Pecanic Tailpiece

[David Powell]

Originally Posted by JoeyNaeger

FWIW, the pecanic tailpiece helped a lot with the tone and response of my bass. It felt much looser under the bow and the sound was more even. The wolftone isn't nearly as prevalent, but it still pops out occasionally. I had a carbon fiber tailpiece on before.

Interesting, Joey. Are you using the compensated or the tunable Pecanic?

[Brian Gencarelli]

Bob,

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the afterlength tuning important in the fight against wolfs, or it can at least mimic a "true wolf" when the afterlength is vibrating at a sympathetic frequency?

For instance, if your A string is hard to start, check all the afterlength and see if one of them is an A or very close to it. If so, put a wolf tone eliminator on to "correct" that pitch?

This concept was passed on to me by a luthier I worked with in the past, and I figured with your AO/BO expertise you could shed some light? Plus this would affect the tail length to shoot for.

I have heard that we should try to tune an octave and a fifth higher than the open string, but obviously that would be hard with a compensated tailpiece...

What are your thoughts? Or Arnold, Jeff, Ken?

Thanks,
Brian

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Brian Gencarelli

This concept was passed on to me by a luthier I worked with in the past, and I figured with your AO/BO expertise you could shed some light? Plus this would affect the tail length to shoot for.

I'm sure that others will disagree with me, but I personally do not believe in "tuning" the after-length. I'm not going to say that players are wrong when they honestly think that their "tuning" performed some kind of miracle on their bass, but it usually turns out that several things were changed in addition to the "tuning". My problem with it is two fold. First, I've tried just about every scheme there is for after-length "tuning" and I never found one that consistently worked on different basses. In addition, the string does not slide freely over the bridge so the "tuning" frequently changes from day to day as you actually tune the instrument to play it. Second, no one has ever been able to give me a good, logical reason why tuning the after-length to some particular interval (3rd, 4th, b5th, etc) should work. The oldest method I know of for setting the after-length is to simply make the after length equal to 1/6th of the playing string length. A very logical argument could be made for that method because this places the bridge at 1/7th the total length of the string. By being there it cancels out the 7th harmonic of the (total) string. This is good because the 7th harmonic is false. That is what I use most of the time although I don't measure it all that closely. FWIW, Pianos are made so the hammer hits on the 7th harmonic to deaden it.

If you are able to accept the concepts of A0-B0 matching (which I will NOT discuss here), the best way to tune the after-length is to not tune it, but rather tune the entire vibrating assembly as a unit. By this I mean the tailpiece wire length above the nut, the tailpiece and the string after-length as a unit. Each part affects the resonance frequency of the whole. Several excellent papers have been published in violin acoustics journals that say the ideal is to have the tailpiece tuned to 1/2 the frequency of the body cavity resonance frequency (which usually turns out to be in the 25 to 40Hz range). This job can be somewhat difficult since you have to add or remove weight to or from the tailpiece while it is still on the bass. I've only done this while performing the complete A0-B0 matching process, therefor I have no personal knowledge of just how well tailpiece-A0 matching works by itself.

[Mike Pecanic]

Yeah, c'mon Jeff, tell 'em about the "woo-woo" theory...

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Brian Gencarelli

Bob,

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the afterlength tuning important in the fight against wolfs, or it can at least mimic a "true wolf" when the afterlength is vibrating at a sympathetic frequency?

For instance, if your A string is hard to start, check all the afterlength and see if one of them is an A or very close to it. If so, put a wolf tone eliminator on to "correct" that pitch?

This concept was passed on to me by a luthier I worked with in the past, and I figured with your AO/BO expertise you could shed some light? Plus this would affect the tail length to shoot for.

I have heard that we should try to tune an octave and a fifth higher than the open string, but obviously that would be hard with a compensated tailpiece...

What are your thoughts? Or Arnold, Jeff, Ken?

Thanks,
Brian

Well, when I make an adjustment in the after length I am either moving the TP up or down. If up, the tailwire is longer with more flex possibly and iff down, less flex as the shorter wire is tighter. Also, there is more or less string below the bridge or the TP is closer away or farther towards the bridge.

What does this all mean scientifically? I have NO CLUE!

But, I do feel that when the TP is lower, the string tension feels tighter and when the TP is closer to the Bridge, The bass feels easier to play. There is about a 5% - 10% difference if pay close attention. A day or so later, all is forgotten.

Now, I am doing this on some pretty good carved Basses, most of them being fairly old. These are all great Orchestral Basses and 'smoke' for Jazz if that's what I need them for. If It was a wolfy shop Bass or modern plywood Bass, I don't know if polishing the hood ornament would make the engine run smoother. No insult meant there by the way.

Newer Bass need to be broken in and stay well set up and cared for just like any other Bass. The only thing is that you may not live long enough to see, play or hear that Bass fully matured.

I have owned and used about 4-5 New Basses in my life. One was my first plywood from Germany (Lang/Juzek). the next would be my W.Wilfer (from Juzek, Master Art model w/o Juzek Label). That Bass was 5 or 10 years old when I bought it but never out of the shop or set-up b4 I picked it up. It replaced an older Shop Bass maybe 40-60 years old or so. That older Bass was tight and wolfy. The Wilfer was loose and smooth on every note. Just a better Bass regardless of age.

Next was 10 years ago when I got one of 2 Shens made with European wood, the 3/4 Gamba1000 model. Smooth and deep for its size and still going strong. That is now my son Jon's Bass. Then I got a 7/8ths 800 model Gamba Shen which I still have and use when needed. The 3/4 I think is a finer sounding Bass but the 7/8ths is a cannon, just a little new sounding.

Most recently I bought the Bollbach Lion which is amongst the best new Basses I have played ranking the the handmades that Arnold makes which I just don't own one but have played a few of them.

Good handmade Basses sound good, period. Shop Basses do not have the attention to detail internally or in the materials chosen combined which makes it a hit or miss gamble. Two other Basses I bought which were both represented originally as Italian Basses turned out to be most likely Hungarian and not as old as they are dated. These do sound good by the way and not at all like my Shens. They are just Italian fakes made in a country where they think making a fake is more profitable than building up your own name as a maker. Many people are searching to find who these makers are as they have fooled a lot of people in the business or at least made us interested rather than just disgusted as the Basses are very good for the most part.

So.. for the TP.. Dress up you Bass as you see fit but the set-up overall is more important than one single component or accessory.

By the way, if and when I DO need a new TP, Mike is my go-to guy for that. Jeff and Arnold have made some nice ones for their personal Basses as well but I think Mike has the best ones on the market today.

[Bob Branstetter]

Here's a nice carved tailpiece by gold medal bass maker Dan Hachez.

[David Powell]

Brian, when I first got my bass, the shop set-up was with the afterlengths tuned to the major 3rd (plus at least one octave, perhaps two). I was surprised to find that this kind of detail had been paid attention to in design and placement of the TP. The tuning was too dead on for it to be accidental. So at least the maker thought it contributed something. I changed the string spacing and the only 3rd tuning that is surviving is the middle string, the A. The rest are close but of course the G and low B suffered the most. It really didn't seem to affect the way the bass played or sounded nearly as much as the new bridge, or even as much as when I did a very minor dressing on the FB. With a tunable Pecanic;- that is one with separate adjustable saddles on the TP for each string, I could have restored the tuning. I don't think it is that important what these are tuned to as long as it is tuned to something. It could help with getting intonation correct in the high range and might give a little constructive resonance to some notes here and there. I'd love to get one of them and play with it to find out. As far as wolf tones go, it seems plausible that if putting a weight on an afterlength reduces a wolf tone, then tuning the afterlength to something might also help, but I don't know that anyone has done the careful research that would be required to establish that. Like anything else in a system as complex as a DB, it might work sometimes, and it might do nothing.

As far as the compensated TP goes, the extra room for afterlength on the heavier strings probably makes those feel more balanced in terms of flexibility.

[Ken Smith]

I have been taught that the after length should be tuned to 2 octaves and a fourth. This will interfere less with the natural harmonics of the Bass.

[Bob Branstetter]

OK - we've got a third and a fourth. Anyone got a fifth or maybe a flatted fifth? Or an augmented ???

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

OK - we've got a third and a fourth. Anyone got a fifth or maybe a flatted fifth? Or an augmented ???

Bob, I'm not much of a drinker, sorry..