Breaking in a bass
 

I think most bassists agree that one reason basses improve with age is the effect of vibration in 'opening up' the bass. Exactly how this occurs I don't know, but I'm guessing there are differing opinions.

Anyway, in an attempt to speed up the process, I've thought of leaving the stereo on while I'm away with a speaker blasting away at my bass.:D

Thoughts?

Do you think a bass would prefer:

Pictures at an Exhibition/Organ transcription
Vic Wooten
Paul Chambers arco solos
James Earl Jones narrating a book

I tried this for a bit, but my dog isn't crazy about Russian music, so that almost eliminates number one.
My bass may try to pick up some Vic Wooten licks. This would be difficult for a DB to pull off, but maybe worth a try?
It would have to have better intonation than Mr PC, but he's surely a goal to shoot for.
Maybe a little James Earl Jones would be good for helping the solos. Me and the bass may actually have something worth saying and a willing audience. :D

OK,
So what are your thoughts? Is this a stupid idea and if not, any material for helping the bass along on it's road to maturity?

p.s. Bob, I'd bring the bass to you for the de-dampening treatment, but money is really tight right now. Maybe it's in my basses future.

Thought!
 

Why do Basses sound better after it gets some cracks and then gets fixed? Is that part of aging? Is that part of mellowing out or am I just cracking up mentioning this? :p (why pink? yuck..)

Experience and time combined loosens up a Bass. My 200 or so year old Italian Bass sounds mellower than my 88 year old Italian Bass and the older one has way more cracks. :(

I had two English Basses side by side both around 200 years old and the one with more cracks sounded better. Then I bought another one almost 200 years old with even more cracks and it sounds even better than the other two. :D

Maybe it is all it's cracked up to be, aye?:rolleyes:

Ken, I respect your advice.
Do you recommend I put the bass outside for the rest of the winter?

breaking in a bass
 

I have heard people suggest some kind of transducer that vibrates the bass; but I don't know specifically what device, where to get it and how to use it. Anyone else, know about these? One bassist suggested playing tritone double stops with a bow to generate a lot of vibration. My bass is new so I bow some long open Es and As as well as the tritone double stops to open it up when I start practicing.

Jim

If you believe that sound vibrations will improve your bass, then just plug into your amp, turn it up till it feeds back and leave it on all day. :eek:

I do this:

Tune your E string down to D. Then hold your finger down on A on the G string. You end up with 4ths, or 5ths (if you are on your head). Then play a series of double stops on the strings D & A, A & D, D & A, etc... if you want to get tricky turn your bow underhanded and play the lowest and highest string at the same time.

You will feel your bass start to open up. Give it a whirl.

Brian

Give it a whirl?
 

Do you do this for 20 years without stopping? How do you expect to excel the aging process with all these gimmicks?

Remember the song? "Breaking-in Is Hard To Do" ..;)

My method? I just buy old Basses and get them fixed up, period. My 3/4 Shen is 10 years old and my 7/8ths is about 6. The Lionhead from Jeff is about 3 1/2 etc.. They all sound their age. My Martini is 88 and Gilkes is 193 and they both sound their age as well despite their young looks.

Being smart and having experience is two different things. Doing the right thing to vibrate your Bass is fine if you can live long enough to witness the change.

If you can afford a House or Car and/or hobbies and vices, then adjust your priorities and try to get an older investment grade Bass. I don't see it happening any other way.

I have one Ken- and it sounds great. I am not telling him that a "new" bass will sound anything but "new".

I believe that each bass, where it is in its own progression has a maximum volume and tone production capability. What I am suggesting is how to get the most out of that instrument at that particular time in its progression. However, if you don't believe me- try it. Try it on one of your 200 year old English Basses. Do it for one week solid, about 5-10 minutes a day. Make it part of your practice routine, as long tones.

Your bow arm will improve, and your tone production on that instrument will improve. I also think that the amount of vibrations you are producing will positively affect the sound- in the long run. There is no instant fix.

I have both, as well as you. Some of us are younger, Ken. We may see the difference in our lifetimes. ;) Also, some of us keep a bass for 30 or 40 years without buying and selling. (or at least plan to)

As I said, give it a whirl. :rolleyes:

Brian

A variation I use of this warm-up is different. I introduce a very strong low pitched dissonance by bowing the major 7th interval (B on the B sring and Bb on the E) It all starts shuddering at about 2 Hz. I suppose the same thing can be done with the E and Eb on a 4 string. If the bass is feeling stiff, I do this for a few bow strokes and it seems to limber it up a bit. I think playing it often will do more than leaving music on, but if you do leave the music on;- my dog, Mars, prefers Stan Getz and Astrud Gilberto,....

My reasoning for using the method I developed is that all four strings are ringing either due to direct playing it or sympathetic vibration. That means the whole bass is being driven from every string. (hopefully) You can hear all the overtones ring fully- and I believe that is the key.

I don't have enough fingers to pull off your system.:D

My bass wasn't played for about 10-12 years when I bought it. It was stiff and didn't speak as well when I first got it. True, I have done some set up and added a C-extension. (Which, incidentally, I think has a profound effect on "opening up" an instrument.)

After eight years of owning this instrument, it sounds much better now. Not just to me, but my section mates in the orchestras I play in. Part of this, not all- is due to me "coaxing the sound" out of the instrument.

If I could demonstrate it- you could hear the difference just a few minutes makes. I call it "waking up".

FWIW
Brian

For those interested:

http://www.dalemfg.com/acousticaladjustment_021.htm

Obviously a bass would be much more involved, but you guys asked.
:cool:
Brian

I'm sure the quickest and easiest route (for those who can afford it) is to just buy an old bass to begin with.
For someone in my lack of income bracket :( finding a bass that is well played in and speaks to me is a challenge. It seems most practical to get the last ounce of tone out of my current bass.
I am in the market for a 200 year old Italian bass under 5K if anyone knows where I might find one.:D

Vibration DeDamping
 

Greg has played several instruments which have been treated with the Vibration DeDamping process.

FWIW, I've been using Prof. Gerhard A. v. Reumont's Vibration DeDamping procedure on basses for several years with very good results. This systems uses a frequency adjustable mechanical device attached to the bridge of the instrument which sets the plates into high amplitude vibration during 12-15 precisely controlled steps from approx 50 to 12,000 Hz. The lowest frequency steps starting at about 50Hz are run for 5 to 10 hours each and I can guarantee that a few hours of this can get your wife VERY mad at you as it is VERY loud (good ear protection is an absolute must). Unlike loudspeakers, all of the energy is directed into the tables of the bass and the top of the instrument can actually be seen (with a stroboscope) to move with an amplitude of between 1/16" and 1/8" at the ff hole area continuously. That is far more amplitude than you will ever see as a result of playing at FFFF. Here is a link to more info in case anyone is interested.

Prof. Reumont's book "How to Improve the Resonance Condition of Musical Instruments by Vibration Dedamping" has been translated into English and is available from Henry Strobel Books for about $30.00. Henry added this statement on the ordering page.

"Describes the author's twenty-five years of experience and the methods and equipment he used to "play-in" string instruments. (Only for experts who can properly evaluate and apply this process.)"

Reumont's method was patented in Germany and was licensed to several musical instument makers. When his patent expired, he wrote his book which explains all of the how, what, why and whens of the process. Reumont was a professor of Engineering prior to his retirement. His specialty was relieving stresses in structures. He is also a life long doublebassist.

Me too. God why didn't I think of this? Its so obvious!! Rather than wasting time trying to get my bass to sound better, I should buy one that is already perfect!:D

Can't you just build one that is already perfect?;)
BG

Yes, I have played a few of Bob's basses that had the Vibration Dedamping process done to them. Although I didn't play the basses before the process, I am a believer in the process. They have tone in spades.
Bob, surely at some point when finances improve I'll come see you.

Someone..
 

Someone PLEASEZZZZZ come by and play my Cornerless bass and feel your innards shake when you play the two bottom strings as well as listen to the G and D which sound as thick as a bridge cable and tell me if any new Bass can sound like this with any of these 'mad scientist' methods. Then, please play one of Arnold's handmades as well as my Simba' from Jeff and then tell me how these good newbies sound in comparison as well as your souped-up gadgeted newbies as compared to my Storionish Bass.

I just want to hear it from someone playing all three examples between actually old, New and 'vibrated' New.

Is that too much to ask? Then, and only then can we put this theory to rest. If you don't compare it to some good old Basses, we will not know what it does.

Also, do Basses ever crack while doing this test? All Basses crack somewhere while being brokin-in during the first 50-100 years somewhere at least..

Ken - you need to go back and read the title of this thread. It is "Breaking in a bass", not comparing old basses to new ones or vibrated basses to old ones. Come on Ken, stop comparing Apples and Oranges. You might as well be saying that old basses sound better than Cremona plywood basses. We all know that to be true, but that was never the question. There is far more than "breaking in" process that makes an good old bass sound great (but time isn't going to make a bad old bass sound great). No one can duplicate the effects of time on the molecular structure of the wood. Breaking in, whether by playing or other method, is simply the process of relieving the internal stresses of an instrument. Once an instrument has been broken in, Vibration DeDamping does absolutely nothing. However, on brand new instruments, what Vibration DeDamping does IMO is simply amazing. I also use it anytime that I do major repairs that incur the removal of the top. Customers tell me that it sounds just like it did before the repairs were done.

I am not going to get into a discussion on whether Vibration DeDamping works or not. It has worked for me in the past and that is all that matters to me. I simply wished to point out that Reumont's Vibration DeDamping method does exist and has been reviewed positively by such well know violin authorities as Joseph Curtin. There have been very positive articles written by persons other than Reumont on the subject of Vibration DeDamping that are also available. If your mind is closed on this matter, that's your business. I'm not going to try to convince you or anyone else otherwise. However, don't think for a second that Reumont's methods can be compared to the old schemes such as putting a speaker in front of a instrument and playing loud music or tones. All you have to do is put your hand on the instrument and feel how little of the audio energy has been transferred to the plates of the instrument. Such schemes might possibly work on a violin or other instruments with smaller, relatively thin plates, but on a bass it isn't going to happen. The plates are simply too big, thick and stiff for air transfer to do much, if anything.

Vibration DeDamping is not a gentle process and proper care MUST be exercised, as it has the potential to damage (i.e. crack) an instrument, especially if one tries to cut corners. I read where one person thought he could "improve" the process without using Reumont's methodology or buying the expensive equipment that Reumont specifies. The net result was an instrument that had to be sent to the shop for fairly major repairs. Even with proper care, broken strings sometimes occur. However, I have not heard on anyone damaging an instrument when they followed Reumont's instructions.

Ok ok..
 

I think we are talking about two slightly different things. I agree that playing a Bass does help to break it in and this Vibrating technique you refer to may help it further and faster BUT my point is as you have just said, "No one can duplicate the effects of time on the molecular structure of the wood".

I just want to make it VERY clear that anything short of a good Bass being very old will not sound or respond like a very old Bass no matter how much you 'shake 'n' bake' it....

If you have a newish kind of Bass, play it as much as you can to break it in. The methods described above has worked according to the witnesses postings. If you want an actual Real OLD BASS, then get one because nothing you can do will make it old before its time..

Bob? Are we on the same page now? Close maybe buddy?

I will try Brian's methods of 'D'/'A' 5ths for a warm up each time before playing whenever time allows and see what shakes. Brian? On that 'E'-string to 'D' de-tuning, will I get the same results just using my Extension stopped on the 'D' to play that 5th with the 'A' string or does the length matter?

Ken,

No, you can stop the D on your extension. I was assuming that Greg did not have one... I stop my extension like that.

I may be up to Philly in the near future, so I will try to get John to take me out to your place. I would love to play that "Storioni". I also want you to take a look at the "Heifetz" up close and personal.

Brian

Visit?
 

Great, come on by. John who by the way?

The Storioni is here for a few months 'till Arnold finishes my Hart/Fendt Bass. Then I take one off his bench and put another one on it. I would love to see your Old German as well. Just let me know what your plans are. I go into Philly myself on occasion and there is also a Train that comes within 10 minutes of the shop as well.

OK, I think we are fairly close now. The important concept we agree upon is that "breaking in" and "OLD" are two distinctively different things.

Harrison. I may be making a trek up there in a month or so... I'll keep you posted.
Brian

Yup...
 

Gotcha.. Now we're cookin..

Oh him...
 

Ok, yes. I didn't know you guys knew each other. He knows his way here fairly well. Nice guy and great player as well. My sons name is Jon so it threw me a curve at first..

You can say that again. John is a former student and friend. He has a pretty amazing bass as well...

I have been paying attention here, but chose not to jump in; more interesting to watch from afar. :D

Thank you Brian, but I've got an Obligato E and don't want to kill it buy tuning down. No extension on the bass. I have been dragging the bow to get as much sound out of the bass as possible when nobody else is home :eek: and I think it's helping.

FWIW, I don't currently have the means to even consider another bass for probably several years. It's got something to do with being married and soon having two kids in college among other factors. I'm not complaining, it's just the way it is. I suppose I could change my marital status, but I love my wife too much to give it much thought. :D

My bass will get to listen to some loud music for the foreseeable future and be punished by the bow. This may or may not help, but it can't hurt either. When I can free up some funds, I may take it over to Bob's for some punishment.

Thanks for the advice.

I'd love to try that cornerless bass, do you stand it in a corner when you're not playing it?

who me?
 

No, it sits in a rack in my office.

I definitely notice even over a week long period that my bass is more responsive the more I play it. Let it sit a couple of days and it feels stiff at first. It's not a huge difference, but I do notice it. I think doing something to get it vibrating is just getting it warmed up mechanically. Oh, and that low Major 7th interval is just a double stop. I just use the two notes, the open BB and the Bb. You have to play it arco to get the effect. If you have a 4 string, the flat 5th works pretty well and the vibrational deflection in the bass is considerable if you can set up a standing wave at about 2-3 Hz. The dissonance is sort of seizmic. Things will walk off of the shelves....

Overall, my DB does respond much easier than when new. I think the exercise is beneficial. If it is going to get considerably better with age, that will be nice to experience. If not, some day I may resort to Ken's strategy...

Gee for whatever reason I could take up that invitation to come play on his basses, I might have to make the time.

A few years a go Rick Turner and Steve Rabe (SWR amps) did a similar experiment where they hooked guitar up to a low frequency transducer. They reported similar effects. Interesting. They patented the proces, or the device, but I don't think it ever went anywhere

http://www.acousticguitar.com/gear/a...ibration.shtml

I always assumed that the changes with age are the result of the wood changing character, not viibrations--in grad school I did a fair amount of remodeling work on old rowhouses in San Francisco--old as in 70 years or so. The wood in those houses was hard to work--it was really hard to drive a nail into it compared to new lumber. It could be because they used "old growth" timber, but I doubt it--those were rowhouses that were built after the SF earthquake, in a hurry. My house was built in 1949, a typical DC area postwar brick cape cod, built in a hurry to standard specs, and the floor joists are similarly harder to nail and drill than new timber, and I just can't believe they were using some kind of old growth lumber in 1949. My guess is that the resins in the wood age and grow harder and more brittle. But who knows? I'm not even convinced that old instruments always sound better. I've played plenty of expensive old guitars that sounded blah. But I've never played a really old bass.

That is an interesting article that really points out one of the big differences between guitars and the violin family. Catgut Acoustical Society members have used Chladni patterns in plate tuning for the last 50 years or so as an inexpensive method to visualize the major vibration modes in plate tuning. Christmas "glitter" is placed on a disassembled plate and the plate is vibrated using a sinewave generator driving a small speaker. When the frequency of a particular mode is activated, the distinctive Chladni pattern is formed by the glitter. In violin plate tuning, the patterns (primarily of modes 1, 2 & 5) are used to help determine where or how much wood should be removed from the plate. The Chladni mode patterns have distinctive shapes that are, for lack of better words, the "target" during the graduation/plate tuning. The vibrating frequency of the particular mode changes as a result the plate tuning wood removal. You never know the mode frequency until after the plate tuning is done and there are no consistent mode frequencies between instruments of the same type and style.

Apparently, in flat top guitars, the Chladni modes are at a consistent fixed frequency from one guitar to another. This allows them to vibrate the guitars at known (fixed) frequencies. Violin family instruments could not use this method since the exact mode vibration frequencies would not be known. (Besides, how would you attach a round back bass to the top of the big guitar shaker?);)

This is something that I have been cogitating on for a while now and thinking about possible links between the aging process, which is bound to be related to chemical / physical changes that occur whether the wood is vibrated or not, and the vibrational process, which while it is something different, may interact with the chemical factor. Some here would warn that me thinking might be a risky undertaking or have even riskier results, but for what it might be worth, two things have occurred to me.

There are definitely chemical changes happening in the wood. Incidentally, the studs in my 1915 heart pine house will break a drill bit unless it is designed to drill through high grade steel, and those will generally burn through more than cut through, so the wood does get harder as observed by others. What has occurred to me lately is that the vibration of the wood may speed up this process. Almost every chemical process is speeded up by agitation of the reactants, and vibrating a piece of wood will certainly cause the components within it to move around, perhaps bringing more of the unstable chemicals into contact with the others that these react with.

The other consideration is that when we play an instrument, much of the energy we introduce to the wood is not converted into sound, but absorbed by the wood. This will be absorbed in the form of heat, a result of the friction between the moving molecules as some of the sound waves are absorbed, just like bending a piece of metal will heat it up. Heat is also known to accelerate chemical reactions. So the agitation and heat effects could be at work in speeding up the aging process and the term "warming up the bass" is more accurate than one might think at first.

Even though these effects are probably quite small, the general perception that there is a difference is considerable.

ahhhh??
 

Hable engles? :confused: ..lol

I have no clue what you just said David! :confused:

As far as breaking in a Bass, playing it is the only sensible thing I can think of. If you are looking for that 'old' sound, buy an 'old Bass'! ;)

I understand what David said, but it seems to be an exercise in theoretical physics. Surely anything that gets molecules moving will cause friction which will, in turn, cause heat. I suspect that any increase in temperature on the bass would be only a fraction of a degree. Have basses in warm climates improved more than those in colder climates?
Oxidation of the wood also chemically changes the wood. How would anyone ever set up an experiment on this?
I do agree that old wood is harder, on average, than new wood; I suspect it was also harder when it was new. New pine is a crop grown with the intent to maximize yield. I believe that approach produces softer wood.

David, are there little insects in your house singing to the studs, causing them to vibrate?:D

Basically what I'm saying in a nutshell:

Anything that produces vibration in the bass or a small amount of heat could speed up the chemical process that is normally due to aging. It is a reasonable hypothesis considering the proven and known nature of chemical reactions, but probably very difficult to prove.

Readily conceded. And I guess that is why physicists who are double bassists would carry out the exercise and patent various processes;- without proof. The thermodynamics behind the exercise are well known and in physics these are now called "laws";- meaning that the observed effect of heat and agitation on reactions that would proceed anyway over a long period of time is consistent. There are many plausible reasons why it could happen somewhat differently, though. And this is why it would be difficult to prove anything. Wood is not a consistent material at the molecular level. Because it is the product of a living thing it has all kinds of unstable stuff in it. If wood were crystalline in structure, that sort of structure locks the molecules in a way that agitation's effect would be canceled except at surfaces. But wood cellulose is a long chain sugar molecule held together by hydrogen bonds. It doesn't have a crystalline lattice structure like steel for instance. Steel rusts, but only where it is in contact with oxygen. And given enough time, it will rust no matter what you do. But painting the surface or coating it slows it down considerably. Oxides of iron are favored by thermodynamics over pure iron. It will not rust from the inside out, but it will rust faster at the surface in a warm and humid environment.

In the wood there are unstable chemicals that react with each other that are in close contact in the wood's structure. These are acids and (relatively speaking) bases right next to each other that tend to neutralize over time, a very long time, because the structure of the wood slows down the migration of reactants through the wood. So the reactions that happen within the wood as it ages happen pretty easily, depending on the moisture in the wood (faster if the wood is wet and warm) and other factors like the density and other components of the wood. It isn't necessary for the wood to be exposed to open air for some of these reactions to proceed. Attempting to seal the wood probably wouldn't slow it down much either. If you want to see an example of accelerated degradation of wood due to heat (and not much heat) simply place a freshly cut piece of spruce (2x4 from any hardware store that has a rapid inventory turn over will do) in the sun with part of it covered by something opaque and the other part exposed directly. Within a few days the exposed part will be darkened. The only energy added is light (heat) and the components in the wood react with each other due to the addition of the light (heat). This will happen without the light also, just a lot slower.

One thing is certain: Freshly harvested wood is chemically unstable. Oxidation is one way to describe what is happening during aging, but mostly it is rapid degradation of partially formed cellulose, hemi-cellulose that is being burned up by acidic lignen. When that has happened completely, the remaining acid attacks the complete cellulose but much more slowly. Most of the hemi-cellulose is consumed within 2-5 years. It would not be practical for most builders of wood items to wait for the cellulose reaction to go to equilibrium, as that might take hundreds of years. But it certainly does happen. I don't think most folks that understand thermodynamics would require proof in every individual case. Enough has been proven that most general cases are predictable. Not everything needs to be that well understood to be put to practical use, either. Take for instance the rather complex engineering of the Roman aqueducts that were built long before Isaac Newton accurately described the forces of gravity. The Romans took their observations as practical fact without any "science". And Ken's experience is that older, well played basses generally sound better. He doesn't need an explanation. So his advice to "play the bass" or to "buy an old one" is pretty solid and well founded. It isn't strange to me that his view is perfectly consistent with what thermodynamics would predict.
Hard to say why the older wood is harder as it appears no one was taking very careful notes. In the case of my house, some think that species of pine is extinct. Some think it was the same as Southern Yellow Pine, just old growth and much larger trees than are currently harvested The boards are definitely nice stuff compared to what you see now. In my hall, which is about 15 feet long, there are only two floor boards that do not span the entire 15 feet. Some of them run past the threshold and go into the foyer all the way to the front door, which is another ten feet. Knots in the wood are extremely rare. I have seen old warehouses along the railway here that have 100+ ft. beams in the rafters that are a single tree. Sadly, in the last few years many of these have burned due to arson with no attempt to salvage the pine. There is no doubt that crop pine trees have been bred to grow extremely fast, and this definitely results in more soft grain and weaker wood. But growth rate and hardness tend to be consistently observable only within a given species. For instance I transplanted two very young Tulip (magnolias that are commonly called yellow poplar) trees when these were under 4 feet tall. One of them was only a few inches tall. These were wild trees. Both are approaching 40 feet tall now and it is less than 15 years ago that these were transplanted. These are averaging an increase in trunk diameter of nearly an inch/year. And I'm sure if these were harvested in a few years that the wood would be consistent in hardness and strength to commercially harvested yellow poplar, which is harder and stronger than spruce 2x4's that even when farmed and bred to grow quickly do not grow at the rate of the wild Tulip trees.

Probably so, but I thought is was just my ears ringing! The wood in my house is so hard that there are places where years ago the termites gave it a go and gave up! Seriously, the colony would find a run of soft grain and last maybe a few feet in one board and then die out. This was probably more than 75 years ago;- before houses were even treated for bugs. And then there were also powder post beetles. I think they gave up too, or the house would be saw dust by now. But I've often wondered if there might be little creatures in the top wood of the basses dancing around when I start playing it. Possibly gnawing a little here and there to improve the carver's work? Well, I kind of hope not... But seriously, this is factual:

Once when I was bowing some really low notes quite loudly, I looked up to find that several spiders, which I had no idea would be disturbed, had crawled out from behind the woodwork apparently to see what all the commotion was! So at least we know that vibrating the wood will drive the spiders out of hiding.

thermodynamics?
 

Speaking of Thermo, my head heats up when I read posts like this, long and Scientific!

So if playing a Bass till it's old makes it sound better, how can you say it's the thermodynamics thingamajig thingy and not just the experience of the harmonics of the wood communicating with itself to sound more mature, seasoned and complex?

On the heat theory, in 1971 shortly after buying a beautiful W.B.Wilfer Bass I got a job for a few weeks on a Cruise Ship. One day while docked in Puerto Rico I took the Bass out in the hot sun and played it for an hour of so in hopes of aging the Bass faster. All it did was make me tired and dehydrated!:( I don't think that Bass got much from my 'heated' jamming..

If this heat thing is true then I ask you, should one move down South when buying a new Bass and then move up North again after the heat has aged it quicker?

Speaking of time, imagine how much better your own Bass would sound, age and mature if you played it for as long as you spent typing these 'marathon' theoretical posts that most of us get dizzy just trying to read!

Just a thought..lol;)

When I posted this, a heated and agitated discussion was not what I had in mind.
:o

Just offering a plausible explanation for what so many of us observe about old and "played-in" instruments. As subtle as the effects would be I don't think one instance of extreme heat exposure or extended playing would mimic true aging. It is possible to add so much heat that the whole natural aging process is wrecked in favor of reactions that only proceed at the higher temperatures. I'd think dehydrating the bass would remove a good deal of the moisture that is one of the necessary vehicles in the wood for acid / base reactions to happen. That is why kiln drying arrests the normal drying / aging process and these woods are not as good for tone wood, but are softer and more desirable for carving into other things that are not musical instruments. Wood carvers prefer kiln dried wood, musical instrument makers usually do not. And the kiln dried stuff is reputedly softer.

I wouldn't recommend any extreme measures to accelerate the aging of an instrument made from relatively new wood. Hooking it up to a jack-hammer or leaving it in the car in full sun are certainly not good ideas. :eek:

Normal seasonal changes with the wood taking up moisture and releasing it and regular playing is probably the safest practice. But I do think it is desirable for builders to use wood that is as old as they can possibly obtain because aged wood is aged wood, regardless of when it was carved into a bass. In fact, the heart wood in a live tree is actually dead already, and is much more aged than the outer tree rings even when a tree is harvested. That part of a tree, the old dead wood in the center, is structural support for the living outer part of the tree. It is biologically adaptive for the tree to have stronger aged dead wood in the center. That way it can get taller, withstand the higher winds, and get the best light for photosynthesis.

It is a shame to me that we are losing the best American spruce for future musical instruments to the timber / lumber export market.

I can't;- I didn't;- and it is plausible that the two things you mention are in fact the same thing, just described differently.
I wrote the post above while I was waiting for my breakfast order to get to my table. I take my laptop there and take advantage of the wifi, not my DB. Believe me, if I could get my DB up to the counter there for some extra time on it, I would.:o