid expensive at the high end level.
My new amp weighs 20 lbs and is good with electric and upright.
Basses are getting less expensive at entry level and stupid expensive at the high end level.
When it comes to the instruments themselves, I think manufacturers should focus of ergonomics and easy access to parts as well as ease of setup.
Bridges that can be lowered and raised, Nuts that can be lowered and raised and spread out in between, solderless pickups that are just plug in/plug out, easy to understand designs without too many screws.
Warwick does some of it right, other companies do other things better.
Also, lightweight stuff. Please.
Bridges that can be lowered and raised, Nuts that can be lowered and raised and spread out in between, solderless pickups that are just plug in/plug out, easy to understand designs without too many screws.
Warwick does some of it right, other companies do other things better.
Also, lightweight stuff. Please.
After reflecting on it for a day or so, I really think the biggest, and one of the best, is modern manufacturing.
I bought my first bass (MiM Fender J) in 1993 for $400. It has served me well over the decades, but I’ll absolutely say it still had a few issues that I had to fix or learn to put up with. I avoided anything lower end than that, I wanted nothing to do with a Squier, I’d seen too many really janky Squiers. Low end basses were really, really risky purchases, in my experience.
Today, more often than not, I can buy a lower priced bass that’s going to have better fit and finish than my Fender J, consistently. It is an entirely different bass buying world today than it was 28 years ago.
I bought my first bass (MiM Fender J) in 1993 for $400. It has served me well over the decades, but I’ll absolutely say it still had a few issues that I had to fix or learn to put up with. I avoided anything lower end than that, I wanted nothing to do with a Squier, I’d seen too many really janky Squiers. Low end basses were really, really risky purchases, in my experience.
Today, more often than not, I can buy a lower priced bass that’s going to have better fit and finish than my Fender J, consistently. It is an entirely different bass buying world today than it was 28 years ago.
Software has made huge strides in the last 10 years. When I first started playing bass, it was pretty obvious when you heard modeling amps in Logic, but these days they are indistinguishable from the real thing. I've heard extremely professional sounding recordings that were just made in Garageband using built-in effects and a single audio interface. The level of sophistication that you can get for so little cost is absolutely unreal.
I see the active 5 string basses and hipshot extenders as a direct reaction to keyboard bass syths that started coming on strong in mid 70's. It was a way for us to fit into the new bass lines that were below the open E string and compete. Anything
that makes a Electric Bass easier to play gets my vote. So light weight tuning gears, chambered bodies, ergonomic necks and 34" 5 strings all get my vote.
that makes a Electric Bass easier to play gets my vote. So light weight tuning gears, chambered bodies, ergonomic necks and 34" 5 strings all get my vote.
As far as amps go I've been a fan of Class D lightweights for several years. I never have to cart that heavy SVT again since I can simulate it adequately using my SABDDI into the Class D or PA.
A design that's somewhere between the Fender Vintage-Style and Babicz FCH Z Series 4 String?
If the design uses a bent steel base plate but with CNC fabricated saddle hardware for better or more sure intonation and action setup that could be quite scalable as far as production is concerned. Whether there could be a market for such a thing. (Insert shrug emoji here)
Maybe it's time to reinstall SolidWorks on my PC.
Last edited:
graphite or carbon fiber neck reinforcement is huge.
not that you can't have a good bass without it, but my keepers? all have insanely stable necks. basses that i'll literally forget to tune on a gig because it's no longer routine because they're so rock solid.
fanned frets are an innovation, i personally don't use it, but it's certainly cool.
flexibility with string length. with upright basses, string length was never standard. nowadays you may see an old yankee bass with a 45" string, and you may see some solo instruments with a 37" string. glad that is now in the electric world, everything from 30" to 36" seems to exist. I love me some 33"
not the instrument itself but when it comes to effect pedals: when effect pedals surpassed actual tube amps. this is somewhat subjective, but i can post recordings that use a VT bass or the BDDI that came before it, they actually perform as a tube amp. that's a huge, huge, huge innovation i think. having the amount of drive you want at any volume. med-volume but full crunch, light hair at huge volume, that's a big deal. your SVT can't do that!! For me, the VT bass was the first to authentically recreate a tube amp. there are others out there now, but i still own my v1 VT bass.
not that you can't have a good bass without it, but my keepers? all have insanely stable necks. basses that i'll literally forget to tune on a gig because it's no longer routine because they're so rock solid.
fanned frets are an innovation, i personally don't use it, but it's certainly cool.
flexibility with string length. with upright basses, string length was never standard. nowadays you may see an old yankee bass with a 45" string, and you may see some solo instruments with a 37" string. glad that is now in the electric world, everything from 30" to 36" seems to exist. I love me some 33"
not the instrument itself but when it comes to effect pedals: when effect pedals surpassed actual tube amps. this is somewhat subjective, but i can post recordings that use a VT bass or the BDDI that came before it, they actually perform as a tube amp. that's a huge, huge, huge innovation i think. having the amount of drive you want at any volume. med-volume but full crunch, light hair at huge volume, that's a big deal. your SVT can't do that!! For me, the VT bass was the first to authentically recreate a tube amp. there are others out there now, but i still own my v1 VT bass.
Willis ramps & truss rod wheels.
For decades, basses were either painted or varnished (That includes poly etc). Some started to use exotic woods for the top of the body to improve the looks. Then, some luthiers started using exotic woods as a way to alter the organic sound of the instrument. We now see wood combinations that were not offered (and not imagined) 15 years ago.
Here are a couple innovations I think are very useful and cool but have NOT caught on.
1 - the low string extender design that we saw on Kubicki basses in the 80s. Rather than detuning the string from E to D by reducing tension like a Hipshot extender does, this design uses a whole-step longer scale for the low string than for the other strings, with two extra frets, so that the string's natural behavior was as a D. There was what amounted to a single-string capo that shortened the scale and made it into an E.
The main advantage is that all the notes are in the same place along the neck whether you have the capo on or not, whereas with a Hipshot the note geometry changes when you engage it.
I believe this sort of design has been in common use on upright basses for some time. It's simpler to look at than it is to explain, and worked really well on the basses I tried. Probably too expensive to manufacture.
2 - Ironically also a Kubicki thing, the laminated neck made of many thin pieces of wood. Was it 23 pieces on the Factor? It provided total neck stability without sacrificing the sound of wood. Again, probably too expensive to build though.
1 - the low string extender design that we saw on Kubicki basses in the 80s. Rather than detuning the string from E to D by reducing tension like a Hipshot extender does, this design uses a whole-step longer scale for the low string than for the other strings, with two extra frets, so that the string's natural behavior was as a D. There was what amounted to a single-string capo that shortened the scale and made it into an E.
The main advantage is that all the notes are in the same place along the neck whether you have the capo on or not, whereas with a Hipshot the note geometry changes when you engage it.
I believe this sort of design has been in common use on upright basses for some time. It's simpler to look at than it is to explain, and worked really well on the basses I tried. Probably too expensive to manufacture.
2 - Ironically also a Kubicki thing, the laminated neck made of many thin pieces of wood. Was it 23 pieces on the Factor? It provided total neck stability without sacrificing the sound of wood. Again, probably too expensive to build though.
Last edited:
One nitpick for the OP: Round wound strings are not an innovation in the bass guitar realm. They existed long before the first bass guitars (look inside an old piano or harpsichord). Leo could have chosen round wounds, but he was trying to emulate an upright sonically, which is why flats ended up on the first Precisions.
Since I started back in 70's . . . .
CAD/CAM and CNC have eliminated to a great extent the variability in production axes. Of course, wood weight and density is always the loose end here, but now when you try out 4 or 5 of the same thing, the weight will vary somewhat, but the necks and bodies feel alike. Was NOT like that back then.
True low-impedance active pickups. Fewer turns for less noise and magnetic dampening with a preamp in the shell or circuit to boost back to normal output, ability to put the pickup right next to the strings if desired with no penalty, and generally far quieter operation.
The great spread of aftermarket pickups for most platforms, from mild to wild, didn't exist back then. The Seymours, DiMarzios, and so many others were just starting out back then, you couldn't select from over a 100 different Jazz Bass pickups as you can now. Even passive pickups are built better now.
Hardware, particularly bridges and keys, are a big jump over the old days. Far more precise, far lighter if need be, and the bridges you can pick from now range from bent plates to engineering wonders.
And I think the reason for the 'looks mighty old' look on brand new basses is simply because if you have to wait out a modern poly finish looking that old, you may not live that long. If you'd have told me then guys would pay big money for fake cigarette burns, scratches, and peeled-away lacquer and grungy parts, I'd have never believed it. Still don't, really.
But without the huge leaps in bass amp technology and the speaker cabinets to go with them, all of the above is just academic. It was simply understood back in the 70's that the regular club rig was a head and a 215 bin. And you'd have to hope for the best you could cover things with it.
12's and 10's were simply for guitars, and front-loaded or W-bin 18's were still common. The '200 watt' heads common back then (Peaveys, Sunns, Fenders, and the rest) were straining at the transistors to make that figure, and when they did, well we'll just say that's why we didn't need distortion pedals back then. And the drivers in the cabs, whether Black Widows or JBL's rode a tricky balance of living through the distortion and power near their limits. I never heard myself properly until I built a component rig with a CS800, it never farted out ! That's why component and/or biamp rigs reared their head for a while, it was the only way we could be louder AND clean.
The move to a brighter, tighter sound, led by brands like the original Trace Elliot and SWR, GK, and others, with higher power, clearer tone, came along as the components and drivers began to improve for designers to use. The drivers themselves improved markedly, and computer modeling aided in making the now better-braced and damped cabinets perform better.
That you can today simply plug in and be stoopid loud AND clean and have to buy distortion on the outside is a complete revolution for us Neanderthals who used to be in the cartage business . . . . . for ourselves.
CAD/CAM and CNC have eliminated to a great extent the variability in production axes. Of course, wood weight and density is always the loose end here, but now when you try out 4 or 5 of the same thing, the weight will vary somewhat, but the necks and bodies feel alike. Was NOT like that back then.
True low-impedance active pickups. Fewer turns for less noise and magnetic dampening with a preamp in the shell or circuit to boost back to normal output, ability to put the pickup right next to the strings if desired with no penalty, and generally far quieter operation.
The great spread of aftermarket pickups for most platforms, from mild to wild, didn't exist back then. The Seymours, DiMarzios, and so many others were just starting out back then, you couldn't select from over a 100 different Jazz Bass pickups as you can now. Even passive pickups are built better now.
Hardware, particularly bridges and keys, are a big jump over the old days. Far more precise, far lighter if need be, and the bridges you can pick from now range from bent plates to engineering wonders.
And I think the reason for the 'looks mighty old' look on brand new basses is simply because if you have to wait out a modern poly finish looking that old, you may not live that long. If you'd have told me then guys would pay big money for fake cigarette burns, scratches, and peeled-away lacquer and grungy parts, I'd have never believed it. Still don't, really.
But without the huge leaps in bass amp technology and the speaker cabinets to go with them, all of the above is just academic. It was simply understood back in the 70's that the regular club rig was a head and a 215 bin. And you'd have to hope for the best you could cover things with it.
12's and 10's were simply for guitars, and front-loaded or W-bin 18's were still common. The '200 watt' heads common back then (Peaveys, Sunns, Fenders, and the rest) were straining at the transistors to make that figure, and when they did, well we'll just say that's why we didn't need distortion pedals back then. And the drivers in the cabs, whether Black Widows or JBL's rode a tricky balance of living through the distortion and power near their limits. I never heard myself properly until I built a component rig with a CS800, it never farted out ! That's why component and/or biamp rigs reared their head for a while, it was the only way we could be louder AND clean.
The move to a brighter, tighter sound, led by brands like the original Trace Elliot and SWR, GK, and others, with higher power, clearer tone, came along as the components and drivers began to improve for designers to use. The drivers themselves improved markedly, and computer modeling aided in making the now better-braced and damped cabinets perform better.
That you can today simply plug in and be stoopid loud AND clean and have to buy distortion on the outside is a complete revolution for us Neanderthals who used to be in the cartage business . . . . . for ourselves.
Last edited:
Fodera's dual action truss rod is most likely the coolest thing I've seen
My personal favorite ideas are Triggers and dusting pickups
Triggers can write midi to use or not to use in post or just for a kick on the down to shake the place .
want real a challenge trying to play kick and snare with the groove .
Triggers can also be used to control stage lighting
Dusting a pickup is like adding a new spice to a pickups tone
My personal favorite ideas are Triggers and dusting pickups
Triggers can write midi to use or not to use in post or just for a kick on the down to shake the place .
want real a challenge trying to play kick and snare with the groove .
Triggers can also be used to control stage lighting
Dusting a pickup is like adding a new spice to a pickups tone
Last edited:
I started out with 15s, and I believed anything smaller than that just wasn't suitable for bass.
Now, I play through 5" speakers. While I'm fully aware it isn't for everybody, I think Phil Jones' development of quality bass gear using 5" speakers represents an advancement in bass technology.
