Neck-thru or 35" scale = greater effect on tone?

I’d argue that the amplifier and cabinet are as much a musical instrument and part of “the bass” as the bass instrument itself. Just as an oscillator by itself does not a synthesizer make. But that would only lead to endless hairsplitting over definitions. And probably end up annoying the rest of the thread while we’re having a good time. :laugh: So let’s compromise and call it an electro-acoustic instrument and let it go at that. :thumbsup:
Amps have as much personality as instruments and they're certainly a part of the bass player's instrument (just as the piano box is a part of the piano) but the source sound is acoustic so the properties of the bass do effect the sound. The electro-acoustic world.
I'd say rules are hard to cling too because there are basses that sound great and break rules. My danelectro Longhorn 1999 reissue is one. You could get used to the thing on a permanent basis, some do, and it's made of of hockey stick tape and cheep furniture particle board. Right now all I'm playing is a Jack Cassidy, 34" scale is just fine for this remarkable 4 stringer with the special pu set at the right spot and a body that brings out Lots of frequencies...truly electro acoustic balance. DR Blue nickles sounding perfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluebard
Honestly? I don't think about this stuff a lot. My feeling is that:
- Tone is the result of the sum of the parts. A Bass' tone is what it is, and they're all going to be different - a little; and
- Since I think all basses have too much sustain already, worrying about "which has more?" is like worrying about drowning in 10 feet of water; or drowning in 1,000 feet of water. You're sorta dead, regardless... However...I think lz4005 is right when he said sustain is a product of neck rigidity. Yes, both my Ricks have a lot of sustain; yes they're rigid, multi-ply neck thrus. So is my Carvin LB-20. But although the sustain is still obnoxious, it's noticeably less than the Rick's. Both my T-Birds are multi-ply neck thrus, too; but they don't have much sustain at all. For me, they're almost tolerable...
My bass with the most sustain? It's actually got a bolt-on neck; a Kramer 450B. It makes the Ricks sound like they have none at all. But, it's hard to find a neck more rigid than a thick aluminum T-beam...:cool:
 
Amps have as much personality as instruments and they're certainly a part of the bass player's instrument (just as the piano box is a part of the piano) but the source sound is acoustic so the properties of the bass do effect the sound. The electro-acoustic world.
I'd say rules are hard to cling too because there are basses that sound great and break rules. My danelectro Longhorn 1999 reissue is one. You could get used to the thing on a permanent basis, some do, and it's made of of hockey stick tape and cheep furniture particle board. Right now all I'm playing is a Jack Cassidy, 34" scale is just fine for this remarkable 4 stringer with the special pu set at the right spot and a body that brings out Lots of frequencies...truly electro acoustic balance. DR Blue nickles sounding perfect.

I’ll have to respectfully disagree. The sound of an electric bass is current generated by a magnetic string oscillating in a magnetic field. It is not a mechanical (or purely mechanical) phenomena like when a string transfers vibration to a piano’s sounding board and directly excites the surrounding air to produce the sound you hear. So the source of the sound is really the frequency of the current generated. In that respect it’s no more acoustic than a generator or dynamo - both of which have been used in the production of musical notes back in the early days of electronic music. Or like the Hammond organ, which works much like an electric bass except it has rotating metal “tone wheels” spinning in the field of a magnetic pickup instead of strings. And I don’t consider that an acoustic instrument either.

Just because something doesn’t use an electronic wave oscillator as its sound source doesn’t mean it’s an acoustic instrument. And I’ve never seen a music dictionary, music article, or textbook ever once refer to an electric bass as an “acoustic” instrument. So that’s either been changed since my more academic phase or you’re personally redefining the term “acoustic instrument.”

Fender’s landmark patent even states it’s for: “an electromagnetic pickup for a lute-like musical instrument.” So Leo and the USPTO aren’t thinking that it’s an acoustic instrument either.
 
Last edited:
I’ll have to respectfully disagree. The sound of an electric bass is current generated by a magnetic string oscillating in a magnetic field. It is not a mechanical (or purely mechanical) phenomena like when a string transfers vibration to a piano’s sounding board and directly excites the surrounding air to produce the sound you hear. So the source of the sound is really the frequency of the current generated. In that respect it’s no more acoustic than a generator or dynamo - both of which have been used in the production of musical notes back in the early days of electronic music. Or like the Hammond organ, which works much like an electric bass except it has rotating metal “tone wheels” spinning in the field of a magnetic pickup instead of strings. And I don’t consider that an acoustic instrument either.

Just because something doesn’t use an electronic wave oscillator as its sound source doesn’t mean it’s an acoustic instrument. And I’ve never seen a music dictionary, music article, or textbook ever once refer to an electric bass as an “acoustic” instrument. So that’s either been changed since my more academic phase or you’re personally redefining the term “acoustic instrument.”

Fender’s landmark patent even states it’s for: “an electromagnetic pickup for a lute-like musical instrument.” So Leo and the USPTO aren’t thinking that it’s an acoustic instrument either.

No one believes pickups pickup the sound of the body as if they were microphones. The first pulse is picked up by the pickup. The second and almost immediate to our ears pulse is the note transferred by vibrating strings through the contact points and back as influenced vibrations through the strings again picked up by the pickups. Teles sound like teles if you swap strat pickups into to one and vice versa. Tele and Strat pickups are wound and assembled differently. Why do SGs, ES335s and Les Pauls sound different? Their electronics are identical.
What Leo called it for a Patent is what just that. It is a distinguishing characteristic necessary to gain a Patent.
 
No one believes pickups pickup the sound of the body as if they were microphones. The first pulse is picked up by the pickup. The second and almost immediate to our ears pulse is the note transferred by vibrating strings through the contact points and back as influenced vibrations through the strings again picked up by the pickups. Teles sound like teles if you swap strat pickups into to one and vice versa. Tele and Strat pickups are wound and assembled differently. Why do SGs, ES335s and Les Pauls sound different? Their electronics are identical.
What Leo called it for a Patent is what just that. It is a distinguishing characteristic necessary to gain a Patent.

Precisely. Which is why I had to take issue with BassBrass's contention an electric bass is an acoustic instrument at heart.

Interestingly enough, the strings actually oscillate radially in a circular motion rather than simply move back and forth horizontally like many think. It's more the motion of a jump rope.

The physics of a vibrating string are really quite fascinating when you get right down to it.
 
Precisely. Which is why I had to take issue with BassBrass's contention an electric bass is an acoustic instrument at heart.

Interestingly enough, the strings actually oscillate radially in a circular motion rather than simply move back and forth horizontally like many think. It's more the motion of a jump rope.

The physics of a vibrating string are really quite fascinating when you get right down to it.

Yet I do think an electric bass is an acoustic instrument. While not primarily and specifically intended to be it is anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anhg77
Yet I do think an electric bass is an acoustic instrument. While not primarily and specifically intended to be it is anyway.

Um..petitio principii? (I believe it is an acoustic instrument - because - it is an acoustic instrument.)Those last two lines are an assertion that doesn't follow as a proof. But so be it if you're happy with it. ;)

Well...we've each stated our position without reaching consensus. So I'm thinking we'll just have to agree to disagree on that niggling point. Suffice to say it's some kind of instrument.
:)
 
Yeah We love it.
I did provide a description of what happens sonically and electronically.
There is never a response to the why of the Tele/Strat and three Gibson example.

What appears here to me are two things. A strongly held belief that needs science to disavow vs a clear observation that when science gets around to testing will confirm human’s experience for decades.

The question is more why would we hold a belief that nothing but pickups and strings do the job. Why can’t it be both? We can debate how much effect all day. Obviously the pickups and strings are prominent.

Some people can’t hear the same things others hear. A mechanic can tell you which lifters are sticking where another has no idea what he’s talking about. One thing the human organism does well is distinguish differences. It is a finely tuned skill that increases survival chances.

We know some folks play and process their signal in such a way that no one would notice anything but strings to pickups.

There are so many who choose one instrument over another because of this body effect. There are equal number of builders who choose and build because of these distinctions as well as makers who don’t.

I appreciate the mature respectful dialog. I’m shaking your hand over the ethers. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Anhg77
I don't think the tone is much different but the higher tension makes it easier for me to play and i think it makes my playing sound better.

All main players are 35" 4 strings and i love them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluebard
I don't think the tone is much different but the higher tension makes it easier for me to play and i think it makes my playing sound better.

All main players are 35" 4 strings and i love them.
Just to clarify, I think there is a sonic difference, I just don't think that it's something that will be audible in the mix.

What i do find is that the taughter strings allow me to play with a bit more ease and precision and thus many aspects of my playing -and thus the sounds created- improve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluebard
Um..petitio principii? (I believe it is an acoustic instrument - because - it is an acoustic instrument.)Those last two lines are an assertion that doesn't follow as a proof. But so be it if you're happy with it. ;)

Well...we've each stated our position without reaching consensus. So I'm thinking we'll just have to agree to disagree on that niggling point. Suffice to say it's some kind of instrument.
:)
We can play any of the basses acoustically ifin it's quiet. As a matter of fact, the best use I ever had for a Guild Pilot was when I took it on a trip to NYC to be traded, and there was nothin to trade for that trip but really I enjoyed playing it acoustically in the apartment rental space. First time that little low mass neck and whatever light weight wood the bass was made out of really sounded great. Aged perfection acoustically. Loud. I hated the plugged in sound though and turned it into the Jack Cassidy bass which rattles acoustically and sounds super plugged in. Basses are amplified acoustic instruments, the magnetic transference is the same energy. an analog. Electric instruments go away totally when you unplug them. Only a crunching sound if it falls over.
absolutely, From the point of view of acoustic orchestral or traditional acoustic, anything the uses an amplifier is an electric instrument.
 
From the point of view of acoustic orchestral or traditional acoustic, anything the uses an amplifier is an electric instrument.

I guess that's the place and perspective I'm coming from. Like when you look at light. Is it a wave or a particle phenomena?
Einstein showed us rather conclusively it is simultaneously both. It just depends on how you're looking at it. :thumbsup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluebard
Basses are amplified acoustic instruments, the magnetic transference is the same energy. an analog. Electric instruments go away totally when you unplug them. Only a crunching sound if it falls over.

I think the term "acoustic" has come to often be used in place of the term "unamplified". And it also gets mixed up with the word "resonant".

An acoustic instrument is built using a hollow body designed to enhance resonance and produce sound at a volume adequate for use in it's intended environment.

An electric bass is designed to require an electronic amplification system to produce sound at a volume adequate for use in it's intended environment. It is not an acoustic instrument. However, it is still a resonant instrument, and this resonance allows you to still hear it at a low level when it is not amplified.

From the point of view of acoustic orchestral or traditional acoustic, anything the uses an amplifier is an electric instrument.

Not really. There are all kinds of pickup systems for violins, double basses, acoustic guitars, etc. Most are piezo pickup systems; some combine a piezo with a microphone. A double bass with a piezo pickup is not considered an "electric" instrument at all. It is considered to be an amplified acoustic, just as an acoustic guitar with a microphone on it isn't considered to be an "electric guitar".

Electric guitars and basses aren't acoustic instruments, but they do still have resonance.
 
Not really. There are all kinds of pickup systems for violins, double basses, acoustic guitars, etc. Most are piezo pickup systems; some combine a piezo with a microphone. A double bass with a piezo pickup is not considered an "electric" instrument at all. It is considered to be an amplified acoustic, just as an acoustic guitar with a microphone on it isn't considered to be an "electric guitar".
I left them put for brevity. I was talking about an orchestra like the BSO, which doesn't use them, it's an acoustic experience. Symphony Hall in Boston is one or the best acoustic resonators I've ever experienced (it's amazing really), and by "Traditional" I meant what was played before amplification was even possible. I use piezos on kalimbas (African thumb pianos), and a clip on condenser mic on my horns. The best dynamic mic for trumpet is a tom tom drum mic. People use 58s and they are horrible for trumpet...too much upper mid, so sounds pinched....
These semantic arguments get boring
 
Eh, I think the typical talk about the resonant qualities of electric guitars and basses is kind of interesting in that, from a design perspective, it's one of those things that can really be considered as a design flaw that became a feature. A resonant body/neck is not necessary to the function of an electric guitar; it's sound originates from a ferrous metal "cable" moving/vibrating within a magnetic field. A resonant mounting system for that cable actually absorbs and thus dampens/reduces some of that vibration.

Ned Steinberger's original idea in building a carbon fiber instrument was to make a completely non-resonant body/neck so that all of the string vibration, all of the fundamental and all the harmonics, would be preserved and available to amplification, where you could theoretically use finely tuned equalization to emulate the sound of any guitar. I don't know that he ever really pursued the finely tuned EQ half of that, but the instruments he designed were certainly groundbreaking.
 
Hey all,

The other day I had the opportunity to play an Ibanez BTB1805E at GC, and I was blown away by the lovely sustain and rich harmonic tones this instrument produced. The low notes seemed to have richer, more complex frequencies than any other bass I've played. I think I grasped what some TB-ers mean when they describe a bass's tone as "piano-like".

Having only ever owned 34" and 30" bolt-on neck basses, having never played a 35", and having never paid much attention to neck-thru vs. bolt-on, I am now wondering whether this great difference in tone is more likely derived from the neck-thru construction of the Ibby, or from its 35" scale. I'm sure both aspects have something to do with it, but I'm wondering whether one might contribute more greatly to the tone I'm talking about than the other.

The reason I'm asking is that I have small hands, and am therefore hesitant to purchase a 35" bass. So I'm wondering if a 34" neck-thru bass is likely to get me closer to this kind of sustain and rich tone, or whether the 35" scale might be what's making the big difference here. I'm sure the Aguilar pickups and zero fret have something to do with it as well, but the richness of tone and sustain seemed to be more of a physical thing that I could feel in the vibrations of the instrument, even when unplugged.

Even with my small hands I might end up springing for a less expensive BTB model (under $1000, hopefully closer to $500) in the same series, but if a 34" neck-thru bass (like an SR model) with similar pickups might get me closer to this rich harmonic content and sustain, I'm likely to opt for that.

Anyway, thanks for the input! Much appreciated! :)
For me, all of my NT basses appear/seem to have longer sustain. There could certainly be other factors involved and I've never actually taken out a stop watch and made A-B comparisons, but it definitely appears/seems this way.

I own 46 basses with 7 being NT basses. Of these 7 (from memory) the Rickenbacker 4003 and the Dean European Select Edge Select have the longest sustain. All 4 string except for the Schechter and all fretted except for the Ibanez Portamento

1. Schechter Stiletto Studio 5
2. Ibanez SRF700 Portamento Fretless
3. Rickenbacker 4003
4. Dean Edge Pro
5. Kona KWB4A
6. Dean Hardtail
7. Dean European Select Edge Select