Sustain? Discuss.

[LeftyJ]

1 hour ago, discreet said:

I've never understood those who will 'upgrade' a bridge thinking it will give more sustain. In my view it does not, and why would you want it to?

I'm not so sure. I changed the classic bent-steel Fender bridge on my '75RI Jazz to a BadAss II, and you'd be amazed how it affects not only the tone but definitely your conception of the decay of played notes. The tone used to be thumpy and a note would die out fairly quickly. Now it is harmonically richer, tighter and definitely appears to ring out longer. But maybe that's just "feel", due to the richer harmonics.

[discreet]

7 minutes ago, White Cloud said:

Detractors may insist that this is a confirmation bias on my part...but to me I like what I like and I like what I hear and that is good enough!

Yes, it is good enough - I'm a big fan of doing what the hell you like with your own property.  I have 'upgraded' many bridges, in fact my current #1 bass, a Jazz, has a Hipshot Kickass fitted to it. Not for any perceived (or otherwise) tonal reasons, but for aesthetic reasons, and more importantly to have more control over string spacing and therefore position of the strings over the pickup pole pieces.

[discreet]

5 minutes ago, LeftyJ said:

I'm not so sure. I changed the classic bent-steel Fender bridge on my '75RI Jazz to a BadAss II, and you'd be amazed how it affects not only the tone but definitely your conception of the decay of played notes. The tone used to be thumpy and a note would die out fairly quickly. Now it is harmonically richer, tighter and definitely appears to ring out longer. But maybe that's just "feel", due to the richer harmonics.

Without an A/B comparison involving EQ curves and other scientific conditions, I can't prove otherwise. The only time I noticed a difference in tone between bridges was changing from steel to brass saddles, and the brass definitely had less bottom end and more 'twang'. Which is the very opposite of the generally-held belief and not what I wanted at all, so I changed back. Weirdly the brass saddles in the Hipshot Kickass seems to make no difference whatsoever.

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 25, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[Skol303]

46 minutes ago, Jus Lukin said:

...the longer the release, the longer the perceived sustain of the note. However, these things are relative, and the nature of the attack and decay affect how the release portion of the note is perceived. Without ever letting the note ring to full duration, one bass may still have more 'sustain' than another in normal playing situations... So as a kind-of sort-of summary, even when playing a fairly staccato eight-feel, a bass which may be described as having less sustain might 'pop' or 'cut' or 'bounce' more whereas a bass with more sustain may 'roar' or 'thunder along'.

Spot on! Great insight.

[LeftyJ]

14 minutes ago, discreet said:

The only time I noticed a difference in tone between bridges was changing from steel to brass saddles, and the brass definitely had less bottom end and more 'twang'. 

Can confirm the same for the switch from bent-steel bridge to (brass?) BadAss II, sort of. I'm not sure if it's actually less bottom end, but there definitely is more of all the higher frequencies so it can easily be perceived as less bottom end, relative to the mids and highs. 

[discreet]

16 minutes ago, LeftyJ said:

Can confirm the same for the switch from bent-steel bridge to (brass?) BadAss II, sort of. I'm not sure if it's actually less bottom end, but there definitely is more of all the higher frequencies so it can easily be perceived as less bottom end, relative to the mids and highs. 

Quite possibly. Whatever it was, I didn't like it.

[discreet]

30 minutes ago, Jus Lukin said:

That Kickass looks rather... kickass. How does the side to side adjustment work?

There's a hex screw on the front of the steel saddle, which you can't see in the pic. You undo that, manually move the brass insert to the required position (easier to slacken off the string for this), then tighten it back up. Very simple.

[Muzz]

14 hours ago, chris_b said:

+1

To the OP - In my experience a bass that sustains well usually sounds better than average on the rest of the notes.

Sustain is essential to have but that doesn't mean that you have to use it on every note, but if you need it and the bass can't sustain then it's not a good instrument.

This. And I'd agree with 'You can mute to reduce sustain, but you can't add it if it's not there'.

[Woodinblack]

I want sustain, if I don't want it I will damp the strings. If it doesn't sustain, there is something wrong with the bass in my mind.

[discreet]

1 minute ago, Muzz said:

This. And I'd agree with 'You can mute to reduce sustain, but you can't add it if it's not there'.

And I'd agree with you.  But in 40 years I've never owned a single bass that I thought lacked sufficient sustain, or had so little sustain that I decided to move it on - it's just never been an issue. Every bass I've had has been up to the job of playing a long note at the end of songs!

[Woodinblack]

3 minutes ago, discreet said:

And I'd agree with you.  But in 40 years I've never owned a single bass that I thought lacked sufficient sustain, or had so little sustain that I decided to move it on - it's just never been an issue. Every bass I've had has been up to the job of playing a long note at the end of songs!

I have. It cost me a whole fiver, and frankly, I was done.

[cheddatom]

I guess for 99% of gigs you won't be sustaining notes on the bass guitar for very long, so fair enough. Personally I like to play some weird stinky poo and sustain is often essential

 

[Muzz]

Oh, yeah - possibly because I like a ring to a bass, so I buy the ones which ring and sustain, tho only the very terrible ones didn't. I did own a 78 Jazz once which had all the sustain of a cowpat hitting a wall, but it was horrible in many other ways. Apart from the monetary appreciation...

[Frank Blank]

Just now, Muzz said:

Oh, yeah - possibly because I like a ring to a bass, so I buy the ones which ring and sustain, tho only the very terrible ones didn't. I did own a 78 Jazz once which had all the sustain of a cowpat hitting a wall, but it was horrible in many other ways. Apart from the monetary appreciation...

I think this is it, sustain seems to be a general indication of the overall quality of the bass.

[White Cloud]

58 minutes ago, discreet said:

 

That looks killer!

[Baxter]

Flatwounds and a sponge mute. What's sustain?

[stingrayPete1977]

17 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

I have. It cost me a whole fiver, and frankly, I was done.

A Rickenbacker for a fiver isn't too bad imo.

[leftybassman392]

2 hours ago, Skol303 said:

Sustain is all about energy. I don't know whether a higher mass bridge adds more energy to the notes being played; perhaps it does but to what degree I dunno.

Nope. The only energy in the string is what you (the player) put into it. It may be that certain bridge designs reduce the rate at which the energy dissipates (which you'd hear as enhanced sustain), but they can't add to it. It may also be that certain bridge designs bring out the higher order harmonics a bit better, but the two are not necessarily related I don't think.

In case it isn't already blindingly obvious, the dynamics of plucked strings is quite a complex topic...

 

[FinnDave]

20 minutes ago, stingrayPete1977 said:

A Rickenbacker for a fiver isn't too bad imo.

Still more than a pint costs, and I know which I'd rather have!

[Nicko]

32 minutes ago, leftybassman392 said:

Nope. The only energy in the string is what you (the player) put into it. It may be that certain bridge designs reduce the rate at which the energy dissipates (which you'd hear as enhanced sustain), but they can't add to it. It may also be that certain bridge designs bring out the higher order harmonics a bit better, but the two are not necessarily related I don't think.

In case it isn't already blindingly obvious, the dynamics of plucked strings is quite a complex topic...

I agree.  However I think sustain equals retaining the motion of the string rather than transferring the energy to the bridge and body.  It would make sense that a high mass bridge and dense/heavy guitar body would resist the vibration transfer more and hence result in a longer string decay.

FWIW I believe sustain isn't that useful, but a longer sustaining guitar will give a more even note volume  on shorter notes.  You can mute a note in loads of ways to get a different decay, but only if the original string is still ringing.  I'm kind of talking myself round to this resulting in a more compressed tone on the note.

 

 

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 25, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[Dad3353]

3 hours ago, Lozz196 said:

Yep, I only ever upgrade bridges to the ones with grooves in the base-plate, so that there`s less chance of slippage, as am rather ham-fisted/heavy-hitting.

You bash the strings so hard the bridge moves..?  Remind me not to lend you my bass..! 

[discreet]

23 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

You bash the strings so hard the bridge moves..?  Remind me not to lend you my bass..! 

Punk band, innit? Real deal!

[Al Krow]

I'm impressed that you guys are managing to sustain meaningful discussion on this thread; although it does seem to be a little long and drawn out; certainly compared to the usual punchy notes I've come to expect.