Properties of some common bass shapes

Why is there such wide variety in the shapes and sizes of double basses? Why does there seem to be no standard? What do the different shapes indicate? 

The two biggest categorical questions we hear at QBC regard gamba vs. violin corners, and flat back vs. round (carved) back. It's said that violin-cornered and gamba-cornered double basses co-evolved - gamba-shaped violone as the contrabass instruments of the viol (viola da gamba) family, and violin-cornered double basses from the violin family. Both families were concurrently in use for centuries. The very oldest double basses have violin corners, as do many violone, and there are gamba-shaped Italian and French double basses (not just German), so the gene pool is pretty murky. The corners don't perceptibly affect the sound. 

Flat backs, on the other hand, have a measurable effect on the tone and volume of a bass. Acoustical testing has demonstrated flat-back basses produce somewhat more decibels below 150Hz, though the frequency response above 150Hz becomes uneven. In short, flat-back basses do have a tendency to powerful sound, particularly in the low register.

Apart from the properties of the back, the overall shape of the bass is the foundation of its tone and character - read on!

Makers through the ages, certainly, have primarily sought to produce basses with BIG SOUND to fulfill the role of the bass in an ensemble. The fundamental frequencies of the bass (open E string = 41Hz) must emanate at a comparable volume to the much higher, faster-travelling, and more easily produced notes of the violin (open E = 659 Hz). This physics challenge has led to continual experimentation with sizes and shapes of basses from the mid-1500s to the present day.

Gigantic Roth bass

Shortly after the double bass evolved in the 16th century, luthiers demonstrated that massive sound could be produced by massive instruments. Gigantic (though barely playable) basses were constructed from the 1500s well into the 20th century, though the majority of bass makers’ efforts went into experimenting with getting maximum tone from basses that could be played capably by average-sized bassists. Until comparatively late in this timeline, bass lines were simpler or simplified, and basses often (if not always) had frets. There was little demand for a double bass to do more than produce a good ensemble sound in the lowest positions, which called for them to be as large as practical.

---

Australia Chamber Orchestra's ca. 1580 Gaspar Da Salo

The physics principles governing the sound box of violin-family instruments are fundamentally the same as the very well-studied physics of speaker cabinets, and there are demonstrable parameters of the shape of the sound box specifically dictating the frequency response.

As with the violin - the most-studied and most highly engineered member of the violin family - which produces the most even frequency range when the sizes of its upper half (above the bridge) and lower half (below the bridge) are nearly equal, we see early double bass makers achieve a voluminous, yet balanced sound by constructing basses with shoulders almost as wide as their lower bouts. See this huge ca. 1580 Gaspar Da Salo bass belonging to the Australia Chamber Orchestra. It might not look huge in this photo, but it really is!

---

This G.B. Grancino bass from 1690 is a more extreme example of high (not sloping) shoulders/low FF hole placement - allowing for as much interior volume as possible in the upper half. This poplar flatback bass was carefully made as a fine instrument, with a high level of workmanship, and produces low frequencies at extraordinarily high db levels. Its design was clearly deliberate, but also precludes access to thumb position, demonstrating that playing in the upper register, and transitioning back and forth to/from thumb position, was not a priority for the 1690 bassist.

G.B. Grancino, 1690 - FF holes very low

Vincenzo Panormo, late 18th century

The Da Salo pattern was so successful that it was modelled by Vincenzo Panormo in the late 18th century - this bass shape sounds GREAT. Power, good response, and even sound, from the lowest notes to the highest. Many, many modern copies and tributes to this model are produced. However, the size of the shoulders limits accessibility for all but the largest bass players. Domenico Dragonetti did play a Da Salo bass with underhand bow, but was also noted as having extremely long arms and fingers, using 4-finger technique at a time when many bassists played just two notes in one position. He was also an active orchestral player and a personal friend of Beethoven, and there are indications that his extraordinary abilities on the bass influenced the challenging Beethoven symphonic parts.

---

Later examples of high-shouldered basses are seen in the cello-shaped, 19th-century basses of Mirecourt. Makers were so devoted to the ‘ideal’ proportions of the violin and the cello that they often carved a second button at the ‘ideal’ location, adding a slightly sloping shoulder above. These basses, additionally, often have no taper toward the neck block, and are large (7/8 size) - not easy to play - yet, the literature of the time included very challenging bass parts. It can be postulated that the high-shouldered bass problem in this era was mitigated by the emergence of the modern French bow. In fact, J.B. Vuillaume (one of the most notable makers of cello-shaped French basses) became an avid proponent of the French bow after seeing Giovanni Bottesini play.

French cello-shaped bass with false button below the structural button

---

Pietro Meneghesso, ca. 1895

​Bottesini himself, however, performed on a Testore bass with an outline nearly identical (per full-size tracings) to this Pietro Meneghesso bass, which features a very manageable shoulder width and back bevel, and produces a very balanced tone.

---

Examples (such as Dragonetti) of high-level success playing in all registers on a large-shouldered bass with underhand bow may present an extreme challenge to an average-sized (5’9” male or 5’4” female) bassist embroiled in modern school and professional performance requirements - however, numerous shapes of basses are, in fact, designed for ease of playing as well as good tone. Technique and agility built while playing on an easier, slimmer-shouldered bass WILL translate later to a larger, more “orchestral” bass, if desired, while it’s more challenging to try to do technique-building on a bulkier instrument.

---

​A frequently-seen solution to the issue of bass shoulders is building basses with narrower shoulders, but wider lower bouts. Seems obvious, right? The wide-bottom, narrow-waisted bass does (usually) produce voluminous low frequencies, but tends to be less ‘even’ or ‘balanced’ in tone and response - the narrow upper bout is stiffer than average, and the wide lower bout more flexible than average, creating a disparity in response. Similarly, modifications to increase the size of the sound box by making the bass with extremely deep ribs or very high arching also comes at a cost of decibel and frequency response.

Wide lower bout, narrow waist

---

French cello shaped bass, no taper or bevel toward upper block - hard to play!

---

Solo bass with strong TAPER toward the upper block

---

Italian bass with BEVEL (angle) toward the upper block

---

Giovanni Marcolongo, ca. 1880 - wide waist = huge sound

A road less travelled (but highly effective solution) in solving the large shoulders problem is relocating upper-half volume from the shoulders to the waist (C bouts). Here are two examples: a Giovanni Marcolongo and a Carcassi. As you can see, the FF holes are farther from the outer edge, as the waists of these basses are wider than average. This design principle produces basses that are tremendously loud as well as even-sounding. The width of the waist, however, demands the player be precise with bowing angle, so the bow hair doesn’t contact the edge of the bass while playing. It’s very important these basses be correctly set up, without excessive bridge curve, and that the player be willing to engage in refining his movements to play with said minimal bridge curve; if so, the payoff is enormous.

Carcassi bass - sloped shouders, wide waist, flat back, enormous sound!

---

Charles Quenoil, 1930s

One of the most notable bass patterns for studying technique and solo playing is that for which French maker Charles Quenoil won a national award and commission in the 1930s. This style of bass (which was also made by other French and German makers) features very sloped shoulders, and its profile tapers to a very shallow neck block, making access to thumb position about as easy as it can possibly be on a double bass. The narrow upper bout results in the top being somewhat stiff, causing the upper-mid register to dominate the lows and low mids (i.e., a somewhat “tenor” voice), which is fine, even desirable, for solo playing. Importantly, this bass is more than its slim-shouldered outline - Quenoil intelligently inlaid a tall, ebony raised saddle into the end block, and carefully balanced the mass of his tailpieces to offset the stiffness of the top. When this model bass is copied INCLUDING the design features of its original fittings, the resulting sound is extremely resonant, with a beefier low end than would be expected from the width of its plates.

---

Here are two additional, popular, player-friendly shapes that typically have a balanced sound while being easy to get around. The German gamba-shaped, carved-back bass is still being manufactured by Wilfer and many others. From the earlier 20th century, many of these were sold under Roth, Juzek, Thoma, and several other labels. Gotz produced them with flat backs. They have sloping shoulders, the backs taper toward the upper block, and the depth of the ribs and the gamba corners allow for ease of access with the bow arm. As this pattern is one of the most popular in history, there’s a wide variation in quality, and even quality levels with different model numbers within the same brand. 

Emmanuel Wilfer, 2017 - player friendly shape

Tyrolean, ca. 1920 - flat back with bevel

“Tyrolean” or “Bohemian” basses are a practical design, good-sounding, and still easy to find as reasonably-priced, vintage basses. Almost all of them are flat backs, which gives them good projection. The upper and lower bouts are close in size, but their ribs are not overly deep, and they all have a back bevel toward the upper block. They tend to be very resonant, with thin plates. Jillions of these basses were produced from about 1900-1960, some of them VERY cheaply made - many with integral bass bar (the bass bar is carved in one piece with the top) and no upper block (“blockless wonder”). Repairing these original construction shortcuts can be expensive, and the work doesn’t add to the resale value, making them viable as a “player’s bass” that sounds good and serves well. Their value is in the progress and musical expression they facilitate in the player!

​

---

What does this mean for you? When you’re choosing a bass, look for a shape that’s most compatible with your size, upper body strength, and reach. It’s true that bassists over 6’ tall, with long arms, have an easier time playing larger basses, and will have fewer concerns about which pattern they choose. Factors that comparatively reduce your reach are: height under 6’ AND/OR short upper arm*, playing German bow, sitting to play, and your girth. Should you have one or more of these factors, search for a bass that, optimally, features sloped shoulders, tapered or bevelled back, and upper-bout corners that don’t stick out (gamba corners are a slight advantage). To find maximum tone in the sloped-shouldered bass, look for one with a wider waist, a flat back, and/or the back made from poplar.
​

​
​*If your upper arm does not reach your iliac crest, this is known as Short Upper Arm - persons with this physical dimension are more prone to repetitive-motion injuries and nerve pain in the arms and wrists. ​

​This is just some background, from Quantum Bass Center's experience with clients' and colleagues' basses, on the GENERAL characteristics of commonly-seen shapes. Of course, there are many variations, exceptions and outliers, and many more shapes. Basses and bassists are very individual! The vital factors of neck geometry and setup are topics for another article, as well.