Breaking in a bass

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

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.

[Ken Smith]

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?

[Brian Gencarelli]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

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

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Brian Gencarelli

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

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.

[Brian Gencarelli]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

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.

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

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Brian Gencarelli

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

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..

[Brian Gencarelli]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

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...

[Richard Prowse]

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

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Richard Prowse

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

No, it sits in a rack in my office.

[David Powell]

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.

[Mike O'Malley]

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.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Mike O'Malley

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

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?)

[David Powell]

Originally Posted by Mike O'Malley

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.

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.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by David Powell

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.

Hable engles? ..lol

I have no clue what you just said David!

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'!

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

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?

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

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

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.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

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.

Gotcha.. Now we're cookin..