The Evolution of Bass Guitar Technology and Beyond...

[Energy]

Edit:
Whoops, I just saw that the "Evolution vs. Creation" topic has already been discussed. And I had a good laugh reading it.

 

[mongo2]

Since I actually spent a good chunk of my life studying, practicing, and teaching science, it galls me to see someone spewing gobbledegook. I always wonder if they know they are FOS or really think they know what they're talking about. Either way, more's the pity.

+1

 

[plangentmusic]

Imagine if Leo Fender had the same frame of mind you do

Not at all analogous.

At the time it was pretty obvious there was a need for a more audible bass. What is the "need" now? Most of what I'm seeing is just one gimmick or another. Fads. Meanwhile, Leo's invention carries on.

Big difference, wouldn't you say?

 

[Rickett Customs]

Not at all analogous.

At the time it was pretty obvious there was a need for a more audible bass. What is the "need" now? Most of what I'm seeing is just one gimmick or another. Fads. Meanwhile, Leo's invention carries on.

Big difference, wouldn't you say?

I've learned that "reinventing the wheel" (or continually copying Leo, in this case) doesn't get you too far, so you've gotta fan out from this, or there is no way to evolve, right? Sure, some things are built upon others, but isn't that change?

and just like the term "evolution", it does not necessarily mean that every "gimmick" is successful, It just means that it may show dramatic improvement later on, thus making "it successful", but who's to say when.

Think about it this way, folks in the 50's couldn't tell us for sure what there would be today (although we have not reached the flying cars and tight space suits and such).... the same can be said of us predicting the next 10 years or so.

 

[SHWAG]

personally, i'd much rather play a mid 50's-early 60's fender p bass thru a Sunn 2000S or a vintage SVT than anything that's come along since.

+1

 

[plangentmusic]

I've learned that "reinventing the wheel" (or continually copying Leo, in this case) doesn't get you too far, so you've gotta fan out from there, or there is no way to evolve, right? Sure, some things are built upon others, but isn't that change?

and just like the term "evolution", it does not necessarily mean that every "gimmick" is successful, It just means that it may show dramatic improvement later on, thus making "it successful"

Fair enough. And I agree. And I think there have been some innovations that although they may be debated whether they're "better" or not, they're certainly "options."

That would include...

active pu's,

extended range necks,

jumbo frets,

superior machinery to produce more consistent assembly line products

higher mass bridges with saddles,

color and finish options.

Now personally, one may not prefer any of these options, but they can't be discounted. But what's happened in the last 20 years that's really changed everything? If anything, there's more of a dismissal of these things and a greater demand for more vintage sounding (and looking) instruments. That tells you something.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Not at all analogous.

At the time it was pretty obvious there was a need for a more audible bass. What is the "need" now? Most of what I'm seeing is just one gimmick or another. Fads. Meanwhile, Leo's invention carries on.

Big difference, wouldn't you say?

No. The "need" for more audible bass was considered a just as much a fad by a lot of players as the things you consider a fad today. The Fender bass was in the same category of 'weird composites, wacky fret design" that you view with disdain now. Electric bass guitar is still considered a fad/lesser instrument/attempt to remake the wheel by a lot of upright players. The "toy" bass is still a gimmick to some, just as some basses/bass alterations that you considered gimmicks are essential to other bassists.

Every generation has some (usually older) folks who think the best has already been created in their or previous generations. There were folks saying "every great bass sound has already been created" before the Ric sound came out, before the Fender bass came out, and so on. Some people latch on to what they like and think it equates to being "good" because they like it, and that any derivation is just making something worse. If Leo Fender felt that way, there's be no Fender bass. As there would be no Ric sound, and there would be no Wal sound, and there would be no fretless electric sound, and so on. There's nothing to benefit from thinking the best lies in the past, and lots to lose. While what you prefer may lay in the past, what someone else prefers may not have been created yet.

 

[Rickett Customs]

If anything, there's more of a dismissal of these things and a greater demand for more vintage sounding (and looking) instruments. That tells you something.

Sure there is (although I can exempt myself ) There have been many things that have stood the test of time, vintage included. But, I feel that is still divided somewhat, but then we're in for another generation change yet, so it's hard to tell if the vintage type instruments and gear will dwindle or thrive during that time, or perhaps we'll turn another corner in technology.

 

[plangentmusic]

No. The "need" for more audible bass was considered a just as much a fad by a lot of players as the things you consider a fad today. The Fender bass was in the same category of 'weird composites, wacky fret design" that you view with disdain now. Electric bass guitar is still considered a fad/lesser instrument/attempt to remake the wheel by a lot of upright players. The "toy" bass is still a gimmick to some, just as some basses/bass alterations that you considered gimmicks are essential to other bassists.

Every generation has some (usually older) folks who think the best has already been created in their or previous generations. There were folks saying "every great bass sound has already been created" before the Ric sound came out, before the Fender bass came out, and so on. Some people latch on to what they like and think it equates to being "good" because they like it, and that any derivation is just making something worse. If Leo Fender felt that way, there's be no Fender bass. As there would be no Ric sound, and there would be no Wal sound, and there would be no fretless electric sound, and so on. There's nothing to benefit from thinking the best lies in the past, and lots to lose. While what you prefer may lay in the past, what someone else prefers may not have been created yet.

I get all that. I just don't think it's analogous.

I'm not resisting change. I've embraced it. That's the irony. After all is said and done, I've found all those things didn't necessarily advance the instrument much. But I do recognize their appeal.

However, I haven't seen anything come along in the last quarter century that is really a big improvement -- except that today you can get a quality instrument for much less than you could 25 years ago.

 

[matt descending]

I get all that. I just don't think it's analogous.

I'm not resisting change. I've embraced it. That's the irony. After all is said and done, I've found all those things didn't necessarily advance the instrument much. But I do recognize their appeal.

However, I haven't seen anything come along in the last quarter century that is really a big improvement -- except that today you can get a quality instrument for much less than you could 25 years ago.

I think the fanned fret innovation is the best in the last quarter century if there is one. Very applicable. There will be more of that I'm sure

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

However, I haven't see anything come along in the last half century that is really a big improvement -- except that today you can get a quality instrument for much less than you could 25 years ago.

It all depends on what you're doing. If you want to lay a track with the classic P tone, there probably won't ever be anything better than a good solid P bass. You can get a more refined version of it with some basic ergonomic improvements, but not much else would need to be changed.

If you want to create a piece of music like Michael Manring's "The Enormous Room," you simply can't play it on a bass like the Fender P- you can't even come close in either tone or in the mechanics of the instrument. That's one of my favorite tunes and IMO one of the best examples of solo bass as music rather than wankery.

All technological changes can be seen as silly, unmusical, or useless until a brilliant mind comes along to show what how what they can do. Bob Moog and the creation of the synthesizer is another great example of that.

What has been no improvement to you has been massive, groundbreaking improvement to others. We need to look past whether we like it or not to truly see if it's made a difference, and maintaining the frame of mind that all the best sounds have already been creating will prevent you from doing that. You also may miss out on some new, unique stuff that you may otherwise would have loved. The instrument is only 60 years old. Assuming we have any concrete knowledge of what or how it will improve in the future would be silly. Almost no instrument these days is the same as it was 60 years after its creation. Bass may function build-wise completely differently in the future but sound the same. It may stay the same basic shape but the "normal" sound may be completely different than it is now. No way of knowing, so might as well keep an open mind about it.

 

[Basshappi]

Well said Speaker-To-Llamas.

*spit*

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Well said Speaker-To-Llamas.

*spit*

What??

 

[mccartneyman]

I too thought the only missing item was Steinberger; had an early L series from the Newburgh shop and it was not sterile at all.

I had an L2 in the 300 serial range, bought in 1982. First session, the engineer says "That bass is a bear!" And it was. Far from sterile -- in fact, very warm when taken direct and set near flat. My only regret is that I sold it in the '90s.

 

[Keith Guitars]

I think the fanned fret innovation is the best in the last quarter century if there is one. Very applicable. There will be more of that I'm sure

In practical terms (re: implementation, especially on basses), I would agree.

However, the funny thing is that multiscale instruments with non-parallel frets have been documented as going back well over 100 years - long before the existence of bass guitars.
This was one of the main complaints from people who challenged the Novax patent, which is AFAIK now expired anyway.

Cheers,
Martin

 

[BurningSkies]

In practical terms (re: implementation, especially on basses), I would agree.

However, the funny thing is that multiscale instruments with non-parallel frets have been documented as going back well over 100 years - long before the existence of bass guitars.
This was one of the main complaints from people who challenged the Novax patent, which is AFAIK now expired anyway.

Cheers,
Martin

You're correct on both accounts. I find the cool thing is that this idea has been brought back from the 'dark ages' and then applied with modern building technique and materials and is very successful when combined with compound radiusing as well as compound neck profile.

I think torzal twist is probably a more innovative concept, but probably too labor and detail intensive to really function on a production level.

 

[WoodyG3]

Woody!
You funnin me?

I did not think that you honestly believed that in 1951 Leo threw some wood, metal, plastic, copper wire and a couple magnets in a trash can, stirred and then poured the contents onto the floor and the P Bass fell out, and then in 1960 did the same thing to make the J?

Say it aint SO!

Yeah, sure, that's what I was sayin'...

Hey, how come nobody has mentioned the UBass yet?

 

[mongo2]

Hey, how come nobody has mentioned the UBass yet?

It's just an acoustic version of the Ashbory.

 

[nostatic]

Hey, how come nobody has mentioned the UBass yet?

Because we're a self-centered lot. Now the MeBass...we're all over that.

 

[J Hud]

Every generation has some (usually older) folks who think the best has already been created in their or previous generations. There were folks saying "every great bass sound has already been created" before the Ric sound came out, before the Fender bass came out, and so on. Some people latch on to what they like and think it equates to being "good" because they like it, and that any derivation is just making something worse. If Leo Fender felt that way, there's be no Fender bass. As there would be no Ric sound, and there would be no Wal sound, and there would be no fretless electric sound, and so on. There's nothing to benefit from thinking the best lies in the past, and lots to lose. While what you prefer may lay in the past, what someone else prefers may not have been created yet.

Amen.

A-friggin'-men.....