| Author | Message | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 219 Registered: 1-2008 |
I have an almost compulsive need to at least try and understand how/why things work (drives people crazy... sorry). I've been visiting several bass forums lately and one of the things I keep coming across is posts of people expounding about how wonderfully resonant their ELECTRIC bass is. I understand the need for resonance in an ACOUSTIC instrument but I don't see that as necessarily desirable in a solid body electric instrument. I've seen the term "filtering" used here several times and that makes sense to me (ie. any resonance is as a result of certain frequencies being "filtered" from the vibration of the strings). Of course I can appreciate how you can use this property to tailor an instrument for a particular tone, but the implication in much of what I have read is that a poorly resonant instrument is somehow "bad". We actually already had a variation of this discussion in a recent thread regarding body shapes/sizes. One of you referenced a study done by Eric W. Moon Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The results of that study stated: "...Electric guitars transmit their sound through magnetic pickups. Vibrations are not the most important aspect of an electric guitar’s sound. Actually, large modes of vibration would draw energy from the strings and impede the sustain of notes played on the guitar. In contrast, acoustic guitars are designed to be played without amplification. Vibrations of the guitar are the way the sound is transmitted...". The reason I'm bringing this up (again) is that I recently read a review on a replacement bridge in Bass Player magazine (not sure how old it was). They stated that the purpose of the (or any) bridge was to transmit string vibration into the body and thus INCREASE sustain. Furthermore, they implied this particular bridge was better because it was made of aluminum (brass being too heavy to effectively transmit those vibrations!). I also recently saw an ad for a new Yamaha bass that made similar claims regarding their "string thru body" design. Am I missing/misunderstanding something? | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2049 Registered: 6-2002 |
Careless wording there, Mr Moon, mixing up vibration and resonance ... Obviously on an electric guitar/bass you still need a vibrating string to get any tone, the question is how best to transfer that vibration into the instrument, as the actual "body" of an instrument (even an electric one) determines resonances, which indeed are a major factor in tone. Sympathetic resonance can help sustain, while dead spots stem from having a resonance in the wrong place. Suffice it to say that part of the Alembic design is to use heavy brass hardware to isolate the vibrations of the string from the resonances of the instrument. And while they say that by so doing wood choices become less important, they also say that specific wood choices do have a recognizable impact on tone. Any bit of hardware that is not sitting tight will absorb vibrations (if not rattle along) and so any construction that anchors the hardware to the instrument (like the string-thru-bridge) can be an improvement over hardware that is simply attached to the top of the instrument. And just think of a banjo or a resonator guitar. There is no single "truth" here - people can apply different approaches to resonance in electric instruments, in order to get the results they want. | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1578 Registered: 10-2003 |
Stiffness and mass together have the most direct impact on sustain. The person who wrote the article has no understanding of the physics involved. John | ||
| 3rd_ray
Intermediate Member Username: 3rd_ray Post Number: 172 Registered: 2-2008 |
It's hard to describe sound in words, and it's even harder to explain exactly how those sounds are produced. I agree with John that the Bass Player writer had it wrong. I'm definitely not an expert, but here's my take on it... Look at the energy of a vibrating string. If the string never loses its energy, it will have infinite sustain. So how does a string lose energy? Through the bridge into the body, through the nut or fret into the neck, through the pickup because of the magnetic field, and probably a little just because its vibrating in air instead of a vacuum. So you have energy that starts out in the string and ends up in a lot of places through a lot of different mechanisms. Changing those mechanisms (bridge, pickup, wood, frets, etc.) changes the sound. The initial energy in the string also depends on a lot of things, like using a pick, finger, or thumb. I also agree with Adriaan, there's no single approach for making an instrument. So for me, it's enough to understand the basics without trying to go into scientific details. You're better off building an instrument and experimenting to get the best sound. Of course, we can't all do that, so good thing that Alembic has already done this for us! Edit: This all holds true for acoustic instruments, but they rely more on the body to transmit the sound. Mike (Message edited by 3rd_ray on January 12, 2009) | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 221 Registered: 1-2008 |
Adriaan I missed that... he did mix-up vibration and resonance (or is resonance a type of vibration?)!!! I had never heard of "sympathetic resonance". It sounds like that is a phenomena (in an solid body instrument) whereby resonance in the body would "feedback" into string vibration and accentuate certain harmonics via a "standing wave" mechanism??? Is that right? If part of the Alembic design is to use heavy brass hardware to "isolate the vibrations of the string from the resonances of the instrument", would it be fair to say that Alembic's use of heavy brass hardware, sustain blocks, etc is to minimize resonance of the body? Should I put in my order for a marble Series I (LOL)??? It sounds like the 2 extremes are: 1) Keep the energy in the strings by minimizing resonance of the body. This would give you the "purest" tone. 2) Use the body resonance to generate sympathetic vibrations in the strings. This would give you a "colored" tone. This would explain the claim that different bridges (or other pieces of hardware) can change the tone of an instrument. | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2050 Registered: 6-2002 |
Mike, that's pretty much my understanding of resonance. I think the #2 extreme would be the banjo, which gives you just the start of the note and not much sustain. There was a science quizz on Dutch television where they had taken a recording of a melody, and chopped off 25 percent of the duration of each note, from the start of each note. Contestants had three options up-front: (a) you can't make out the pitches, (b) you can't make out the melody, or (c) you can't make out the instrument. Of course (a) and (b) make no sense, but actually it sounded like a hobo, whereas the original recording was of a trumpet. So there's a lot of resonance at the start of the note that lets you recognize the instrument, but not much in the sustaining note that lets you identify the tone. | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 578 Registered: 11-2007 |
Quite simply every manfacturer claims their products are the best - I wouldnt worry about it too much. Good Pr usually sells infinite numbers of average products when it comes to the musical instrument business! The ammount of difference between most bass bridges is minimal imho. For example Leo Quan badass bridges are an excellent replacement for Fender basses but I wouldnt say they transform the instrument in a jaw dropping way. It is a definite improvement over the cheap pressed steel type though. Resonance is obviously extremely relevant but I believe that the importance of sustain on an electric bass is massively overstated - who really needs huge sustain on a bass?? How many notes do you hold for as long as possible when playing bass in your band?? However, If you were to join Spinal Tap and try to compete with Nigel Tuffnels infinite Les Paul sustain then buy a amp with a volume that goes all the way up to eleven and party on! John. | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2051 Registered: 6-2002 |
John, There is a whole world of music out there that has long bass notes - you may not spend any time in that world, but it's for real. You may even find that you can take music to completely different places if you only add long notes ... It's easy to stop a string from sustaining, but it's a whole different matter to coax a string into sustaining when it wants to stop vibrating. Fernandes used to market a Sustainer that would replace a regular humbucker sized pick-up. There were the E-bow and Gizmo hand-held devices. And of course there is ye olde bow. | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 579 Registered: 11-2007 |
Yes, I remember the E-bow very well from back in the day when Stuart Adamson (r.i.p) was still with us and playing with Big Country. It was a very interesting sound! There is a definite place for devices of this nature! Hey, you are right, there are no wrongs - I dont spend any time sustaining bass notes for any particularly long periods during any of my performances - and I cant really think of many bass players that I have seen doing so - but each to his own. If you want to sustain notes for as long as possible then thats fine and well! The point I was making is that manufacturers overplay things like "massive sustain" into their adverts to sell products. The replacement part business is huge and most companies want a slice of the action. I believe that there is a hell of a lot of nonsense out there - there is a certain snobbishness..."mine is better than yours because it has blah blah blah" - Paul MCcartney, love him or not, didnt stop one day, look at John Lennon, and say "John - we had better stop writing some of the most influential pop music of all time - my bass has a bolt on neck and doesnt sustain enough." You catch my drift good people? | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 222 Registered: 1-2008 |
Thanks guys I'm getting a better feel for the "Alembic strategy". Do you agree with this statement: Between the use of low impedance PUPs and the measures taken to minimize resonance of the body, the PUPs are capturing as pure and uncolored of a tone (via vibrations in the string) as is possible. That tone can then be manipulated in a meaningful way via the electronics. I think the opposite approach explains why my MM Stingray is often referred to as a "one trick pony"... the signal that the PUPs capture is already highly colored, thus its hard to do much with it. | ||
| bsee
Senior Member Username: bsee Post Number: 2134 Registered: 3-2004 |
Sorry, Mike, I don't think you get it. The electronics/pickup side makes sense, but not the bit about body resonance. The instrument has a native tone based upon the woods used and construction. The guts of an Alembic are about capturing that native tone without coloring it. The construction itself, though, is about using knowledge of wood properties and construction methods to create an instrument with a pleasing natural tone. If you just wanted the pure vibrations of a string, you'd make an instrument from granite and anchor it to the planet. The body wouldn't absorb any of the string's vibration, or virtually none anyway, and you'd have the pure string. At that point, your choice of string would go a very long way to determining your tone. Someone might want that, but not me. You want a neck made of stiff and dense enough material to push the resonant frequencies outside of the musical range of the string. That eliminates dead spots which occur when the instrument absorbs all of the string's energy through resonance leaving nothing for a pickup to detect. You can go too far, as I believe Modulus did when they offered the TBX line of basses. That graphite composite neck-through instrument has a very sterile tone to my ears because you are getting the pure tone of the string. The wood adds by taking away. Tone coloration comes from the instrument having a naturally uneven frequency response. Some frequencies get absorbed more than others and what is left determines the tone available to the pickups. Too much absorption and sustain suffers, but you need some for the instrument to have individual character. Even a character that kills sustain is a potentially pleasing tonal property in some cases. It's all about finding the right balance. In short, the wood is designed to allow a tuned string to generate a pleasing tone, and the guts capture it without alteration. | ||
| flaxattack
Senior Member Username: flaxattack Post Number: 2146 Registered: 4-2004 |
i agree with bob- the string has characteristics of its own- the woods add or subtract from that and the pickup amplifies that sound. As for resonance-it's a combo of the above. this is why scarlet sounds different than wolf- different woods my a string on scarlet will vibrate for over 2 minutes when played open. This vibration goes through the entire instrument in a loop especially on neck throughs. this sound goes through the bridge block and bridge and they transmit and slightly amplify it, which one can hear as a harmonic. Again this is because of the wood sandwich. unplugged they also sound a little bit different. any of this make any sense? lol ps- this is also why an open a sounds different than an a on low b at the 10th frett | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 223 Registered: 1-2008 |
Thanks for responding Bob. I've read a lot of your posts on such issues and you seem to be "The Man" when it comes to the technical stuff. You stated: "The wood adds by taking away. Tone coloration comes from the instrument having a naturally uneven frequency response. Some frequencies get absorbed more than others and what is left determines the tone available to the pickups." Actually that is my understanding of that process. When you say "I don't get it", I assume you are referring to my statement that "measures are taken to minimize resonance of the body". If so, what is the utility in sustain blocks, dense hardware, etc? Or is your point that one would never want to completely negate the influence of the wood on tone. (Message edited by mike1762 on January 12, 2009) | ||
| bsee
Senior Member Username: bsee Post Number: 2135 Registered: 3-2004 |
You are correct there, Mike, at least in terms of what I was responding to. It seemed like you were simplifying body construction into the minimizing of resonance for the purpose of capturing the natural tone of the string. While that may be the goal of some designs, I don't believe that it is the core goal of Alembic's work. Density, especially through the neck and at the ends of the strings, can add to sustain by increasing the amount of the vibrating energy of the string that remains in the string. That's important to many players, though apparently not all. You're dead on when you say that one would never want to completely negate the influence of the wood. Well, at least almost never. I found that out the hard way with the two Modulus basses that I owned. They only worked for me at all when pumped through some seriously glowing tubes. Again, to each his own and some may like that pure string tone, it just didn't work for me. There are just no objective absolutes when it comes to the definition of "good" instrument tone. One was flame maple over alder, the other cocobolo over mahogany. Neither had any "woodiness" or "warmth" to their tone. As far as me being "The Man", I think that overstates things a bit. I have been around a while and always try to do my research for things that matter to me. Spending thousands of dollars on an instrument is one of those things. Getting a great bass tone is another. So, I did a lot of investigating. Now that I have that info in my head, I try to pass it back, particularly when it is a matter just trying to present it in a different way that someone may better understand. There are, and have been, quite a few people around here who know more about these things than I. I'd also note that, while I've been through the factory tour, I don't work or speak for Alembic. When I wrote about what I believe to be their design goals, it is based on outside observation of their results and interpretation of their various postings. I'm sure that if one did an exhaustive search of this site for info on this topic, you'd find that there isn't much that I wrote that hasn't previously been written. One other note on sustain. To me, it's one of those characteristics that would be better to have too much of than too little. There are plenty of ways to reduce sustain or otherwise deaden a vibrating string when a performance calls for it. On the other hand, there aren't too many performance techniques to increase the duration of a note. I'll take as much sustain as I can get without losing the woody character of the instrument. The "traditional" Alembic neck recipes that mix purpleheart and maple are just about perfect. Swapping in some ebony in place of the purpleheart pushes it a little further. I'm not sure what the next step might be beyond that, but I am quite happy with these recipes and see no need to push the envelope any further. -bob | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 580 Registered: 11-2007 |
Are you guys musicians or scientists??? Maybe its just me - I just like picking up a bass and playing it. If it sounds good...then it sounds good...if I dont like the sound I dont like it! Music does not have to be complicated to work well, i.e. touch people on many different levels - musical instrument construction is exactly the same. Sure, its great to play a piece of sublime craftsmanship with cutting edge electronics onboard like any Alembic - but there are two sides to every coin. Some of the most sacred basses ever built are early, simply constructed, Fenders that dont have massive inherant sustain or jaw dropping resonance. They simply sound fantastic - like a classic aged fine wine. It has been, correctly stated many times here on this forum that there are a myriad of luthiers/builders making basses with similar (and on a par with) construction techniques used by Alembic. Even Mica admits the Fernandes Alembic copies were, when it came to the aspect of the woodworking, superbly constructed to a level similar to the very basses they were mimicking. So what sets them all apart from Alembic? The electronics? Surely not just the resonance or sustain naturally inherant in the construction! If that were the case why would basses built with a similar type of construction to Alembic not resonate/sustain just as well? I honestly dont believe that Jaco, Jeff Berlin, Percy Jones etc etc lost too much sleep over playing simply constructed Alder bodied basses with a Maple neck that didnt sustain/resonate enough! Sure, they wanted to sound as good as possible but all truly great players know the eternal truth - the most important tone is in the finger. I mean no offence to any fellow club members whatsoever but there seems to be a lot of analytical techno heads here at the club - but we are all musicians and players first...right?? John. | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2052 Registered: 6-2002 |
John, I have to confess I'm not a "musician and player first" all day long. But the "analytical techno head" stuff is harder to switch off. One thing though: McCartney would not have talked about a bass with "a bolt on neck" since he used mainly a Hofner (set-neck) or a Rickenbacker (neck-through). Other than that, an excellent point. | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 224 Registered: 1-2008 |
I guess it's in my nature to want to understand these things. I find it fascinating that something that seems relatively simple can be so complex. I'm not unaware that many of my questions and misstatements (on this thread and others) make me look like a tool, but if you don't ask...!!! | ||
| jacko
Senior Member Username: jacko Post Number: 2061 Registered: 10-2002 |
Adriaan beat me to it. His 5 string Wal would in all probability have been bolt on but that came after he stopped talking to Lennon ;-) Graeme | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 581 Registered: 11-2007 |
well guys , you have an good point about McCartney...not the best example for me to use. However I doubt any of you would disagree that the Hofner bass he employed didnt sustain/resonate all day long... set neck or not!! I have to say (I know this is the Alembic club but we are allowed to praise other basses - right?) that since the Wal name has been thrown into the ring I must state my admiration for them. Superb basses, of a relatively simple construction, with a monster onboard pre-amp. Sure, it was a bolt on neck (who cares!!)but Percy Jones, Mick Karn, Geddy Lee, Jason Newstead, Justin Chancellor etc etc cant all be wrong! I was lucky enough to have an amazing Wal custom back in the eighties. I always viewed them as a cross between an Alembic and a Fender Precision in sound and feel! Oh, and it sustained and resonated all day long  John. | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1579 Registered: 10-2003 |
I had a Conklin 7-string bass for awhile. It was a bolt-on and had the best sustain and fundamental of any instrument I've ever played. That instrument had a lot of mass, and 6 or 7 big bolts holding the massive neck on. The string tension on the fat, mostly-purpleheart neck was enormous, so the instrument was very very very stiff as well. The mass meant the resonant frequencies of the body were well away from the fundamental of any notes playable, and the stiffness contributed to the long sustain and smooth/predictable extended overtones. A great instrument that I do really miss (except for it being a tendonitis machine, that is). It also held tuning better than any instrument I've ever owned, including my Series 1.5 (which holds tuning very well, thank you). John | ||
| terryc
Senior Member Username: terryc Post Number: 669 Registered: 11-2004 |
I once read that the wood is the voice and pick ups are the microphone so if you have an instrument made from quality wood and pick ups that are the best you will get the best tone and sound. Ron's idea of low Z pu's and pre amps with individual controls is the gold standard, I mean you would not feed all the band into one channel with high Z mics on a desk would you?? | ||
| serialnumber12
Advanced Member Username: serialnumber12 Post Number: 381 Registered: 12-2004 |
Ive learned alot reading this topic!.......thanks guys!!! | ||
| serialnumber12
Advanced Member Username: serialnumber12 Post Number: 382 Registered: 12-2004 |
Ive learned alot reading this topic!.......thanks guys!!! | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 583 Registered: 11-2007 |
Forgot to say Mike - imho there is never, ever, a stupid question! Im glad you started this thread - it is a very interesting subject! Show me a man who knows everything and I will know for sure where to find a man who knows nothing! John. | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 7329 Registered: 5-2002 |
John wrote, "but we are all musicians and players first...right?" Speaking for me personally, no. While music seems to be an important and integral part of my path, the idea that I am a musician or bass player before anything else doesn't seem to be an accurate description of that path. | ||
| bsee
Senior Member Username: bsee Post Number: 2136 Registered: 3-2004 |
Well, the talk gets technical around here from time to time because we have a lot of "investors". Everyone who buys, or thinks of buying, an Alembic puts a significant amount of their money out to do so. Now, if you're looking at a used $1000 Spoiler (well, maybe $1500 these days), you will get what you pay for and there aren't a lot of choices. On the other hand, if you're looking at a custom built instrument that will cost you between five and fifteen thousand dollars, you kind of want to make the right choices. As great as Alembic instruments are, the original owner who decides to sell will take quite a financial hit. It is not unusual for the loss to be about a third of the original cost. That's a lot of money and time to throw away if the instrument you ordered isn't what you expected. Is it any surprise that people who are thinking about putting $10K of their money down for something want to understand what they are getting and order the right options? As far as the "this great player used a piece of limp vermicelli strung between two popsicle sticks" arguments that show up from time to time, I'm not sure they apply. In my reality, an instrument is a tool. Some tools are great for one thing and suck for anything else, other tools can be used for a wide variety of jobs. Alembics, to me, can do just about anything, but try creating a signature Ric sound with a P-Bass or vice versa. When a player is put together with a compatible instrument, you get something great. Some instruments also have an inspiration factor that impacts what comes out. Would someone like Jaco have written the things he did on a pristine Alembic? Maybe not, but whatever came out would probably still have been memorable. I highly suspect that if Alembics were as common and affordable as the Fender, Hofner and Ric were in the 60s, that at least a few of the great players people point to in these comparisons would have been playing them. Many of those guys have looked beyond their original instruments in the years since they "made it". Is a guy who plays continuous 16th notes with a pick going to care about sustain? Probably attack will be more important. If you're playing ballads and occasionally need to let a note ring for two or three measures, maximizing sustain might be more important to you. Maximizing sustain is also more than just that. The same features that improve sustain often also provide a stronger fundamental and better bass response on short duration notes. There are dozens of other characteristics that have to be balanced as well. In short, those instruments worked for what those players wanted to do. Some of what they played may even have been a result of the limitations of those instruments. The reality is that every player and situation has its own dynamics, and choice of instrument is a very personal thing. That's all kind of hazy, but one thing is clear. I get more compliments on my bass tone with an Alembic than I ever did playing Modulus, Ibanez or Spector. I doubt I'm the only one around here in that situation. -bob | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 226 Registered: 1-2008 |
I recently ordered a custom built 6 string bass and that is what got me to researching all this. I have a very specific tone in my head, but I had no idea how to go about making it happen. While I obviously still have a lot to learn, I THINK I made all the appropriate choices. I'll find out soon enougth (it should be delivered tomorrow or Thursday). While it was not an Alembic, I did drop a chunk of change on it. The experience of ordering a custom build was very different than going to Guitar Center and choosing which color you like best!!! I bought my Alembics used; therefore, I was saved the stress of making those decisions with them. (Message edited by mike1762 on January 13, 2009) | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 584 Registered: 11-2007 |
Dave - I must correct you as I feel VERY strongly about the assumption you have come to about my statement; The statement that I made was in the context of my musical experiences, in the realms of bands, within the realms of equipment, interacting with other musicians etc etc etc. This IS a musical instrument forum/club after all is it not?? I, obviously incorrectly, assumed (never a wise thing I will admit) that my statement would have been interperated within that context - because I can assure you that in my lifetime path I have experienced many, many trials, tribulations and tragedies that put the topic of Musical instruments, "musicianship" and "playing" firmly into perspective my friend! Its no big drama though - fate places obsticles in front of us all and we just have to live, learn and progress. Obviously, being a player and a musician is first to me in the MUSICAL context of my life (although actually building basses is becoming almost as important to me - and, no, I dont get hung up on every tiny detail of my builds...they just sound good) however in the scheme of the other aspects of my life it means little in the grand scale of things. Its a hobby I enjoy. If members enjoy talking about why a bass sounds good in minute detail then god bless them, I sincerely hope they derive enjoyment from it - life is too short! I simply try to offer an alternate point of view...is it not the whole point of forums like this??? John. | ||
| jacko
Senior Member Username: jacko Post Number: 2062 Registered: 10-2002 |
Can I stick my hand up and say that I'd read John's comment and interpreted it the same way as Dave. However, I'll say no more as we're veering wildly from Mike's original question. graeme | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2054 Registered: 6-2002 |
I agree, it was a rather sweeping statement. But let's resume our regularly scheduled programme of interruptions (without repetition, hesitation or deviation). | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 585 Registered: 11-2007 |
Graeme, Adriaan - quite frankly I would be stunned if either of you ever disagreed with Dave! Apologies for any distress caused to any other club members with my sweeping statements. John. (Message edited by white cloud on January 14, 2009) | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2055 Registered: 6-2002 |
John, I'd be stunned if anyone (after careful consideration) ever disagreed with Dave. | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 586 Registered: 11-2007 |
Adriaan, Dave is undoubtedly a truly great guy, and a wonderful moderator - one of the very best - but I firmly believe the assumption that any one person can never be wrong is a dangerous one. Imagine if Dave became "evil" and instructed you to walk into the sea with lead boots on - after careful consideration would you? John. | ||
| georgie_boy
Senior Member Username: georgie_boy Post Number: 634 Registered: 8-2005 |
No distress caused here John! I've been enjoying this thread. George | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2056 Registered: 6-2002 |
John, I didn't say Dave can never be wrong. But I would probably agree with him if he were. ;-) And I have to add that agreeing with someone is not the same as blindly obeying orders from anyone. And neither is disagreeing with someone, for that matter. | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1581 Registered: 10-2003 |
Dave seems to have an incredible gift for sorting through the details and bringing truth to light. I'm sure there are things we all would disagree on, but I'm also sure Dave's perspective would be the better-informed one. John | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1582 Registered: 10-2003 |
Just to kind of brush up against the original topic, let me just say that many of the comments and perspectives here RESONATE with me! ;) | ||
| lmiwa
Intermediate Member Username: lmiwa Post Number: 141 Registered: 2-2008 |
This is a "resonance" thread, not a "priorities" or "Dave" thread Thanks! | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1584 Registered: 10-2003 |
Lots of sympathetic vibrations here though! *rim shot* | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 587 Registered: 11-2007 |
What the hell does resonate mean anyway? John. | ||
| olieoliver
Senior Member Username: olieoliver Post Number: 1981 Registered: 2-2006 |
....to "sonate" again? (rim shot please) OO | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 227 Registered: 1-2008 |
From Wikipedia (when did they ever lie??? LOL) In physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate at maximum amplitude at certain frequencies, known as the system's resonance frequencies (or resonant frequencies). At these frequencies, even small periodic driving forces can produce large amplitude vibrations, because the system stores vibrational energy. When damping is small, the resonance frequency is approximately equal to the natural frequency of the system, which is the frequency of free vibrations. Resonant phenomena occur with all types of vibrations or waves: there is mechanical resonance, acoustic resonance, electromagnetic resonance, and resonance of quantum wave functions. Resonant systems can be used to generate vibrations of a specific frequency, or pick out specific frequencies from a complex vibration containing many frequencies. | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2058 Registered: 6-2002 |
The peak at the low-pass filter's cut-off frequency is also a resonance. The Q switch amplifies that resonance. | ||
| 3rd_ray
Intermediate Member Username: 3rd_ray Post Number: 175 Registered: 2-2008 |
Resonance is what brought down the Tacoma Narrows bridge. Mike | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1587 Registered: 10-2003 |
An example of resonance would be that one note at a gig which seems to rattle the entire room if you don't EQ it down a bit. Another would be the frequency that feeds back first and/or strongest when the instrument is in front of the amp. The intent of "tuning a room" with pink noise and EQ is to mitigate the natural resonance of the room. John | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1588 Registered: 10-2003 |
"Resonance is what brought down the Tacoma Narrows bridge. " Classic example! John | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 229 Registered: 1-2008 |
...previous threads have suggested that this (The Q switch) is why Alembic's are able to emulate so many other basses. However, as Bob stated above: "The wood adds by taking away. Tone coloration comes from the instrument having a naturally uneven frequency response. Some frequencies get absorbed more than others and what is left determines the tone available to the pickups." Bear with me here... If an instruments body is resonating at a given frequency, the vibrational energy in the string causing that resonance is being reduced and thus the PUPs are hearing LESS of that frequency. If this is correct, the contribution of wood to an instruments tone will be "valleys" rather than "peaks". I suppose "string tone" would have "peaks"??? I almost forgot about Adriaan's post... sympathetic resonance would result in peaks. However, with sympathetic resonance you still have to obtain that energy from somewhere (Conservation of Mass-Energy). Please understand that when I state something as "fact", it's usually a question. I have to learn to use the ? key. (Message edited by mike1762 on January 15, 2009) | ||
| keith_h
Senior Member Username: keith_h Post Number: 1203 Registered: 2-2005 |
Actually the wood does not have to take away. It is possible for the wood and the structure it is used in to create a feedback loop into the string & pickups thereby adding energy back into the string. This would be a type of sympathetic resonance if I remember my physics lessons of way too many years ago. Keith | ||
| mike1762
Advanced Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 231 Registered: 1-2008 |
Yes, I think you are describing sympathetic resonance. But resonance is a form of energy, therefore, if we increased the vibrational energy of the string in 1 frequency range, we had to reduce it in another. It now is clear that the wood will contribute valleys AND peaks. The Q switch can zone in on a VIBRATIONAL peak/frequency (in the string) typical for an instrument and thus emulate its tone. (I meant ?) Is there any sort of mathematical relationship between resonant frequency of an instruments body and the vibrational energy/frequency in the string? I imagine there are too many variables for that. (Message edited by mike1762 on January 15, 2009) | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2063 Registered: 6-2002 |
Not only the physical instrument causes resonance: the filter causes resonance within the electronic circuit. This colours the signal that is coming out of the pickup(s). The peaks in sympathetic resonance are feeding off of the entire vibration energy, but they may cause valleys in other parts of the frequency spectrum. The valleys can be just as defining for the "sound" as the peaks (scooped mids work even before you start boosting highs and lows). The maths involved are extremely complex (and way beyond my comfort level) - try finding some info on "Fourier analysis". | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 590 Registered: 11-2007 |
Adriaan - stop thinking and get playing John. | ||
| jacko
Senior Member Username: jacko Post Number: 2064 Registered: 10-2002 |
The other guys in his office might complain about the noise. I know my colleagues would ;-) graeme | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2064 Registered: 6-2002 |
That, plus it takes me an hour and three quarters to get from my office to my beloved Alembics. Stop tempting me! | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1591 Registered: 10-2003 |
An hour and 75 cents? | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2066 Registered: 6-2002 |
Ah well, I never pretended to be a native speaker ... Funny thing: before the euro, the Netherlands did have 25 cent "kwartjes", unlike the rest of mainland Europe which all seemed to have 20 cent pieces (at least for those currencies that had decimals in real life). We also had paper money at 25 (not 20) and 250 (not 200) guilders. The artwork on paper money was full of colours and graphic artistry - the euros are incredibly dull in comparison. So yes, I often stare at the small change in my wallet and wonder where those quarters went. | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2067 Registered: 6-2002 |
... but memory is such a fickle mistress: I forgot to mention that emblem of correct change, the 2.50 guilder coin, or rijksdaalder. |
