Pecanic Tailpiece

[Mike Pecanic]

"Yeah, you should try another tailpiece - it might solve that problem and make your bass sound better!"...or not...mebbe...make it worse...no change...transpose your instrument to Bb...I dunno...get 2, they're small...

Honestly Stan, its all a crap shoot! Lemme guess, the wolfiness is around the F# huh?

[stan haskins]

Actually, the whole string is a bit of a problem. the open A and A harmonic are rough, hard to start - it gets a little rough again around F# and G#, too . . . like I said, I'm not sure if it's by definition a "wolf tone" problem, but when I have problems starting the string with a clear fundamental, I think "Wolfiness"

Anyway, thanks for the responses, Mike. Those tailpieces sure do look cool, and all the basses I've heard with them sound good - if I ever decide to try one, I'll report back. I guess I ought to start with a wolf tone eliminator though, I haven't tried that yet . . . (they just don't look as cool)

[David Powell]

What you described Stan, sound like what happens on my B string when I try to tune it to the E sometimes using the fourth /fifth harmonics. The string fights the bow and you can't get a clear note and the sound it makes, well, there is just no hope hearing when it gets in tune. I'm guessing that is why they call it a "wolf";- because it kind of howls in this wierd strained dissonance if you get anything at all. Fortunately it is only on the low B. Once you are at C and above, the string plays well. The body cavity resonance as best I can tell is about C and the fingerboard is A. I don't know if that effects it but the C's are really strong everywhere and the A is pretty strong too. It's just the low B forth harmonic that jumps like that against the bow. Stopped B on the A sounds really strong as do the F#s.

My work around is just to tune that string at the octave to an electronic source. If it is really carefully tuned then the wolfiness is not as bad. And on some days for unknown reasons, it just isn't there at all. I've thought about the Pecanic TP, the tunable ones or even just a compensated one as at least something worth trying, but on my bass, it's just a few notes on one string that suffer. The original TP is a dyed hard wood, not compensated, and looks pretty good so it's not the highest priority to upgrade it, but considering most of the better 5 string basses I see photos of have compensated TP's makes me curious.

[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.

[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.

[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]

I don't think that either Stan or David are experiencing a true wolf note. As Mike Pecanic pointed earlier out by asking if the wolf occurred around F#, a true wolf note does not encompass an entire strings or a large percentage of the notes on it. It is normally a break in the sound of a particular note and it occurs regardless of what string you play it on. My first reaction would be to try a different (brand) string or strings. If the anomaly still occurs and if your luthier can not eliminate the problem, you may just have to accept the sad fact the some basses have dead spots and/or do not respond evenly across the strings.

Here's a no cost or very low cost idea for trying a heavier tailpiece without making any permanent change.

I don't know if anyone has tried this on a tailpiece, but when tuning the neck/fingerboard in B0 tuning, we use common modeling clay to temporarily add weight to the end of a fingerboard. The same could probably be done with tailpieces to determine if a heavier tailpiece would be of benefit and find the exact weight needed for a new tailpiece. The clay adheres to smooth surfaces and can be added or removed without damage to the surface. Lead fishing weights can be added to the clay if even more weight is wanted.