Jack Hack

[nofi]

seriously, i can't think of a single time where i thought more sustain would be a good idea. why 'more sustain' is pushed on bass products is a mystery to me. maybe useful for one of those extended range solo guys...

[PhilT]

I can't see the attraction of the Supertone either. It seems a very high price to pay, both aesthetically and financially, to make something easier that isn't that difficult, or needed that often. Maybe I don't pay the attention to intonation that I should.

And then there's the disconnected tone pot. Going back to Rob's response to my original post, actually I do very rarely use them. So how is always fully open different tonally from by-passed?

[Psycho Bass Guy]

I can't see the attraction of the Supertone either. It seems a very high price to pay, both aesthetically and financially, to make something easier that isn't that difficult, or needed that often.

Same here.

And then there's the disconnected tone pot. Going back to Rob's response to my original post, actually I do very rarely use them. So how is always fully open different tonally from by-passed?

There's a very slight resistance just by running the pickup through a tone pot at all, even fully open. I'm from the other end of the spectrum; I find most passive pickups to be too bright and upper midrange-heavy, especially cheaper ones.

[Mungi]

If you don't use the tone pot then just put in a dummy for aesthetic reasons. In my Jackbass I never use the tone pot. I put in a Varitone in a Darkstar modded Dearmond Guild Starfire and for those PUs the Varitone was very useful.

I would never put in a Supertone for added sustain. If there is any added sustain, which I very much doubt, it is almost unnoticeable. And why one would need added sustain is beyond me. But it does help with intonation and with the bridge coming out of the body. If that is not an issue for you, then you should certainly not bother with it. The bridge coming out can be fixed by just using superglue.

[uwe]

A neck thru TBird certainly doesn't crave for more sustain, when I play a Fender I sometimes think in the 15th fret "wouldn't it be nice if it held the tone just a little longer now?", but in reality that would take away from the Fender's attack and snappiness in the low register. What bolt-on construction and flimsy original bridge give you there, they take away in the upper register and vice versa. And then there is always those people that even when playing in the upper register like a fast attack, short decay sound, which is fine if funky, percussive  runs are your thing.

Anyway, the Supertone's sustain benefit is minimal, just barely hearable (and I'm a sustain cultist, which is why I hate JAE's latter day sound because all the sustain came from his OTT amplification and none from the bass as his low action preference was tone-defeating).

[Mungi]

A bit of OT here, but is it really the bridge (Supertone, string through or whatever) that one should depend on for added sustain? Wouldn't it be easier just to have a bit of overdriven tubes to get the sustain? I am asking here, cos I don't know and haven't thought about it at all (never felt I missed out on sustain).

[Dave W]

A bit of OT here, but is it really the bridge (Supertone, string through or whatever) that one should depend on for added sustain? Wouldn't it be easier just to have a bit of overdriven tubes to get the sustain? I am asking here, cos I don't know and haven't thought about it at all (never felt I missed out on sustain).

Right. Even a mildly overdriven signal will give most players all the sustain they need.

Also, there are always tradeoffs. A heavier bridge sustains more because it keeps more energy in the strings. This also usually means more low end presence. OTOH more energy kept in the strings means less energy transmitted to the body, which means that body and neck resonance are less a part of the sound.

A certain manufacturer's website says (or used to say) that their bass bridge not only has great sustain, it's made of some special metal for maximum transfer of tone to the body. Well, that's advertising bullshit. You can lean one way or the other, but you can't have more of both.

[Mungi]

Right. Even a mildly overdriven signal will give most players all the sustain they need.

Also, there are always tradeoffs. A heavier bridge sustains more because it keeps more energy in the strings. This also usually means more low end presence. OTOH more energy kept in the strings means less energy transmitted to the body, which means that body and neck resonance are less a part of the sound.

A certain manufacturer's website says (or used to say) that their bass bridge not only has great sustain, it's made of some special metal for maximum transfer of tone to the body. Well, that's advertising bullshit. You can lean one way or the other, but you can't have more of both.

How about string through then? Isn't that suppose to add sustain and transfer tone to the body?

[Dave W]

How about string through then? Isn't that suppose to add sustain and transfer tone to the body?

I've heard those claims for years, but nobody has shown that stringing through the body does anything other than change the break angle over the bridge. Now, if you don't have enough of a break angle, stringing through could possibly make a difference. But if you don't have enough break angle, that's due to a poor setup -- a bad neck angle, poorly cut nut, etc. If you have a proper setup, it won't do anything you can hear.

[Mungi]

Interesting! So, last question, how about Tune-o-matic? What does it and does not do?

[uwe]

You mean the three point? 

[uwe]

I've heard those claims for years, but nobody has shown that stringing through the body does anything other than change the break angle over the bridge. Now, if you don't have enough of a break angle, stringing through could possibly make a difference. But if you don't have enough break angle, that's due to a poor setup -- a bad neck angle, poorly cut nut, etc. If you have a proper setup, it won't do anything you can hear.

It does increase saddle pressure considerably and that causes less buzz and a more consistent signal if you really dig in hard. More saddle pressure will also give you a deeper sound but whether you like that or not is a matter of taste, it is not automatically better.

[Mungi]

You mean the three point? 

No, sorry, this is all OT. I mean tune-o-matic style bridges in general. Those two piece bridges with a bridge and a separate string holder, or floating tailpiece also for that matter. Theoretically, those would help transfer tone to the body better than other bridges. Right?

[Dave W]

It does increase saddle pressure considerably and that causes less buzz and a more consistent signal if you really dig in hard. More saddle pressure will also give you a deeper sound but whether you like that or not is a matter of taste, it is not automatically better.

The string pressure on the saddle doesn't change, just the direction of the force.

I've only compared with a Fender Am Deluxe bridge, there was no noticeable buzz or saddle rattle either way and no detectable difference in tone.

[Dave W]

No, sorry, this is all OT. I mean tune-o-matic style bridges in general. Those two piece bridges with a bridge and a separate string holder, or floating tailpiece also for that matter. Theoretically, those would help transfer tone to the body better than other bridges. Right?

I would think the opposite, that having the bridge only contact the body on the two posts and having the tailpiece separate would isolate the bridge from the body more than a typical one-piece bridge/tailpiece that sits flat on the body. That's what Alembic uses and they are almost fanatical about isolating the body. But I haven't seen any direct comparisons between the two types.