I think that if you have an instrument that is of high quality and sounds good with a low mass bridge it may not sound as good with a high mass one. A high mass bridge can have the effect of overriding the essential sound of a guitar or bass- this can be good if the instrument doesn't sound good to you as is. My general thoughts around replacing vintage style Fender bridges with high mass ones have been that the HM bridge doesn't so much add sustain but shifts the resonant frequency and dead/hot notes to new locations on the neck (you may want this). It also changes the tone of a bass- more emphasised low end, less mids, and the top end becomes smoother/less responsive. I think that a good sounding vintage style Fender bass sounds generally better with the traditional bridge.
One of the things people don't talk about with replacing bridges is how the new one might not be entirely compatible. I had a bass where I replaced the classic bent plate bridge with a Babicz high mass, but the base plate was a different thickness, so the bass needed a neck shim and new setup to work right. So in the end I had no idea if the tonal changr came from the bridge, thd shim or the new setup.
I like a bass with the string through option. The string through has a much steeper angle and more downward pressure on the saddles which helps to eliminate rattling. Acoustic guitar players can modify their bridge by cutting slots between the bridge pins and the nut. The steeper string angle makes a noticeable improvement.
Awesome, thanks for sharing that tip. My P Bass has both string through and top-loader options. It is awesome to hear or feel a difference just from that.
Adding a bridge with greater mass and more precise adjustment and intonation is a useful, pretty easy upgrade to make to most basses though one point to keep in mind is that the improvements in tone and sustain are not going to be profound if there's a decent bridge already installed on it.
Good point! Definitely agree. I have definitely heard what I would call improvements going from a ‘good’ bridge to a great one - ex: stock mid-tier Fender to Callaham, Mastery, etc.,, but less drastic of course with nicer bridges.
I have a four string neck through body bass with a single cut body shape. It had quite good sustain already but when I replaced the stock bridge with a KSM bridge the improvement in sound quality was amazing. Not only the sustain has improved but the overall tonality as well. KSM is light weight because it is made from aircraft grade aluminium and after adjusting it you can lock down every part of it. So absolutely no moving or rattling parts and it is like a solid piece of metal once everything is locked down. Beautiful overtones and sustain for ages.
Getting shorter saddle height screws would have been easier than replacing the whole bridge. I had to get longer screws for the Schaller bridge on my Yamaha RBX270, because I could not get the saddles high enough and the screws were buried in there.
Good idea. Similarly, I have done that for a guitar bridge in the past. I wanted to upgrade this one anyway because of the tone/sustain aspect. Cheers!
I totally don't agree with this video. Most of the pop and rock history of last century was recorded on vintage Fenders that had light mass vintage style bridges. If you want more systain, maybe yes, but we are talking about bass here. If you like a traditional tone, I even think that high mass bridges improvre frequencies I personally don't like in a bass. It's good if you like more mid and slap style bass, but for traditional tone, just keep the old one. I preferred how the bass sounded with the original bridge.
Adding a hi mass bridge seems more stable latterally and more comfortable for palm muting. as far as sustain, most likely never going to hold a note long enough to matter. BUT, Will I lose any punch/thump , lows or low mids? Im installing pv63 pups for those attributes and don't want to defeat that purpose...?
My perception with the high mass bridge was that it added more sustain. Made the signal feel more compressed. That may or may not be welcome. For this space, in my opinion, I believe the tone is better. It is also a non-destructive modification, so you could also try it out. Be careful when removing the strings, and go back to your old bridge if it is not a welcome total change.
I think that if you have an instrument that is of high quality and sounds good with a low mass bridge it may not sound as good with a high mass one. A high mass bridge can have the effect of overriding the essential sound of a guitar or bass- this can be good if the instrument doesn't sound good to you as is. My general thoughts around replacing vintage style Fender bridges with high mass ones have been that the HM bridge doesn't so much add sustain but shifts the resonant frequency and dead/hot notes to new locations on the neck (you may want this). It also changes the tone of a bass- more emphasised low end, less mids, and the top end becomes smoother/less responsive. I think that a good sounding vintage style Fender bass sounds generally better with the traditional bridge.
Good points.
One of the things people don't talk about with replacing bridges is how the new one might not be entirely compatible. I had a bass where I replaced the classic bent plate bridge with a Babicz high mass, but the base plate was a different thickness, so the bass needed a neck shim and new setup to work right. So in the end I had no idea if the tonal changr came from the bridge, thd shim or the new setup.
Good point! Another thing to consider and research ahead.
I like a bass with the string through option. The string through has a much steeper angle and more downward pressure on the saddles which helps to eliminate rattling. Acoustic guitar players can modify their bridge by cutting slots between the bridge pins and the nut. The steeper string angle makes a noticeable improvement.
Awesome, thanks for sharing that tip. My P Bass has both string through and top-loader options. It is awesome to hear or feel a difference just from that.
Adding a bridge with greater mass and more precise adjustment and intonation is a useful, pretty easy upgrade to make to most basses though one point to keep in mind is that the improvements in tone and sustain are not going to be profound if there's a decent bridge already installed on it.
Good point! Definitely agree. I have definitely heard what I would call improvements going from a ‘good’ bridge to a great one - ex: stock mid-tier Fender to Callaham, Mastery, etc.,, but less drastic of course with nicer bridges.
I have a four string neck through body bass with a single cut body shape. It had quite good sustain already but when I replaced the stock bridge with a KSM bridge the improvement in sound quality was amazing. Not only the sustain has improved but the overall tonality as well. KSM is light weight because it is made from aircraft grade aluminium and after adjusting it you can lock down every part of it. So absolutely no moving or rattling parts and it is like a solid piece of metal once everything is locked down. Beautiful overtones and sustain for ages.
That is awesome, I’ll have to check those out. Good point also about the tight tolerance of the parts.
Completely agree! Easy and generally cheap upgrade that is noticeable.
Awesome!
Getting shorter saddle height screws would have been easier than replacing the whole bridge. I had to get longer screws for the Schaller bridge on my Yamaha RBX270, because I could not get the saddles high enough and the screws were buried in there.
Good idea. Similarly, I have done that for a guitar bridge in the past. I wanted to upgrade this one anyway because of the tone/sustain aspect. Cheers!
I totally don't agree with this video. Most of the pop and rock history of last century was recorded on vintage Fenders that had light mass vintage style bridges. If you want more systain, maybe yes, but we are talking about bass here. If you like a traditional tone, I even think that high mass bridges improvre frequencies I personally don't like in a bass. It's good if you like more mid and slap style bass, but for traditional tone, just keep the old one. I preferred how the bass sounded with the original bridge.
I agree, if you want less sustain go with the traditional. It has more of a thump and then dies more.
It is just different sounds… use what you prefer.
Sounds Beefier with high mass bridge 😅
I agree!
do not agree at all!
That’s what makes the world go round, cheers mate!
Hi Steve. Why did you left apple?
Banana was calling.
Adding a hi mass bridge seems more stable latterally and more comfortable for palm muting. as far as sustain, most likely never going to hold a note long enough to matter. BUT, Will I lose any punch/thump , lows or low mids? Im installing pv63 pups for those attributes and don't want to defeat that purpose...?
My perception with the high mass bridge was that it added more sustain. Made the signal feel more compressed. That may or may not be welcome. For this space, in my opinion, I believe the tone is better. It is also a non-destructive modification, so you could also try it out. Be careful when removing the strings, and go back to your old bridge if it is not a welcome total change.