Trussrod material

Thumbfreak

Thumbfreak

Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
259
Reaction score
0
Just checked the Warwick webshop, I'm glad Warwick is now offering every spare part through their webshop but wondered why there are 3 trussrod made of different material ?

I think the standard trussrod is made of steel but what's the aim of offering other material ?
 
Yeah I wonder too...............

I remember something that was discussed in the past that is related to this topic................But I really can't remember.................. :(
 
Over the years the material of the construction of the trussrod has changed and so has the the design, if you own an old bass, the new trussrod might not fit your bass.
 
The weight of the trussrod is important, Basically, more mass you add to your neck, more sustain you get. But also you can get neckdive, so ... you chose your trusrod considering the sound, and the overall mass and playability.
 
Thanks guys for answering so fast.

Why does the aluminium one seem to be only available as replacement part ?
 
Florin said:
The weight of the trussrod is important, Basically, more mass you add to your neck, more sustain you get. But also you can get neckdive, so ... you chose your trusrod considering the sound, and the overall mass and playability.
Click to expand...

I think you're making a mistake here. Generally, the heavier the neck, the more sustain. But that's because you have either more wood (thicker neck), or you have a denser wood that usually gives more sustain as well. Using a steel trussrod instead of an aluminium one will result in a heavier neck (assuming that the steel trussrod is heavier than the aluminium version), but the trussrod itself will most likely not enhance sustain. I haven't read anything about how a particular trussrod "sounds" either, so it seems ridiculous to choose a trussrod for sonical reasons.......
 
Wouldn't the aluminium be lighter than the steel?
 
ThirdthumB said:
Florin said:
The weight of the trussrod is important, Basically, more mass you add to your neck, more sustain you get. But also you can get neckdive, so ... you chose your trusrod considering the sound, and the overall mass and playability.
Click to expand...

I think you're making a mistake here. Generally, the heavier the neck, the more sustain. But that's because you have either more wood (thicker neck), or you have a denser wood that usually gives more sustain as well. Using a steel trusrod instead of an aluminium one will result in a heavier neck (assuming that the steel trusrod is heavier than the aluminium version), but the trusrod itself will most likely not enhance sustain. I haven't read anything about how a particular trusrod "sounds" either, so it seems ridiculous to choose a trusrod for sonical reasons.......
Click to expand...

Absolutely right here my friend. The heavier trussrod will not add anything in terms of sound to your bass. But a heavier neck like you said (if it's because of a denser wood) will most likely involve a change in the sound your bass that will sound a lot like a longer sustain.
 
ThirdthumB said:
I haven't read anything about how a particular trussrod "sounds" either, so it seems ridiculous to choose a trussrod for sonical reasons.......
Click to expand...

Then you have to make more investigations The TR really influences the sound...
And people are actually choosing trussrods for sonical reasons, only you don't know it yet
A heavier truss rod will give you longer sustain, cleaner and clearer notes


 
Florin said:

Then you have to make more investigations The TR really influences the sound...
And people are actually choosing trussrods for sonical reasons, only you don't know it yet
A heavier truss rod will give you longer sustain, cleaner and clearer notes
Click to expand...

Well,

I've been thinking a lot before posting the above, and there is certainly something logical about the fact that the trussrod influences the sound. It's a piece of material that is fixed to the instrument itself. Surely it will vibrate as well, hence influence the overal sound (of course, the question is whether it is audible or not and whether you will prefer the sound or not).
One thing that came to my mind is that brass (or bell brass) is used by many manufacturers for the nut, bridge etc., because brass has a more favourable influence to the sound than Steel or Aluminium (at least this is a consensus: some may disagree). So logically, there should be trussrods available that are made of brass. One condition is that the material is strong enough, but since there is also an Aluminium version available, I suspect that brass is strong enough. Since there is no Warwick (bell) brass trussrod, I figured that the influence is negligible.
I will adjust my opinion: The trussrod material and design will influence the sound, but I don't think that was not Warwick's intention in the first place to offer different kinds of trussrods. It's likely that Warwick designed the Aluminium version to reduce weight, but the consequence is that the dimension of the trussrod will be different, i.e. thicker, because the Aluminium used is less strong (most likely) and less stiff than the Steel variant. This means that these trussrods are not interchangeable. You've mentioned that people choose different trussrods for sonical reasons. This means that the trussrods must be standardised (or a luthier has to do some customisation). I always thought that this was not the case: most companies have their own design. Apparantly, this is not the case. However, I do think that a heavier trussrod by definition will not give a better sound: you have many many alloys of Steel (and Aluminium) that will influence sound as well. The design of the trussrod will influence sound as well. A super thick trussrod will require a lot of space, therefore a lot wood will be removed: would this be beneficial ?? Well, some may like the sound, and some won't..................
Anyhow, I will try to find some information about this. If you have some links or whatsoever, please post some. :wink:

Cheers man. :D
 
Well, for questions like this I first ask the Warwick guys, so I get the official answers of the guys that are actually making our basses :-) I am not that smart to know anything, so I ask. Usualy Mr Gregory Pasquet, the guy behind the Custom Shop is helping me with answers.

I have read this in other places too... you can go to Warmoth website for example.
 
Tricky one this. As a materials engineer (don't know how many of us are on the site) I guess it will come down to:

1. The stiffness of the TR
2. The length and thickness of the TR, and on the basis of these 2,
3. The resonant frequency

Also important will be the level of 'coupling' between the TR and the base (or bass!) neck substrate. In terms of materials I would assume that the stiffness of the TR will be much greater than the wood so will have an effect on the inherent vibration characteristics of the composite and therefore the sound. The difference between the Aluminium and Steel may be more difficult to quantify - also steels are very different and it depends which is used (e.g. High tensile, mild, ductile, free-cutting).

I guess the best way to quantify effects would be to perform Finite Element Analysis on the bass - don't know if any bass/guitar manufacturers have done this routinely (Steinberger?)
 
Martthebass said:
Tricky one this. As a materials engineer (don't know how many of us are on the site) I guess it will come down to:

1. The stiffness of the TR
2. The length and thickness of the TR, and on the basis of these 2,
3. The resonant frequency

Also important will be the level of 'coupling' between the TR and the base (or bass!) neck substrate. In terms of materials I would assume that the stiffness of the TR will be much greater than the wood so will have an effect on the inherent vibration characteristics of the composite and therefore the sound. The difference between the Aluminium and Steel may be more difficult to quantify - also steels are very different and it depends which is used (e.g. High tensile, mild, ductile, free-cutting).

I guess the best way to quantify effects would be to perform Finite Element Analysis on the bass - don't know if any bass/guitar manufacturers have done this routinely (Steinberger?)
Click to expand...

The outcome of FEA will simply be that there is a difference in frequency response. But this will also be the case if you change the bass e.g. by adding a matched headstock, high polish finish, or even adding a detuner (mass increase). The question is whether the change will be audible. Translating the output of the FEA is a bummer I think. Secondly, a greater problem is that the bass system must be modeled accurately. I think this is practically impossible. I don't think that there is crucial materials data available for different woods, besides the obvious like density, E-modulus, poisson's coefficient etc. Wood is an organic material and some weird things happen; Ash for example is not as dense as Wenge or Bubinga, but nevertheless it is responsible for some serious bottom end (so I've read). Wenge is dense, but is much warmer than Ebony.................We don't want to just model stiffness of an object, but the frequency response...........
I think experimenting is most efficient: just replace the trussrod with another one and listen. But this isn't done as easily as changing strings from Black Label to DR for example................(which is a bummer to model with FEA as well...........)

I checked out the Warmoth site: , and indeed they mention "Increased mass = longer sustain, cleaner and clearer notes".
I believe this is incorrect. This statement is used to describe the benefit of the so called "Double Expanding Truss Rod" compared to the "Vintage Truss Rod". One fundamental difference between these two trussrod systems is that the vintage neck will be compressed, not only by the strings, but also due to the trussrod. This is not the case with the double expanding trussrod, where the neck is only compressed by the strings. So what does this all mean ?? Simple: it's just like strings. When you have more stress in a string (up tuning), then your frequency go up right ?? Well, the same happens with the neck as well. The wood of the neck is compressed more when you have the vintage trussrod, meaning there is a higher tension in the wood. The result is that the frequency response will be shifted to a higher region. This is I believe the primary reason that the (Warmoth) bass with the vintage neck will sound more "vintage" than the (Warmoth) bass with the double expanding trussrod neck, because the old Fenders had this type of trussrod.
Should you increase the thickness of the vintage trussrod (increase weight), so it weights as much as the double expanding trussrod, then I think that you still have two different sounding basses due to the reason described above. Warmoth initially claims that they should sound the same, because the masses are equal.
Another argument is that the trussrod can be made heavier with little effort (for clearer, cleaner notes), but the ones I've seen (cross sections) seem fairly small.........
Well, enough writing for one post................. :D
 
Please forgive me if I'm barking up the wrong tree here but isnt a double expanding truss rod just a two-way truss rod & a vintage rod is a one-way?
 
I just love this topic, I am the Taiwanese, I just check the bass forum in Taiwan, they talking about the truss rod of Warwick, I keep saying this is because I wish Warwick can do something about this.

The neck problem is killing me and other Warwick owners in Taiwan, many people have twisted neck due to the weak truss rod or weak neck which I am not sure, the Warwick agent in Taiwan is suck, we have to find a workshop by ourself, they usually don't have the the skill to fix it perfectly, so now I found that I still have a neck problem, the neck had aluminium truss rod, it looks thin and weak for the SSI 5, the people said that Warwick buy undry wood and dry by themself, but the wood is not dry enough for the country which have wet weather like Tawian......I am not sure about the wood thing but I think the wood of Warwick should not be the problem, but the neck problem just keep coming out.
 
The materials engineer has a good point. Different steels have different tensile strengths. The way they are made (drawn, cast, forged, etc.) is critically important to the tensile strength. --steel is more important for its stiffness than its tensile strength. All this being said could the human ear actually notice any audible difference regardless of the material? Given the same bass, if you were to install the steel TR then the Aluminum TR can you tell the difference between them? Further can the listening audience tell the difference after the show or concert? (Nice sound dude, what kind of TR are you using?) Unlikely. At best the two TR's may react differently to temperature and may deviate the tuning mildly depending where you are but in the end you would purchase the TR that was designed for the model of your bass. Insatall it, adjust it, tune it, play it.
 
[/quote]

The outcome of FEA will simply be that there is a difference in frequency response. But this will also be the case if you change the bass e.g. by adding a matched headstock, high polish finish, or even adding a detuner (mass increase). The question is whether the change will be audible. Translating the output of the FEA is a bummer I think. Secondly, a greater problem is that the bass system must be modeled accurately. I think this is practically impossible. I don't think that there is crucial materials data available for different woods, besides the obvious like density, E-modulus, poisson's coefficient etc. Wood is an organic material and some weird things happen; Ash for example is not as dense as Wenge or Bubinga, but nevertheless it is responsible for some serious bottom end (so I've read). Wenge is dense, but is much warmer than Ebony.................We don't want to just model stiffness of an object, but the frequency response...........
I think experimenting is most efficient: just replace the trussrod with another one and listen. But this isn't done as easily as changing strings from Black Label to DR for example................(which is a bummer to model with FEA as well...........)

[/quote]

Don't disagree. Wood, as a natural material, would be a bugger to model, different planks will have different properties, but within reason a differences between 'generic types' could be deduced.
The stiffness of the overall system IS important, FEA would be able to deduce in a semi-quantitative way the effect of changes on the resonant frequency. In my experience the main problems lie in modelling the 'translation' of 'energy' through couplings (e.g. at the bridge and nut)and the boundary conditions in these areas.

I don't have experience of testing woods but I'd be careful with equating density to stiffness, just because it is denser it doesn't mean it is stiffer.
In this case I agree with you, experimenting would be quickest in terms of the 'sound' response, however the other question raised - that of neck stability, should be seriously considered for our friends living in less favourable climates. A more suitable TR material, design or combination may be more appropriate here, e.g. graphite re-inforcement. The only neck I have owned that was completely stable was a Status Graphite neck once owned by our own good Saxonbass (alas this has now gone to another home Steve)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top