Does greater weight equal more tone?

OK - so help me out. I have a Squier Jazz bass where I think I need to do a bit of work on the neck, but was considering replacing the bridge. The bridge is flimsy pot metal. What would you suggest?
 
OK - so help me out. I have a Squier Jazz bass where I think I need to do a bit of work on the neck, but was considering replacing the bridge. The bridge is flimsy pot metal. What would you suggest?

Don't get me wrong, it isn't that there can't be significant improvements over a flimsy or crappy bridge... it's just that a bridge improving tone simply because it has mass is a fallacy IMO. Tighter fit and over all quality will allow strings to do their job without robbing their energy. That's what you want really.
 
OK - so help me out. I have a Squier Jazz bass where I think I need to do a bit of work on the neck, but was considering replacing the bridge. The bridge is flimsy pot metal. What would you suggest?

Either spring for a Hipshot or ask the talkbass crowd what the next best option is.
 
You're playing a les paul through a marshall, it better sound just like that, lol. :rawk:

FWIW, my les paul custom is pretty heavy (not 15 pounds, maybe 10), and it sustains pretty well.



This tele was made for me by a friend, it's solid maple, maple top, birdseye maple neck with an ebony fingerboard. It's a tank, about 15 pounds. It has a seymour duncan hot rails in the bridge - sustains for days.... I do believe weight has something to do with it, but the makeup of the wood does as well.

That LP gets me chubby.
 
Don't get me wrong, it isn't that there can't be significant improvements over a flimsy or crappy bridge... it's just that a bridge improving tone simply because it has mass is a fallacy IMO. Tighter fit and over all quality will allow strings to do their job without robbing their energy. That's what you want really.

I guess I'm just not sold on this bridge:

thumbnail.asp


As compared to this bridge:

thumbnail.asp
 
BTW -- I've been playing my new "thing" with the 2Tek bridge right now (which is perhaps the most overbuilt hunk of metal I've ever seen on a guitar -- it's almost like a bass bridge) and it sustains better than my strat did (that guitar was oddly "dead"), but I am not ready to attribute that all to the massive bridge...

2TekGuitarTop.jpg

 
I'll also say that, with regard to the Knaggs I once owned, it had [what I later found after some quick research to be] a proprietary bridge that sustained like crazy. It's the only guitar I'd ever played in which my initial reaction was, wow, that was crazy sustain. It was only then that I looked into their bridge design and realized that was the point. It wasn't a high-mass thing, just a great design.

Knaggs_T2_Kenai_-_bridge_tailpiece.jpg
 
Given that good "tone" is totally subjective, I'm thinking the answer to the original question is no. Greater weight may have an effect on things like sustain, maybe, but sustain and tone aren't the same thing.

And given all the things that have an effect on your guitar's sound -- strings, pickups, body wood, neck wood, electronics, your playing style, cables, effects, amp, etc. etc. -- I'd think body weight would have a minor impact at best.
 
Gotcha!

I'm not sure it'll fit. I don't know why it has that goofy post on the side but if it's normal hardtail tele or strat mounting you're welcome to use one :wink:
But it has to be a top loader for a strat hardtail, right? Something about the ferrules not lining up?
 
My Hamer 2 Tek's have an insane amount of sustain but aren't heavy, my new Clover bass is pretty light (IMO) and also sustains for pretty much as long as I want it to.
Of course both have pretty significant bridges but I don't really feel that they're the reason. I think it's mainly just the fact that they're extremely well built, tight fitting assemblies with great pickups. I think those factors have more to do with good sustain and better tone than weight.
 
Back
Top