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.
How much sustain I get depends on what note I'm playing. That brings us back to resonance.
As a rule i generally measure sustain in Guitar Center with an old blackberry modified to run version 1.0 of the "sustainer app" before i buy the bass, then i fill as much of the control cavity with melted down brass as i can before i pass out from the fumes. I've never had a sustain issue as most of my basses weigh around 16 lbs this way, if i measure less than 30 seconds of solid sustain on the low H string i either use more brass or just sell the bass in the classifieds and list the weight in KG, noone ever notices.
Last edited:
I used to buy the heavy is sustain thing. My first "light" bass was my 35" scale PV Accellerator 5 string. It had lots of resonance. I loved feeling that. No sustain issues.
My main bass is a Line 6 Variax 5 string. I used to weigh nearly 13 lbs. I built a Stingray copy using a very light P bass body...really light. That bass was my "4th set" bass.
My Line 6 got busted up in a truck accident. Over the next year I rebuilt it, and I chambered the body, removing over 3lbs of wood.
Dang if it didn't hurt the sustain at all. I hollowed all I could. The bass looks the same.
My 4th set Stingray knockoff sustains just fine.
My old 64 P bass (stolen around 1983 in Nashville) was rather heavy. The sustain was not great. I used Rotosound rounds. I replaced the bridge with a Shaller roller bridge, and I loved the change in sustain.
I've built a lot of guitars. As I age, they keep getting lighter. No sustain problems. I used to like high mass bridges, and passed on stamped steel saddles. On one guitar I bought a Wilkinson stamped Strat trem. Danged if I didn't love the sound and feel. It's my favorite guitar bridge. It always ends my vibrato tuning problems.
My main bass is a Line 6 Variax 5 string. I used to weigh nearly 13 lbs. I built a Stingray copy using a very light P bass body...really light. That bass was my "4th set" bass.
My Line 6 got busted up in a truck accident. Over the next year I rebuilt it, and I chambered the body, removing over 3lbs of wood.
Dang if it didn't hurt the sustain at all. I hollowed all I could. The bass looks the same.
My 4th set Stingray knockoff sustains just fine.
My old 64 P bass (stolen around 1983 in Nashville) was rather heavy. The sustain was not great. I used Rotosound rounds. I replaced the bridge with a Shaller roller bridge, and I loved the change in sustain.
I've built a lot of guitars. As I age, they keep getting lighter. No sustain problems. I used to like high mass bridges, and passed on stamped steel saddles. On one guitar I bought a Wilkinson stamped Strat trem. Danged if I didn't love the sound and feel. It's my favorite guitar bridge. It always ends my vibrato tuning problems.
I walked into a music store and they had an Ibanez guitar hanging. It was sort of a hollowed Les Paul sort of thing, with F holes, but a rather thin body. I ran my fingernail across the strings, and it sustained better than any other guitar I've ever encountered. You could strum it, and walk around the store listening to it ring, acoustically.
I saw the same model in another store, but it didn't sustain like that one.
I saw the same model in another store, but it didn't sustain like that one.
I see your problem, you forgot to add the Illudium PU-36 to the melted down brass.
You don't see them often anymore, but there were Invalid Link Removed that added a large block of mass which required routing the body to take it. Even Fender makes some high mass bridges as well as the common "upgrade", the Badass bridge.
I am not convinced that more weight equals greater sustain.
I am not convinced that more weight equals greater sustain.
Can't really say I've ever played a bass that had too little sustain, no matter what it weighed. Most of them had more sustain than I needed. Which is why I always thought proper muting technique was so important to get a good handle on when you're first learning to play bass.
With a guitar endless sustain might be important because the thin string crowd likes to hold onto notes forever sometimes. But to me that's more a gee-tar thing than a bass thing.
I just lightly plucked a note on the PBass I'm holding. It's strung with flats. And the note sustained for a good 8 seconds. The open strings ring for about 10 seconds. That's enough temporal space to drive a truck through in your average song. Rounds on a newer bass would probably sustain for three or four times that. And maybe even longer on an active bass.
So sustain is definitely not an issue with an electric bass AFAIC. I mostly think some of those old "innovations" were attempts to solve a nonexistent problem when it comes to bass.
With a guitar endless sustain might be important because the thin string crowd likes to hold onto notes forever sometimes. But to me that's more a gee-tar thing than a bass thing.
I just lightly plucked a note on the PBass I'm holding. It's strung with flats. And the note sustained for a good 8 seconds. The open strings ring for about 10 seconds. That's enough temporal space to drive a truck through in your average song. Rounds on a newer bass would probably sustain for three or four times that. And maybe even longer on an active bass.
So sustain is definitely not an issue with an electric bass AFAIC. I mostly think some of those old "innovations" were attempts to solve a nonexistent problem when it comes to bass.
Last edited:
The weight is just to hold the bassist down. Can't let him get all carried away and upstage the guitarz
It certainly will in my hands! With a fretted, I at least have a 1 in 12 chance of hitting the right note...with my fretless, odds get much worse!
This is correct all things equal, but different density in woods should mean more sustain. The higher amount of force to let it resonate negligible, but so is the sustain. Bridge, neckconstruction and output of pups is more important.
So after finding (and removing) the heavy brass block from the BB2000 - I've been enjoying the weight savings. I have a BB1200s that the bridge looks to be the same, so I pulled the bridge off to see if there was a brass block on this one too --- and on this one the bridge itself has a big heavy brass block cast into the bridge and the body it routed to accept the massive bridge. The bass sounds great and the weight isn't too bad - but apparently Yamaha was experimenting with different methods during this time period. the natural one is the BB2000 with the removable brass block and the black one is the BB1200s with the weight integrated into the bridge. The bodies are otherwise identical construction.
Actually, it's the rigidity between those endpoint connections.
Rigid endpoint connections attached by a thick rubber rod won't result in much sustain.
A super rigid but featherweight strut between rigid endpoint connections may have some sustain with lightweight guitar strings,
but heavy bass strings will cause the whole thing to vibrate/move in sympathy, so sustain will be absorbed by the lack of mass.
The more I weigh the less time I'm able to sustain certain physical activity's so I don't believe that more weight equals more sustain. But seriously I've owned heavy and light basses and found no big difference in sustain. Besides how much sustain do we really need? If I can hold a note for two measures its more than good enough for me.
Thought this was correct until I got a few REALLY LIGHTWEIGHT basses that sustain forever.
Ones I can think of:
Galveston USA flag bass in P/J configuration
Greco VB500(solid body violin bass with Bada$$ bridge)....call it a balsa wood bass, amazing little critter
Ones I can think of:
Galveston USA flag bass in P/J configuration
Greco VB500(solid body violin bass with Bada$$ bridge)....call it a balsa wood bass, amazing little critter
Let me have a go at this:
I would not believe weight, as much as density, and location. I do not know much about sound waves, but I am assuming the denser the wood and hardware, the less it is going to rattle when the stings are struck.
The key I would think, would allow the strings to complete their- cycle- let us call it, in unison with the wood and hardware, allowing these pieces to resonate the sound back into the strings per sound-wave cycle.
Imagine a rope being struck, half of that rope is the string, the other half is the instrument; each side has to work together in order for their wave-lengths to have the best sustain. If you have one side of the rope cycling at one speed, and the other another speed, the average wavelength will not have the highest "peak," and often cancel each other out, thus providing less sustain.
Sorry if that makes no sense. I have a limited musical engineering background.
I would not believe weight, as much as density, and location. I do not know much about sound waves, but I am assuming the denser the wood and hardware, the less it is going to rattle when the stings are struck.
The key I would think, would allow the strings to complete their- cycle- let us call it, in unison with the wood and hardware, allowing these pieces to resonate the sound back into the strings per sound-wave cycle.
Imagine a rope being struck, half of that rope is the string, the other half is the instrument; each side has to work together in order for their wave-lengths to have the best sustain. If you have one side of the rope cycling at one speed, and the other another speed, the average wavelength will not have the highest "peak," and often cancel each other out, thus providing less sustain.
Sorry if that makes no sense. I have a limited musical engineering background.
