weight and sustain

[/\/\3phist0]

there is no correlation between mass (weight) and resonance.
20lbs of lead is less resonant than a block of equivalent "harder" lighter material say titanium.
in fact resonance, is exactly what causes dead spots.

 

[KickingBass]

I haven't noticed a correlation between weight and sustain, but bridge design, neck stiffness, and overall structural rigidity seem to affect it. For example, when I replaced the bridge on an MIM Jazz with a Gotoh, I noticed a more focused tone, with more sustain. The most sustain I've experienced is on my G&L USA M-2500, which has a high mass bridge, ultra-stiff quartersawn neck, and six-bolt neck attachment.

yikes I said something like that about my gotoh bridge on my Fender recently and got jumped by the more knowledgable in the setup forum.

 

[DigitalMan]

I'll take the Geddy Lee route on sustain. If the music calls for a whole note or more I will switch to Tarus pedals because I'm too busy to be bothered playing long notes like that with my hands.

 

[Planespotter]

The sustain of my basses varies, but all of them have far, far more than I've ever needed.

 

[mantaraya]

Well, from a Physics perspective, it's a double edged sword, because:

Once the instrument is resonating it should remain so for longer given more mass.

Getting the whole instrument to resonate becomes more difficult with more mass.

Nice descriptión. The best one I've read to describe correlation between resonance And sustain. I have always tought of it exactly as a double sword

 

[Killed_by_Death]

Yeah, it's kind of like a train. They're really difficult to get moving, but once they are, it's even more difficult to stop them.
Momentum & Resonance are similar in that perspective.

 

[bikeplate]

Heavier basses having better tone or sustain is a myth. I'm gonna try to find a pic of the Loch Ness monster

 

[MCS4]

I haven't noticed a correlation in my basses. Also, I've never owned a well-constructed instrument and wished it had more sustain... any of my basses can hold out a note longer than I would ever need, barring some sound-effect/pad type scenario in which I would already be relying upon some type of pedal or other intervention.

 

[Killed_by_Death]

there is no correlation between mass (weight) and resonance.
20lbs of lead is less resonant than a block of equivalent "harder" lighter material say titanium.
in fact resonance, is exactly what causes dead spots.

You're describing density, not mass.

If you take a material that is resonant & give it more mass, it will remain resonant longer than a smaller piece of material of the same density.

 

[subsonicbassist]

I agree with the consensus here, enjoy the lighter bass! I have a super heavy 5 string Warwick, but it has less sustain than a chambered Mike Lull jazz that weighs close to half the weight!!!

 

[SeattleSunn]

My G&L basses have the best sustain of the collection. They are on the lighter side, but they have the same heavy solid bridge.

 

[Norwegian Bass]

I prefer a light resonant instrument over a heavy one any day of the week. Sustain isn't everything IMO. And a light bass that's put together well, will sustain longer than a heavy bass with not as good a build. My Sadowsky (8 Lbs) has longer sustain than a 11 Lbs Stingray I had; that was not the usual standard from EBMM. That heavy = good sentiment was a "70s thing"; wasn't it? I view the C.F Martin philosophy is sound when it comes to guitar instrument building.

 

[strictlybass_ic]

I could see weight relating to sustain in that a bass which is more rigid, or made from more dense material would potentially have better sustain and consequently also feel heavier. I could also see instrument makers capitalizing on that "intuitive" perception and placing irrelevant weights in their instruments to make a would-be owner perceive it as having better sustain.

 

[AshInAmsterdam]

(non-bass answer, but relevant)

A Gibson SG resonates like no-ones business. Mine resonates more than my Les Paul, which ways twice as much. The sustain goes on and on like no-one's business.

So I'll say no, more weight does not mean more sustain. After all plywood is pretty heavy.

 

[jazzyvee]

I've been searching a bit more. Apparently Alembic used to put brass blocks under the bridge (found one post saying that all the brass hardware added up to 1.5 pounds) ... and there were some posts suggesting some alliance between Alembic and the early Yamaha BB2000.

Anyway ... thought it was interesting to find that heavy brass block.

Alembic still put brass sustain blocks in their more expensive instruments, Series I & II, Signature, Europa & Rogue models as standard. Other models can have them fitted if required.

 

[Jughead6]

If you want your strings to vibrate for longer (sustain) then you need to design or choose an instrument so that the energy imparted to the strings during picking or plucking stays in the strings for longer. In other words, you don't want that energy to be transferred to the outside world through the contact points (bridge and nut).

The strengths/rigidities of the neck and body woods are important factors in influencing energy transfer. Necks are often made of maple (heavy) and sometimes fitted with steel reinforcing rods (also heavy) in order to achieve higher strength/rigidity. Although heavier materials are often more rigid, there are always exceptions (graphite rods, carbon fibre necks).

Due to ergonomics/comfort (and possibly also manufacturing difficulty and cost) it seems that most manufacturers choose to use lower weight, less rigid materials for bodies. This will adversely affect sustain.

So, yes, a basswood body is likely to have less sustain than a hard rock maple body. Pros and cons? Well, they're subjective.

And a neck through design will have greater sustain than a bolt on design. Again, the pros and cons are subjective.

All in my opinion, of course.

Personally, I like my fretless basses to be made from lightweight woods because they are more likely to have a woodier, duller sound. And I like my Precision style fretted basses to be made of heavier woods because they are more likely to have a sharper, tighter sound.

Let the arguments continue.

 

[baileyboy]

Even if I bought the weight/sustain thing, I'll take the savings in weight any time.

Yes!

 

[distortion81]

I put a steel block in the floating bridge of my Strat & the sustain was improved, but that has more to do with the transfer of the string vibration, or perhaps less transference to the body.

I think that if you could isolate the vibration to be only between the bridge & nut, you would have the greatest sustain, but I think that's impossible w/o dampening the strings.

In other words, I'm imagining a world where the body of the guitar/bass did not vibrate, but the strings did.

I wonder if those metal to metal aluminum guitars & basses have better sustain over wooden guitars & basses.

This sounds legit, as I heard Paul Reed Smith says the said the same concept too. He said guitar wood and others hardware are subtractive in nature, they do not add extra energy.

 

[Killed_by_Death]

If the music calls for a whole note or more I will switch to Tarus pedals

If you need a pedal to sustain for a whole note, something is wrong with your bass.

 

[mantaraya]

If weight matters And the heavier ones sounds the best then the most sought after would be the ones made in the flinstones era. Those ones made of full stone!!!