|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Aug 5, 2019 5:42:30 GMT
I shimmed my fretless bass yesterday (again). Now I got the saddles back up and the action is 1.25 mm on the G string at the octave. To Hell with PLEKs and frets and rockers Bill Wyman said he defretted his (cheap?) bass because it was "rattling". I suppose he meant fret buzz. I still get "neck buzz" on the high end of the neck when I take the strings down too far.
|
|
DefJef
THBC Moderator
Due to musical differences I've decided I can't work with myself any more.
|
Post by DefJef on Aug 5, 2019 9:08:51 GMT
What was the action before you shimmed LeoThunder? Were you getting buzzing/rattling then? Has raising the saddles and shimming done anything different apart from lifting the strings over the pickups and under your playing hand? Were the strings rattling in the saddles? What? Why? How? Where? Which?
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Aug 5, 2019 9:21:16 GMT
What was the action before you shimmed LeoThunder ? Were you getting buzzing/rattling then? Has raising the saddles and shimming done anything different apart from lifting the strings over the pickups and under your playing hand? Were the strings rattling in the saddles? What? Why? How? Where? Which? The action was a little higher before (1.5 - 2.3 mm) because the saddles were all the way down. It is now at 1.25-2.1 mm. Now only the neck relief is the limiting factor, no longer the angle. I could take it further down with less relief but it causes mwah overload It is the third time this guitar is shimmed, by the way. There was already one when I first did it. Then I realised the nut was the main issue and cut the slots down to something sensible. The resulting action was playable enough but I wanted the instrument to be fully adjustable, so I thought I'd play around with it a little more. 1.25 mm is fine, now I can shred on it.
|
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Aug 5, 2019 9:45:32 GMT
Were the strings rattling in the saddles? Not at all. These saddles are nailed down with 2 screws, one is for intonation and the other to block the height adjustment, so there are 4 screws per saddle. No springs
|
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Aug 5, 2019 10:23:22 GMT
The sitar effect comes from the length of the string vibrating behind the angle point, be it bridge or nut. I don't think the angle would change anything. String trees prevent this by cutting that length in half or to less than that, thus bringing that sympathetic frequency higher and making it less noticeable.
If a Jazzmaster makes funny noises, maybe the solution is more in muting these strings past the bridge with something foamy. There's plenty of room to place something there.
|
|
DefJef
THBC Moderator
Due to musical differences I've decided I can't work with myself any more.
|
Post by DefJef on Aug 5, 2019 11:32:27 GMT
Maybe I am misdescribing the sitar effect LeoThunder . More poor use of words to describe things that we have discussed several times here before! It's not the sympathetic strings sound that a sitar has that I was referring to, more that distinctive buzz attack that a sitar has as each note is played. Perhaps I have misunderstood what Jazzmaster players have been complaining about all these years (apart from the strings popping out, which I can fully understand). It's also a sound that some players actually hunt for and they have designed all sorts of whacky ways to try to encourage it. I know I have. From weaving wires through the strings to dangling paper clips on them. None have worked for me and there are some expensive after market extras which are supposed to achieve it. I can't justify them and am still searching for a cheapskate solution. But back to eliminating 'sitar buzz' if you don't want it. Thinking about that behind-the-saddle angle a bit more I am wondering if a greater angle must mean more pressure on the saddle from the string and less chance for a buzz to be caused there? If you imagine having no saddle beneath the string and then plucking it then the sound should (hopefully) be buzz free. Raise a saddle gently under the string so that it just touches and, at the first moment of contact, you would expect to hear a horrid metallic buzz. The downward pressure of the string on the saddle is minimal and the string can half carry on vibrating as usual but with little sustain. Raise the saddle a tiny amount more and the buzz will be a bit less, the sustain a bit more. Now, suppose that you don't need to raise the saddle much to get a 'nice low action'. The pressure on the saddle is still not great. Potential cause for buzz? Shim the neck and raise the saddle as you have done on your fretless bass and the string pressure on the saddle is increased. Less potential for lateral or vertical movement and buzz? My brain says 'theoretically so'. Maybe in practice the point is totally moot. Just a bit of a conceptual exercise that may hold more water than I think it does. I always feel that a barrel saddle has too shallow a take off angle anyway in front of the saddle, and I have fixed buzzes here by subtly removing some of the roundness to increase the take off angle. I imagine those compensated tele saddles may do much the same thing as a side effect of their compensation staggers.
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Aug 5, 2019 12:36:38 GMT
But back to eliminating 'sitar buzz' if you don't want it. Thinking about that behind-the-saddle angle a bit more I am wondering if a greater angle must mean more pressure on the saddle from the string and less chance for a buzz to be caused there? Yes, definitely. The downward pressure on the saddle ought to be the tension of the string * sin(angle): The saddle is usually subjected only to its own weight and that sinused string tension so I can see how a string vibrating up and down could make it jump on its little screwy feet. Someone ought to make a cartoon of this. I want to see saddles with eyes and a screechy buzzing voice. In my cheap bass, saddles are also screwed tight against the rail of the bridge, so movement is less likely.Absolutely. A Jazzmaster angle with freely bouncing barrel saddles could be a disaster. Saddles in a Tune-o-Matic are held by screws to the bridge and the Jazzmaster bridge appears to be conceived the same way: The tighter the screwing, the lesser the bounce. How's that for a song title? Now you know what to expect from a band formed by a bunch of guitar techs.The shape of the saddle should make no difference. My little drawing could have a rounded edge, that vertical component of the string tension will depend only on the angle. A sharp edge on the saddle would only dig in wound strings and prevent them from sliding or help break them.
|
|
DefJef
THBC Moderator
Due to musical differences I've decided I can't work with myself any more.
|
Post by DefJef on Aug 5, 2019 13:00:07 GMT
I hadn't even thought about the actual saddle bouncing too. I was more concerned about the contact between string and saddle. That's where the buzz must come from first as you raise a saddle to touch a string, but point taken, saddles may well dance a polka too. As for the shape of the saddle, I believe it must make a difference. Again in an imaginary scenario, imagine a flat saddle. That would be terrible, dull and probably have zero sustain. Imagine it was arched a bit, just a bit. You would begin to get some note but not much. Sustain would be minimal. I also suspect that buzz would be very audible. Now how about an elliptical saddle; an ellipse on its side. I still am not sure that this would be best for sustain, that take off point is initially very shallow and even the section behind the take off point could buzz from the transferred vibration. Then we come to a round saddle as experienced on a traditional tele or a P or J bass. That take off point still starts as a very shallow thing and that's where I wonder if sitar buzz would be generated. By somehow increasing that take off point angle, at least at the front if not the back of the saddle there can surely only be an improvement (if indeed there is a problem there in the first place, which is the point in question really ). No need to make a razor blade out of the saddle. Something like a tune-o-matic one or even rounder than that should seemingly improve matters. After all we like an instant take off point at the nut. Except, apparently when we make a diddley bow and just suspend strings from bolts and tin cans. Perhaps this whole issue is not an issue at all.
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Aug 5, 2019 13:23:54 GMT
I hadn't even thought about the actual saddle bouncing too. I was more concerned about the contact between string and saddle. That's where the buzz must come from first as you raise a saddle to touch a string, but point taken, saddles may well dance a polka too. As for the shape of the saddle, I believe it must make a difference. Again in an imaginary scenario, imagine a flat saddle. That would be terrible, dull and probably have zero sustain. Imagine it was arched a bit, just a bit. You would begin to get some note but not much. Sustain would be minimal. A flat saddle is a mute but a round one is what you have on an acoustic guitar and it's not even hard metal. I would suspect the saddle feet dancing on a metal plate is what causes the buzz. You need three parts to interact with each other. A bit of dampening material like paper underneath would answer that question. In a Jazzmaster bridge, a little play between saddle and screw would allow for the same.
|
|
|
dtjesus
Harley Benton Club Junior Member
|
Post by dtjesus on Aug 29, 2019 21:05:42 GMT
This post is interesting. Just like the OP, I too find my SC 450 plus neck to have a certain bow as well. Despite all efforts at setup including lowering the nut, bridge saddle height adj, truss rod adj, I still have a high enough action, below which you start getting fret buzz. Sounds like other 450's have the same issue.
|
|