Help with lipless cranks

[IgotWood]

I don't fish cranks very much. Late winter and early spring are about the only times I use them. So I'm wondering, whats the deal with the different sounds that they make? I see some are silent, one knocker/two knocker. Then there are also baits that have some super secret patented sound making device. I fish SK Red Eyes because my local basspro has them in just about every color, so I just go with them. 

 

I mainly fish clear water 3-5' viz, and with most of the lake being 2'-6' deep with lots of grass. What conditions constitute the use of different style lipless cranks?

[papajoe222]

Just like any lure style, lipless cranks have many variations, not counting color schemes.  Changing the sound, or vibration or just changing to a silent bait of the same type can make a big difference in your catch rate.  The other thing to consider is how you're presenting the bait. Rat-L-Traps are great baits, but sink like a rock when paused or allowed to fall. A Red Eye Shad doesn't have the tight wobble that the trap does, but flutters on the fall.  Kind of like the difference between a curly tail, ribbon tail, paddle tail, or boot tail worm or grub. 

AS for what conditions call for which bait?  There really is only one way to find out. The other thing to always keep in mind is the possibility that the fish just aren't reacting to a reaction bait. Only you can figure that out.  That's one of the things I love about this sport: No Rules, just guidelines.

[Paul Roberts]

From what I've read, research into bass hearing capabilities has suggested that bass have a limited range of hearing. And it turns out they can't hear high frequency sounds -like the little b-b's in most "rattle-baits". This is especially so in shallow "soft" places (mud, weeds) that restrict and absorb sound. Apparently sound isn't terribly directional underwater either. 

 

Bass should be able to hear the lower pitched thuds from larger "knockers", but then, what do they make of them?

 

What bass fishers tend to say is that different lures give different sounds and... sometimes... -some work better than others (how you'd know its the sound I question), and bass can get conditioned against some such lures (again, how you'd know it's the sound I am still left to wonder).

 

 

 

 

[Sam]

Some suggestions regarding rattles in lipless crankbaits:

 

Rattles - When bass are aggressive

One-Knockers - In between rattles and silent

Silent - When there is a lot of pressure

 

Red Eyed Shads are an excellent choice. The Rat-L-Traps can also produce very well.

 

As mentioned above, go out and experiment.

[Czorn]

23 minutes ago, papajoe222 said:

Just like any lure style, lipless cranks have many variations, not counting color schemes.  Changing the sound, or vibration or just changing to a silent bait of the same type can make a big difference in your catch rate.  The other thing to consider is how you're presenting the bait. Rat-L-Traps are great baits, but sink like a rock when paused or allowed to fall. A Red Eye Shad doesn't have the tight wobble that the trap does, but flutters on the fall.  Kind of like the difference between a curly tail, ribbon tail, paddle tail, or boot tail worm or grub. 

AS for what conditions call for which bait?  There really is only one way to find out. The other thing to always keep in mind is the possibility that the fish just aren't reacting to a reaction bait. Only you can figure that out.  That's one of the things I love about this sport: No Rules, just guidelines.

This^^^

[scaleface]

15 hours ago, Paul Roberts said:

From what I've read, research into bass hearing capabilities has suggested that bass have a limited range of hearing.

  You have spent a  lot more time under water than me but I will attest to this . I was snorkeling in a busy, gin clear Ozark creek . Lots of commotion from other people . Every downed tree ,  I would tap my fingernails on a glass wrist-watch  face and the bass would come out to investigate . It happened every time .

 

  My favorite lipless bait and     A_Jay has one too,  is a silent model that the weight is loose in . It makes a quieter sound than the Two-Tap and its a killer deep water yo-yo bait .

[IgotWood]

All very good information, and I appreciate it! with all that said, what is your favorite lipless crank for yo-yo'ing? As I said, my lake is shallow and full of grass. I'm interested in finding something that falls a bit slower...if there is even anything outt here like that...

[CroakHunter]

23 minutes ago, IgotWood said:

All very good information, and I appreciate it! with all that said, what is your favorite lipless crank for yo-yo'ing? As I said, my lake is shallow and full of grass. I'm interested in finding something that falls a bit slower...if there is even anything outt here like that...

Bagley rattlin' b minus. Sinks slower but still weighs 1/2 ounce

[scaleface]

1 hour ago, IgotWood said:

what is your favorite lipless crank for yo-yo'ing?

Red Eye shad wiggles when its falling . I fish out of a jon boat a lot and i can hear a Red Eye shad going tic,tic,tic as it is falling .

[Spankey]

I can't get into the science of lipless baits or anatomy of a basses hearing senses very deep. But, I have one of a few color Rat-L-Traps tied on at all time. 

 

On on more than one occasion has a Rat-L-Trap caught my first bass of the season over the years.

 

On WAY more than one accession has a Rat-L-Trap basically saved the day or made the day from possibly being skunked. 

 

I don't own a Red Eye Shad. Why I don't know? Maybe I should get them in my 3 or 4 most productive Rat-L-Trap patterns and try them. 

 

They are very versatile from little to no cover, rocks, lay downs and along grass for me. 

[Sam]

12 hours ago, Paul Roberts said:

From what I've read, research into bass hearing capabilities has suggested that bass have a limited range of hearing. And it turns out they can't hear high frequency sounds -like the little b-b's in most "rattle-baits". This is especially so in shallow "soft" places (mud, weeds) that restrict and absorb sound. Apparently sound isn't terribly directional underwater either. 

 

Bass should be able to hear the lower pitched thuds from larger "knockers", but then, what do they make of them?

 

What bass fishers tend to say is that different lures give different sounds and... sometimes... -some work better than others (how you'd know its the sound I question), and bass can get conditioned against some such lures (again, how you'd know it's the sound I am still left to wonder).

 

 

 

 

Paul, as you probably know, Dr. Keith Jones of Pure Fishing's research department wrote a book, KNOWING BASS, THE SCIENTIFIC APPRPACH TO CATCHING MORE FISH, which is a scientific study of the bass family.

 

In chapter 7, Hearing and Vibration Detection, Dr. Jones discusses the acoustics of water, bass' acoustic detectors, the lateral line system, the bass' ear,  and what happens when a bass hears something and what do they do.

 

Of course, the data is deep into scientific data and physics which in many instances is over my head.
But Dr. Jones does explain the data as best as possible for the normal guy to understand what his research found out.

 

On page 115, Dr. Jones writes: "A third avenue for sound discrimination would be the temporal content, otherwise known as rhythm. Rhythm perception may be the bass' forte. Given their sensory equipment, bass seem better designed to detect acoustic transients (that is, sudden changes) than perform complex frequency or intensity analysis.  Natural sounds are rarely continuous.  Rather, they occur in series of beats and pulses intermixed with dead spots.  The regular tail beats of swimming shad and the thump a crawfish makes flicking its tail to escape have two distinct rhythms.  By focusing on the rhythm rather than the actual sound frequencies, bass could potentially discern one prey from another, or prey verses non-prey."

 

In other words, bass can hear and feel vibrations caused by our baits. And many of the older ones can differentiate between a natural prey and a non-prey sound.

 

The bass will hear the noise (sound travels 4,920 feet per second in all directions in the water); feel the vibrations; and then go sight hunting to put their eyeballs on the item making the noise and vibration.

 

If all goes as planned: bass hears noise and faces its direction; bass feels the vibrations; and then bass swims over to see what is making the racket to decide it wants to eat or kill what it is seeing; we will then get a strike.

 

Dr. Jones' book is out of print. I spoke with him a few years ago and asked him to get a second run printed but he was not excited about doing that for some reason.  You can find the book on Amazon or eBay for a lot of money.  I doubt your local library has the book but if it does, I suggest you read it and garner a lot of great scientific information.

 

Enjoyed your reply above. I did not take the time to delve into the frequencies bass can hear but it is in the book on page 108, with a chart called Provisional Hearing Curve for Largemouth Bass.

 

What I found to be very interesting is Dr. Jones came to the conclusion that when a bass rushes up to your bait and then turns away, we always thought it was because of color or how it looks.  Dr. Jones thinks it may be due to the vibrations your bait is sending having a greater input on why the fish does not hit the bait and swims away.

 

Go figure.

 

 

[Paul Roberts]

On 2/19/2018 at 6:14 PM, scaleface said:

  You have spent a  lot more time under water than me but I will attest to this . I was snorkeling in a busy, gin clear Ozark creek . Lots of commotion from other people . Every downed tree ,  I would tap my fingernails on a glass wrist-watch  face and the bass would come out to investigate . It happened every time .

 

  My favorite lipless bait and     A_Jay has one too,  is a silent model that the weight is loose in . It makes a quieter sound than the Two-Tap and its a killer deep water yo-yo bait .

I've seen similar things too. And, yeah, it doesn't make intuitive sense that bass are essentially deaf to such high frequencies. Underwater especially, sound can really travel. But then, I wouldn't really know what bass can hear. Investigating such stuff is complex, most often found to be more complex the more you investigate. That's been my experience with research -even the big budget stuff I've been involved in. I came to call it -the nature of things- the "Deep Well". I was always hoping to find the bottom. But, instead I found a series of false bottoms, and that, the deeper you peer in, the worse the vertigo. As evidenced by Sam's interesting post.

 

I've found bass to be totally curious, checking out just about everything. Whether they were reacting to you or the watch would be my first question. If it were the watch, then... what exactly did they hear? Probably not what we hear. There are low frequency thumps mixed in there too?

 

I cannot rule out what bass really can and cannot hear. And I am even further lost when it comes to deciphering fishing results. I guess such non-commitment comes from getting the sht kicked out of my hypotheses, and the resulting vertigo. Yes, I can smile about it now.

16 hours ago, Sam said:

Paul, as you probably know, Dr. Keith Jones of Pure Fishing's research department wrote a book, KNOWING BASS, THE SCIENTIFIC APPRPACH TO CATCHING MORE FISH, which is a scientific study of the bass family.

 

In chapter 7, Hearing and Vibration Detection, Dr. Jones discusses the acoustics of water, bass' acoustic detectors, the lateral line system, the bass' ear,  and what happens when a bass hears something and what do they do.

 

Of course, the data is deep into scientific data and physics which in many instances is over my head.
But Dr. Jones does explain the data as best as possible for the normal guy to understand what his research found out.

 

On page 115, Dr. Jones writes: "A third avenue for sound discrimination would be the temporal content, otherwise known as rhythm. Rhythm perception may be the bass' forte. Given their sensory equipment, bass seem better designed to detect acoustic transients (that is, sudden changes) than perform complex frequency or intensity analysis.  Natural sounds are rarely continuous.  Rather, they occur in series of beats and pulses intermixed with dead spots.  The regular tail beats of swimming shad and the thump a crawfish makes flicking its tail to escape have two distinct rhythms.  By focusing on the rhythm rather than the actual sound frequencies, bass could potentially discern one prey from another, or prey verses non-prey."

 

In other words, bass can hear and feel vibrations caused by our baits. And many of the older ones can differentiate between a natural prey and a non-prey sound.

 

The bass will hear the noise (sound travels 4,920 feet per second in all directions in the water); feel the vibrations; and then go sight hunting to put their eyeballs on the item making the noise and vibration.

 

If all goes as planned: bass hears noise and faces its direction; bass feels the vibrations; and then bass swims over to see what is making the racket to decide it wants to eat or kill what it is seeing; we will then get a strike.

 

Dr. Jones' book is out of print. I spoke with him a few years ago and asked him to get a second run printed but he was not excited about doing that for some reason.  You can find the book on Amazon or eBay for a lot of money.  I doubt your local library has the book but if it does, I suggest you read it and garner a lot of great scientific information.

 

Enjoyed your reply above. I did not take the time to delve into the frequencies bass can hear but it is in the book on page 108, with a chart called Provisional Hearing Curve for Largemouth Bass.

 

What I found to be very interesting is Dr. Jones came to the conclusion that when a bass rushes up to your bait and then turns away, we always thought it was because of color or how it looks.  Dr. Jones thinks it may be due to the vibrations your bait is sending having a greater input on why the fish does not hit the bait and swims away.

 

Go figure.

 

 

Hi Sam, good post. I have his book. And that's where I first read about the frequency research. It sure got my wheels turning. But, I haven't looked at the original research, or where it's lead to either. Guess my wheels will just have to spin a while longer.

 

Oh... Knowing Bass was reprinted a bit ago. Yeah, it was up to over $100 a copy for a while there. Dunno how available it is now. 

[Paul Roberts]

19 hours ago, IgotWood said:

All very good information, and I appreciate it! with all that said, what is your favorite lipless crank for yo-yo'ing? As I said, my lake is shallow and full of grass. I'm interested in finding something that falls a bit slower...if there is even anything outt here like that...

Im in shallow weedy waters mostly too. If fishing  horizontal I tend to end up going to smaller baits bc they are lighter and have a slower sink rate. When fishing more vertically -like for yo-yoing- I can go heavier. I've done well on a number of them: Rattletraps, Spots, Red-Eyes, Daiwa, BPS, Matzuo. My GoTo became the Sebile FlattShad, but they don't make it in the 1/4 or 1/2oz anymore.

 

I did recently pick up some Sebile FlattShads in the suspending/slow sink model; Some of the guys on here really like them. I'd love to hear of other suggestions for slower sinking lipless.

[Bluebasser86]

I prefer the 1 knocker or 2 tap. 

Booyah (formerly Xcaliber) makes my preferred 1 knocker

 

Strike King makes the tungsten 2 tap that is my other bait of choice.

[Paul Roberts]

8 hours ago, Bluebasser86 said:

I prefer the 1 knocker or 2 tap. 

Booyah (formerly Xcaliber) makes my preferred 1 knocker

 

Strike King makes the tungsten 2 tap that is my other bait of choice.

It seems a lot of people like those old Xcalibers. I don't own a one of em. That may have to change. The 2-tap makes sense too, as far as... current best info goes too.

 

My favorite over the last few years has been the Sebile FlattShad. It's just so well designed. It vibrates instantly on the tug, and it became my favorite cold water lipless bc of that. I've also had it burn really well too. It's rattles are pretty anemic though; In fact I thought it was silent, until I just pulled one out and gave it a good shaking.

[senile1]

18 hours ago, Paul Roberts said:

Oh... Knowing Bass was reprinted a bit ago. Yeah, it was up to over $100 a copy for a while there. Dunno how available it is now.

These are the prices currently quoted on Amazon: 

• Hardcover 
  from $128.0512 Used from $128.053 New from $286.29
•  
• Paperback 
  from $169.0322 Used from $169.035 New from $301.83

 

Somebody must have collected the last of the new ones and are now selling them at a premium.  I'm thinking about renting my copy out . . . . maybe $50 a pop?  

[Paul Roberts]

Wow. Interesting. Talk about a bubble. On the last reprinting I actually thought of buying a few copies. But, I thought they'd just keep re-printing them. And they probably will. 

[TOXIC]

The SPRO ARUKU Shad lipless uses a nose down running style to mimic a feeding shad and has fewer hangups.  It has loud rattles but as an aside, the SPRO cranks have tungsten wrapped rattles to give them a unique and different thump in the water.  

[J Francho]

13 minutes ago, TOXIC said:

The SPRO ARUKU Shad lipless uses a nose down running style to mimic a feeding shad and has fewer hangups.  It has loud rattles but as an aside, the SPRO cranks have tungsten wrapped rattles to give them a unique and different thump in the water.  

This is one of my favorite baits for running into stuff that isn't grass.  The faster you reel it in, the lower that wide head dips, and protects from hang ups.  It also deflects wildly, often triggering strikes. 

[Boomstick]

On 2/19/2018 at 6:34 PM, Paul Roberts said:

From what I've read, research into bass hearing capabilities has suggested that bass have a limited range of hearing. And it turns out they can't hear high frequency sounds -like the little b-b's in most "rattle-baits".

Interesting. Clearly you spent your time into this. However, just like with any other sound those little BBs do also put out lower frequencies as well, they just sound much higher to us because we can hear the higher frequencies which are louder, so I wouldn't be sure that bass don't pick up on them at all, maybe they can hear them only when they are smack in front of them as the lower frequencies are not nearly as loud, or maybe it isn't loud enough to matter, who knows.

 

I'm not saying you are wrong by any means.

[Paul Roberts]

On 2/22/2018 at 6:38 AM, Boomstick said:

Interesting. Clearly you spent your time into this. However, just like with any other sound those little BBs do also put out lower frequencies as well, they just sound much higher to us because we can hear the higher frequencies which are louder, so I wouldn't be sure that bass don't pick up on them at all, maybe they can hear them only when they are smack in front of them as the lower frequencies are not nearly as loud, or maybe it isn't loud enough to matter, who knows.

 

I'm not saying you are wrong by any means.

That's a really good point. Someday I'll have to dig up the original research. I did just look through Knowing Bass and its NOT in there. There are some sonograms produced from lures that... weren't terribly helpful since the scale was not refined enough. It did show some higher decibel recordings in the lower frequencies, which should be perfect for bass. However the scale on the graph shows these spikes starting at 'about' 0hz and extinguishing rather quickly. These may be mostly low frequency/water movement?

 

Since it wasn't in KB, I looked in the IF Critical Concepts and found what I'd read: in CC3. The researchers had tested 23 "rattling lures" and found that only 3 produced "dominant" sounds -the primary (loudest) that a given lure can produce- that were in the frequency range bass are known to hear. They also looked at secondary and tertiary sounds -less dominant (quieter) sounds of different frequencies- some that were in the bass's range. But the researchers concluded that the sounds were too weak "to attract fish from any distance".

 

The CC3 author(s) concluded with: Most rattlebaits were not correctly designed, producing dominant/primary sounds outside the hearing range of bass. And, "Many new rattlebaits...produce sound of a lower frequency that should be more audible to bass." I'm guessing he's talking "knockers"/"tappers".

 

This may also explain at some level why scaleface's bass responded to him tapping his watch? If the above mentioned research covers the whole story (which may not prove to be the case), we would be able to hear the dominant high frequency 'ticks' and 'clacks' -esp underwater- but the bass would be responding to the secondary and tertiary 'thumps'.

 

Not worrying about being wrong, esp when none of its my own research! No vertigo here. 

 

EDIT: From what I recall, the research on what bass can hear was pretty well done. They trained bass to fear an uncomfortable stimulus -electric shock I believe. The fish were able to escape to a safe zone via a "shuttle box" -with an escape hatch. The bass were trained (conditioned) to anticipate the shocks with a preceding sound tone. The researchers then started their trials, which ran through a range of frequencies. There was a point (~1000 Hz) -surprisingly low- that the bass were unable to respond to, and anticipate the shock. Not sure where I got this; I must have seen the original paper. I've probably even written about this before. See IndianaFinesse, I've even forgotten the pain! Hey, let's do it again! 

 

[IndianaFinesse]

This is all really interesting and potentially helpful information, but my head is starting to hurt lol. Interesting to hear how little we really know, and it seems like the more we find out, the more we realize just how much we don't know

[Glenn]

Booyah One Knocker = Xcaliber....literally.  It's the same, exact bait, just rebranded.  Literally no difference.

 

[Paul Roberts]

12 hours ago, IndianaFinesse said:

This is all really interesting and potentially helpful information, but my head is starting to hurt lol. Interesting to hear how little we really know, and it seems like the more we find out, the more we realize just how much we don't know

My head always hurts! I've come to enjoy it. 

"...the more we realize just how much we don't know." That's for sure. But we know a lot too. I wouldn't want to... start all over again.

10 hours ago, Glenn said:

Booyah One Knocker = Xcaliber....literally.  It's the same, exact bait, just rebranded.  Literally no difference.

 

Thanks, Glenn -I think. Now I may just have to add a couple One-Knockers to my lipless box -although I may not be able to close the lid if I do.  The only thing worse than an over-stuffed tackle box, is one with open compartments! 

[CroakHunter]

Now I'm in need of some help. Yesterday while fishing a lipless I noticed that when I had a steady retrieve, the bait was rolling over in its side. I wasn't burning the bait in, just a little bit faster than slow rolling. I was using 15lb mono, 1/2 ounce red eye shad, tied with double san-Diego jam knot. First time I'd tied this knot on a moving bait so could it be that the knot/tag ends were too big coupled with the fact that 15lb mono is pretty heavy line?