Jean-Luc Pickguard Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I tried a badass on my 81 heavy ash precision once. It took away a lot of the punch/attack/oomph. As soon as I put the BBOT back on, the punch/attack/oomph was back - there is a difference & on that precision the difference was so marked that I'm sure I'd be able to tell which bridge was fitted - even with my eyes closed. The main difference I've noticed between neck-thru & bolt-on basses is that you can't shim a neck-thru, but soundwise I dunno as its impossible to compare the same bass with both options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_b Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 If high mass bridges weren't a step forward from the Fender bent pieces of tin Leo Fender wouldn't have put them on all his subsequent designs. The fact that he never used low mass bridges again inspite of the extra cost should tell us something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 (edited) I`ve had Badass bridges, and Gotoh bridges, and in my opinion they do make a slight difference to the sound. To me, they seem to "hi-fi" the sound, almost adding to and tightening the lows, concentrating the highs, and reducing the mids. Ultimately, I preferred the BBOT bridges, I thought the heavy-mass bridges seemed to "de-Fender" the sound of my Precisions. The Gotoh did make the Jazz that I had sound good though. For me, the high-mass bridges emphasise all that is good about a Jazz, but detract all that is good from a Precision. But that`s just my preference, for the sounds I like, not a right or wrong statement. Edited August 18, 2011 by Lozz196 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muttley Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 [quote name='chris_b' post='1343886' date='Aug 18 2011, 12:41 AM']If high mass bridges weren't a step forward from the Fender bent pieces of tin Leo Fender wouldn't have put them on all his subsequent designs. The fact that he never used low mass bridges again inspite of the extra cost [b]should tell us something[/b].[/quote] Yes, it tells us that the marketing people got their own way! If a perceived improvement exists then customers will ask for it. If Fender thought that they were losing sales because of the BBOT bridge/tail then they'd be foolish not to replace it with something else. Put another way, I suspect that: {number of sales lost to having BBOT} > {number of sales lost due to not having BBOT} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterRD350LC Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 String through body uses the string tension to pull the bridge onto the body. Top load uses the string tension to pull the bridge off of the body. It is preferable to have designs that use forces that pull assemblies together rather than apart. Why I prefer string through body. The improvement in tone may be imperceptible but it a design that has load path advantages. All my favourite sounding basses and guitars have string through body so I suspect string through body does improve tone. I suspect anything that makes an instrument stronger and more rigid will improve its tone. I have a 71 Precision that used to be my least favourite bass. It had dead spots on the G string around the fifth string and would hum. I replaced the neck with a Warmoth neck with steel support rods, completely shielded the electrics and converted it to string through body. It is now my favourite bass. It has a clear, deep, full tone and is easier to play. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 The string tension pulls a bolt-on neck away from the body, just like a top mounted bridge. If the bolt-on neck design is ok, then it must be ok to bolt-on the bridge, too, no? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorks5stringer Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 My 72 Telecaster Bass is string through too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neepheid Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 Almost 11 year old Zombie thread - braaaaaaaaains! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorks5stringer Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 12 hours ago, neepheid said: Almost 11 year old Zombie thread - braaaaaaaaains! It's the time of the season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick's Fine '52 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 On 24/06/2022 at 10:03, neepheid said: Almost 11 year old Zombie thread - braaaaaaaaains! Crazy, I just got a notification about a further comment on a post I’d commented on, in 2011. Slow news day! 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geek99 Posted June 26, 2022 Share Posted June 26, 2022 @PeterRD350LC think this thread might be of interest to TimeTeam (ohh more archaeology) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quatschmacher Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 On 16/07/2011 at 15:45, cytania said: Didn't Fender's always used to be strings through bent tin bridge? When did the USA Fenders come to have through body stringing? 1951. The first P bass had a string-through body. 😆 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neepheid Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 10 minutes ago, Quatschmacher said: 1951. The first P bass had a string-through body. 😆 Point already made in the second reply, around 10 years ago... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif.9ad672bb8b84505709f76b39c8c256ec.gif)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.