Belgian and French

[Calvin Marks]

Generally I have seen most basses fitted with French style bridges but occasionally do see Belgium. What is the "difference" (if there is any) and why would someone opt for one or the other? (Just curious)

To me it looks like French bridges have slightly wider feet whereas the Belgian might be taller in height? Please correct me if I'm wrong (it's probably a generalization).

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Charles Stark

Generally I have seen most basses fitted with French style bridges but occasionally do see Belgium. What is the "difference" (if there is any) and why would someone opt for one or the other? (Just curious)

To me it looks like French bridges have slightly wider feet whereas the Belgian might be taller in height? Please correct me if I'm wrong (it's probably a generalization).

A Bass needs the size it needs. I don't know all these differences myself. I just know when the bridge is right or wrong for a bass. In general.

[Arnold Schnitzer]

A Belgian-style bridge has tall feet and a small body. The low mass of the upper part of the bridge is thought to filter out less high frequencies than a typical French-style bridge. Belgian-style bridges are preferred by some soloists, because the sound tends to be more brilliant. Bridge width is another matter, determined mainly by the position of the bass bar and distance between f-holes.

[Calvin Marks]

Originally Posted by Arnold Schnitzer

A Belgian-style bridge has tall feet and a small body. The low mass of the upper part of the bridge is thought to filter out less high frequencies than a typical French-style bridge. Belgian-style bridges are preferred by some soloists, because the sound tends to be more brilliant. Bridge width is another matter, determined mainly by the position of the bass bar and distance between f-holes.

Thank you Arnold, that's really fascinating. Also the hearts sometimes look different as well.

[Steve Alcott]

There's also a difference in the shape of the wing area, ie., the spot where an Underwood pickup goes. I don't know which is which, though.

[Thomas Erickson]

Originally Posted by Arnold Schnitzer

A Belgian-style bridge has tall feet and a small body. The low mass of the upper part of the bridge is thought to filter out less high frequencies than a typical French-style bridge. Belgian-style bridges are preferred by some soloists, because the sound tends to be more brilliant. Bridge width is another matter, determined mainly by the position of the bass bar and distance between f-holes.

Do we assume this is considering bridges of the same overall mass, or is there a tendency for one to be heavier than the other in the same size?

[Arnold Schnitzer]

Originally Posted by Thomas Erickson

Do we assume this is considering bridges of the same overall mass, or is there a tendency for one to be heavier than the other in the same size?

I don't know. I've never had the occasion to inspect two bridges made for the same bass; one French, the other Belgian, and then to weigh them.

[Matthew Tucker]

Originally Posted by Steve Alcott

There's also a difference in the shape of the wing area, ie., the spot where an Underwood pickup goes. I don't know which is which, though.

In a Belgian bridge, an Underwood pickup doesn't go.

Not very well, anyway ... the bottom of the wing is curved.

[Steve Alcott]

Thanks, Matthew-now I know which is which.

[Thomas Erickson]

Originally Posted by Arnold Schnitzer

I don't know. I've never had the occasion to inspect two bridges made for the same bass; one French, the other Belgian, and then to weigh them.

Makes sense. Now that I think about it some more, I suppose that style doesn't make any difference in overall mass, since either could likely be trimmed out to match the other. So just a matter of where on the bridge the mass is situated, although I'd speculate that the length (flexibility) of the legs is just as much a part of it...