Talk:Acoustic bass guitar

Semi-fretting

I've removed the statement that semi-fretting is 'seen only on the acoustic bass'. With over 15 years of bass playing experience, I've only heard about it in the context of electric basses and never actually seen a bass treated this way. Actually, I'd rather see the whole subject of 'semi-fretlessness' moved to another article (maybe the one on frets) as I don't think it has much specific bearing on acoustic bass guitars. Basswulf 09:06, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Good point! I confess (in a bit more than 15 years just BTW) I've only ever seen two semi-fretted basses but they were both ABGs. In hindsight my comment was over the top. Best removed, agree.

Hmmm... But I've never seen a semi-fretted electric bass at all, and I'm really struggling to think of the idiom in which it would be used, while I've seen these ABGs in action and they worked a treat. I don't read bass newsgroups, I'm happy with the gear I have, and have too little time to play it as is!

Do any other semi-fretted instruments exist? Again, I have never seen any, and can't imagine what they would be. Does any instrument other than bass guitar exist in both fretted and unfretted versions? If not maybe the discussion should go to the Bass guitar article. Or if its accuracy is unverifiable it should be deleted altogether. It's just possible that both the instruments I've seen were custom jobs! Andrewa 21:00, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I'm not aware of semi-fretted basses being mass-produced, so they probably are custom jobs. As I recall, I first became aware of the concept when reading Laurence Canty's How to Play Bass Guitar, round about 1987, although it may have been in one of his columns in the Making Music magazine instead - it was definitely in the context of electric basses. I do spend a lot of time in online bass places so I'll do some research.

I've added information about semi-fretless options to the fret article with links to the ABG and BG pages and so will remove the explanation here. Basswulf 07:31, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Eston bass/fretted or fretless?

I've put the caption on the Eston back to just Eston bass with no mention of the frets. It is actually fretless, I play it regularly and would notice. In time I will learn how to take a clearer photo and fix that too. Andrewa 21:00, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that. In the photo I thought it looked fretted, that's the problem with photographs I guess! --Morven 21:05, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

G'day, no probs. It does look fretted, both in the photo and live, but they are just markers. I've updated the photo description too, I'm sure you weren't the only one wondering. It's a pose-proof machine on stage, most people have no idea how hard I am working... but I'm a bit beyond worrying about that (mostly). Andrewa 21:11, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hmmm, a lot of edits later, and I still haven't bought a better digital camera but I have now added a caption that I hope is as informative as the original but won't start arguments. Andrewa 02:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Manufacturers

Manufacturers: I think it's unnecessary to clutter the page with too many manufacturers. Therefore, I've made sure that each brand is only mentioned once on the page and also removed the statement Need to add more makers, but keeping to those who make or have made genuine ABGs not just semi-acoustic electric models. If more manufacturers are added, perhaps it should be on the basis of a unique contribution they have made to the development of ABGs. Basswulf 12:02, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

History and name of instrument

History: It is important to note that Fullerton and Ball brought Earthwood Guitars and Basses to the market - they did not refer to a bass guitar. I quote the Ernie Ball website "In 1972, after tireless work designing and building prototypes, Earthwood guitars and basses were introduced." Ozbass 07:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

It's a selective quoting; the site also says:

"Years before MTV capitalized on the 'Unplugged' revolution, Ernie began to dream about an acoustic bass guitar. 'I always thought,' he says, 'that if there were electric bass guitars to go with electric guitars then you ought to have acoustic basses to go with acoustic guitars. The closest thing to an acoustic bass...'"

This shows that the terms are used synonymously. But the most clear is the longer term, the one used used first. This para. uses both "acoustic bass guitar" and "electric bass guitar," the most descriptive terms for each. Badagnani 07:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but when the dream (in your quote "acoustic bass guitar" or "acoustic bass")of Ernie Ball (the guitar salesman and string maker) met with the craft of pioneering luthier George Fullerton, the original instrument was presented as an acoustic bass. By your own argument, the longer term for the actual finished instrument is therefore "acoustic bass". Even Ernie Ball using the terms simultaneously when reflecting on the concept many years after the fact does not mean that history should be re-written when the catalogues speak for themselves. Ozbass 08:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

"Acoustic bass" is a synonym for the ABG, of course, but many people call the double bass an "acoustic bass" as a folk etymology counterpart to the "electric bass," so ABG is used to avoid this confusion. Badagnani 09:47, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I am from a family of double bass players who also double on electric and acoustic basses. We hear many terms from folk etymology. Most common vernacular alternative for the double bass is upright bass, or EUB (electric upright) when a pick-up has been added. There is no confusion among bass players. ABG is cumbersome, unecessary, and rarely (if ever) heard in conversation. I have heard the term (and seen it on a CD cover) "downright bass" - used by double bass players to describe what you refer to as ABG. Therefore should every reference in Wikipedia immediately be edited to match "downright bass"? Whatever one's opinion may be, historical fact should not be denied. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia. Ozbass 02:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

No, the term "downright bass" doesn't make sense to me; it's an illogical term but if it were really a synonym it would merit a mention and a redirect. Acoustic bass guitar doesn't deny history; it is an accurate description of the instrument: an acoustic version of the electric bass guitar. Badagnani 03:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

"Downright bass" has been mentioned in another area of wikipedia discussions, but this is where we get to the basis of the argument under discussion. "Downright bass" makes perfect sense within a certain group of musicians (especially bassists competent on an upright with a sense of humour poking fun at "bass guitarists"). It may be illogical to one person, as the insistence of "acoustic bass guitar" or "electric bass guitar" is illogical and incorrect to many others. How many guitars have 4 strings and a scale longer than 25"? The first modern form electric bass (solid body, held horizontally, fretted) was described as an "electric bass fiddle" in its registered patent (on display at the Experience Music Project, Seattle). Where is the guitar in that? Shouldn't you therefore be insisting on the term fiddle (or perhaps violin) because it dates back to the mid-1930's? So who is the ultimate authority? I defer to the designers such as Fullerton. As I keep saying, go back to the initial catalogues and current manuals. There is no need for revisionism or to rewrite history. Ozbass 10:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

In that case, it makes sense in a funny sort of way, though "upright" and "downright" aren't exactly antonyms. Although the number of strings differs and the scale is somewhat longer, you must know that the electric bass guitar was modeled on the guitar, in that it allowed session guitarists (particularly in country, rockabilly, R&B) to easily double on a pizz. bass instrument without having to haul, or learn the actual double bass. The guitar element of design is VERY important. Marketing it as an "electric bass fiddle" was done as a marketing term because the "bass fiddle" was the only string bass anyone knew at the time. No, the electric bass guitar clearly isn't modeled on the double bass except for its tuning and number of strings. Badagnani 19:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Please do your research and justify your claims. "Electric bass fiddle" was the description on the design patent which is not a marketing document. The electric bass was designed for bassists as an alternative to the double bass. Every reference I have come across recognises this fact. The number of strings and tuning is derived from a double bass. If it were derived from a guitar it would have six strings and a scale of around 25 inches. If it were derived from a cello it would be tuned in fifths. Where is it written that the consensus decision by designers and instrument manufacturers to call the instrument an electric bass (fiddle or not) or acoustic bass was a conscious marketing ploy to hide the "guitar" element in being played horizontally? Don't be distracted by frets as they were on basses 500 years ago - before the guitar first appeared. The term used by the designers and manufacturers recognises that the function, voice and place of the instrument within an ensemble is fundamental - much more important than the superficial morphological aspects that the layman (or guitarist) may see first. For example, this company does not have a problem with calling their bass instruments electric basses or acoustic basses. http://www.washburn.com/products/index.aspx. No mention at all of a bass guitar from these guitar manufacturers of some 120 years history. Clearly their business has not suffered due to any confusion of terms. Ozbass 12:53, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Yet another irony is the fact that the violone (the fretted ancestor of the double bass) originated as the contrabass size of the viola da gamba, the bowed version of the guitar's ancestor, the vihuela. How about that round trip journey: plucked/fretted/hollow body (vihuela) => bowed/fretted/hollow body (violone) => bowed/unfretted/hollow body (double bass) => plucked/fretted/solid body (electric bass guitar) => plucked/fretted/hollow body... One could even add Jaco's fretless bass (plucked/unfretted/solid body).

...in the round trip one of the signposts is wrong. The books and instructional videos / DVD's written by Jaco refer to "Electric Bass" and himself as an "electric bassist". Ozbass 05:06, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

This is an interesting aside - Things do get a bit muddled, especially when the timeline is mixed up. The double bass was around at least 500 years ago (100 years before the first guitar - a 4 course instrument). Mix it up some more - various sources list the lute, vihuela, gittern and Arabic al ud as ancestors to the guitar. Also, before guitars there were double basses with frets and six strings, and without sloped shoulders (more like the violin / cello body shape). I am not suggesting the guitar was a direct descendant of the double bass however, more that it is a separate divergent branch in the evolution of musical instruments. The first plucked/horizontal/fretted/solid body 4 string bass was called an "Electric Bass Fiddle" (see below). Again, the morphology has nothing to do with voice, function, role and place in an ensemble. That separates the bass and guitar more than anything else. Ozbass 15:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Interesting info. 1500 seems a little early for the first "double bass"/"contrabasso," though sources say it was developed in the 16th century. The large 6-course plucked vihuela is similar to a guitar and the viola da gamba family (including the violone) evolved from it as a bowed version of the vihuela (the vihuela d'arco) in the 1400s. Interesting link, with photos (and controversy over the number of strings): http://www.thecipher.com/viola_da_gamba_cipher-2.html Badagnani 20:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

This is an area that is getting further away from the subject of this talk page, but I think we are in close agreement in that the 1500's is the 16th century. There may be very little differences in the number of years within that century. Your link is to a fascinating article and great collection of images. After reading that, what are we to assume all stringed instruments (solid or hollow body, electric/acoustic included) are therefore guitars, violins or violones? I for one am not going to tell orchestral string musicians around the world they are now "guitarists"!. The modern designs have evolved a long way in the last 500 years. I still maintain the name of the modern instrument should be left to the (still contemporary) designers and manufacturers. Ozbass 05:06, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Which company used the "electric bass fiddle" patent name? You didn't specify. Of course, a real electric bass fiddle would be the EUB (stick bass). Badagnani 16:28, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Paul H. Tutmarc, (musician, teacher, amplifier maker) Audiovox Manufacturing Company, Seattle, Model #736 Electric Bass Fiddle (1936). The patent is on display at the Experience Music Project, Seattle. A stick bass (solid body) is a specific design closely related to but different enough to the common understanding of an EUB (hollow body), in my view. Tutmarc did produce an upright solid body electric bass and had it on the market at least a year before the horizontal version. Ozbass 15:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The Bass Player Magazine website confirms this nomenclature, using the long forms of the name (as well as the shorthand "bass guitar" when the context is understood):

"Bass Player magazine is your source for acoustic and electric bass guitar tabs, chords and free online bass guitar lessons, tutorials and videos..." Badagnani 07:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

A popular magazine will use a popular term and Bass Player Magazine (whatever marketing positioning statement they may employ) is not an encyclopedia either. I am not disagreeing with the vernacular, nor advocating that every reference be deleted. Nor am I interested in an edit war. Let's just acknowledge the correct original term and that the instrument was designed for bassists to have a portable acoustic instrument Ozbass 08:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Which guitarists could easily double on, because the lower instrument resembled it so closely in design. Badagnani 09:47, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Design in shape - not number of strings, purpose, approach, role and voice. The quality of tone and volume suffers enormously from the guitar form as well. I am not sure what your point is here. A guitarist picking up a banjo does not make a banjo a guitar. So when did a guitarist picking up a bass make it a guitar?

From experience, guitarists doubling on bass usually results in bad bass playing. If a drummer picked up this instrument and thumped the strings or sound board would you re-edit the article to be "string bass drum" and call it a percussion instrument? I am sure you agree this is silly to the extreme, but I hope you get my point. Ozbass 02:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Ouch! I'm a drummer (first) who plays guitar and spends more time on electric bass and bass/vocal these days than everything else put together. So I guess I'm tripling on (bad) bass. Hey, it gets far worse. As of a couple of months ago I play a Jap reissue Fender Jaguar Baritone Custom, interesting piece of history rewriting. And no whammy bar, Jack was right. Light strings, short scale, really curved fretboard, I guess good bass players will hate it but I love it dearly. Hey it gets far far worse. A week ago, a request, a chart, no time to write out a part, not good at sight-reading bass cleff, guitar chord line said capot 3 so shock! horror! I just put one of the Jim Dunlop capots that normally serve my (very curved fingerboard) 12-string guitars onto fret 3 of the bari, and rocked along mainly in hand position 1/3, sight-reading and singing too. A capot will travel with the bari from now on. Hey, is there an award for bad bass playing? I must be getting close at least. But the paying public seemed to like it...

When I bought my first ABG (it was a bit of a folly then) in the early 80s, even Sydney's then biggest music shop (Palings/Nicholsons) didn't have a clue what to call it, or who would be mad enough to buy it by any name. That's one of the reasons they eventually marked it down to the point I could afford it. You can see its photo in the article. It's fretless. It still gets the occasional outing (most recently a week ago playing a part that said cello).

These days, everyone I know calls them ABGs, including bass players, music shops, music directors, and even the paying public. Andrewa 20:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

ABG

I know we've been through this before, but the refusal to admit that ABG is a normal and common name for these instruments is just plain wrong. It's not just Australian English either, I just did a Google search on ABG bass and got 211,000 hits, and all of the first page are on-topic and use the term ABG as either a synonym or (many of them) as the normal name for an acoustic bass guitar (which is my experience, see above).

So I really feel I have no choice but to restore the mention of ABG as at least a name in the intro. I realise we come from many different backgrounds. But if you want to argue the point, please cite some evidence (preferably, evidence that extends beyond your own particular musical circles). Andrewa 03:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Adding a resonator

One question: why didn't anyone try to place a dobro resonator within a bass guitar?

Please sign your posts on talk pages.

I'd guess they did! But obviously if they did the results weren't anything that was seen as marketable.

You'd probably need a bigger resonator than the dobro has to do justice to the lower notes. You need to move a lot more air to reproduce a bass note than a treble one, which is why until fairly recently top-of-the-line bass loudspeakers tended to be 15" or bigger. The specialised 10" and smaller bass loudspeakers now available have extremely long cone excursions which are probably not possible for a resonator. But either way, this is going to add to the cost.

By my ears, the sucess of the two ABGs I own and play fairly regularly (a lovely Eston fretless from the early 80s, no pickup, and a cheap but functional fretted student model bought new in 2005 which works well acoustic and better using the built-in active pickup) is more due to the tone than the volume of the lowest notes. On the lowest notes you are getting very little of the fundamental, but the ear percieves it as a low note despite the fact that what your are hearing is almost (but not completely) all harmonics. So a resonator ABG might be possible using this technique. But there's a lot of art there as well as the engineering required to make it happen.

But I'm still guessing. It's an interesting idea. Andrewa 19:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

At the Galax Old Fiddlers Convention in 1998 I saw a bluegrass band who had a stand-up fretted bass that the guy had made himself, emblazoned with the name "Low-Bro" or something like that. I took a photo of it. It looked like a gigantic dobro. Badagnani 19:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I think, personally, believe that if I have to play with pickup, I may as well as go for a electric bass. If i have to get used to a slightly larger resonator, I would not mind. George Leung 09:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Horses for courses. Lately I've been using a fretted ABG with pickup probably more than any other bass, more often plugged in than not but it works both ways. Andrewa 02:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

OHO! But look at this and this! Andrewa 11:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Whoa dogies! Badagnani 13:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed text

It is virtually impossible for a strictly acoustic bass guitar to be heard over other instruments — even unamplified acoustic guitars —

Ummm, if you look at the photo, you'll see an instrument that has regularly been used without a pickup in ensembles with other instruments, and especially acoustic guitars, for several decades now. I guess I'm doing the virtually impossible? Interesting theory...

Certainly, if I play fff on my Maton CW80/12, the Eston would have a hard time cutting through. But, believe it or not, there are occasions when louder is not better.

I currently have two ABGs, one fretless with a pickup, the other the old Eston pictured, no frets, no pickup. Although I'd expect the fretted ABG to produce more volume, in fact it's the other way around. The one with frets and pickup is usable without the amplifier, but not nearly so capable as the unfretted. I'm guessing that the one with the pickup is not all that sensitive acoustically quite deliberately, partly in order to reduce feedback problems, and partly just because the need is not there. Another factor is that the fretless is a higher quality of instrument. All things to consider before generalising, especially if your experience is only with the pickup-equipped ABGs that are the latest thing for the moment. Andrewa 02:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

If you don't use a pickup, you'd probaby need to at least mike it. Correct? Or are your ensembles completely acoustic? The ABG my group used was very quiet in comparison to all the other instruments. Badagnani 02:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, the one used in my group probably had an internal pickup, made to be played with a direct out to an amp (as I think most ABGs are). But it sounds as if a well made "strictly acoustic" ABG, like the one you mention, could be much louder (as it doesn't have to be deadened to reduce feedback problems. Thus, text to this effect should be added to the article. Badagnani 02:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't often mike the Eston. My most regular guitarist and I reach for our amps at about the same time, as she's often doing fingerstyle arpegios and the like, and I tend to use a plectrum so I drown her out not the other way around. We're mainly a capella, eight voices and just use the instruments for some variety, so the volume is not pub rock to say the least.

But generally I think that's right, the pre-piezo-pickup models are probably a bit livelier for all the reasons given. How common these older instruments are I'm not sure... I haven't seen many, but they were around before I bought mine, mainly used by folk groups, mostly very large (the ABGs, not the groups) and too expensive for me. Maton made them, and there were rumours that Gibson did too. I'd jammed on a Maton that had only the first five frets fitted and was a lot louder on them than on the rest of the otherwise fretless fingerboard, so I was very disappointed at the low acoustic output of the modern fretted ABGs when I tried them in 2005. Maton now deny ever having made a semi-fretted one, so that may have been done by a local luthier. Or the other possibility is, my experience of Maton is that their records are a bit patchy.

My buying the Eston was a bit of a fluke, it was new but had been dropped in the shop on some sort of corner that had made a big dent in the join between the back and side, not likely to affect the sound or be noticed by the public but very ugly even when fixed. The shop was closing down, and I was the only one who had shown any interest in it. So I got a very good deal 5 minutes before final closing, cash, no case, no wrapping, just take it and the sales docket and go, the manager actually talked me down a few dollars. I was being at least as stupid as he was, I didn't even play bass at the time, let alone fretless. Anyway, point being, they weren't all that common! I intended at the time to get the first 4 (not 5) frets fitted, but I'm very glad now that I didn't. It did for a short time have four large nylon cable ties serving (very successfully) as frets! That's when I decided I needed a modern ABG, and if I have to use the amp a bit more with it than with the fretless, so be it.

Not much of that rave is encyclopedic, it's not even very good orginal research, there's too little data. But we'll get there! Andrewa 10:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The Earthwood bass was reputed to be quite large, like a Mexican guitarron. That would give a bigger sound, if only for the lowest notes. Wish I could find a photo of one, but they're not made any more. Badagnani 13:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

See

http://www.ernieball.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-5019.html

http://www.reyesaccordions.com/Images/earthwood3.jpg

http://www.reyesaccordions.com/Images/Earthwood7.jpg

http://www.reyesaccordions.com/Images/Earthwood77.jpg

and

http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~bunkenba/abg.html

for some more observations and some pics.

I'm now wondering whether these Earthwood basses were the "Gibson" basses that I referred to as rumoured above... at the risk of putting down my fellow Aussies, I think at the time there were three sorts of guitars we considered worth admiring: Maton (Australian), Fender, and a sort of catch-all "other high-quality American", which covered Gibson, Gretsch, pre-Gibson Epiphone, and probably a few others. Even brands that now have retro interest like Vox (UK) and Danelectro were considered "mail order" quality, we played them while saving up for something with more cred. If we'd seen film of some big name in the USA using an ABG which didn't have a Fender look, it could well have been christened "Gibson" on no more evidence than that. Again I'm guessing. Andrewa 02:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Construction problems

I have always liked the tonal range of acoustic basses, but I have a distinct memory of many (many) years ago (very early 80's) when I was learning I could not play bass (in any form or style) that there was a problem in building acoustic basses - and that was that the hollow bodies needed reinforcing to take the strain of the heavy guage strings, and that such reinforcing dampened the tone significantly. Such basses that were being built were both small bodied and short scaled to cope with these pressures. Was there some innovation is building style and /or technique that overcame this difficulty? If there was, should it not be mentioned in the text?LessHeard vanU 11:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Bajo sexto

The article on the bajo sexto doesn't quite agree with the description here. The information here looks more complete and probably more correct. Can someone who knows this instrument go take a look? Thanks -MrFizyx 07:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Dreadnought Bass

Has anyone heard the term "dreadnought bass"? Does it mean the same thing as ABG? Boris B 06:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

New Wikiproject

I have started a new wikiproject, WikiProject Stringed Instruments. I am looking for 2 other coordinators to help it get started. Apply on my talk page by answering the following questions.

1. Edit count, how long you have been active on Wikipedia.

2. How often you edit string-related articles. (Scale of 1-10)

3. What you hope to accomplish if made coordinator.

Please post by March 1, 2009.

ṜedMarkViolinist^{Drop me a line} 19:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Acoustic bass guitar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050830093307/http://www.ernieball.com:80/mmonline/history/ to http://www.ernieball.com/mmonline/history/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070715071841/http://www.folkofthewood.com:80/page2517.htm to http://www.folkofthewood.com/page2517.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060513114910/http://www.banjo.com/shopping/shopexd.asp?id=780 to http://www.banjo.com/shopping/shopexd.asp?id=780

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)