neepheid

As long as you're not expecting a Precision neck on this Precision (it's Jazz width on these Squier Precision Standards) then you'll be happy. I know a guy who plays a red one of these in a soul covers band and he's more than happy with his.

I thought that string spacing was what annoyed me about Jazz necks, but it turned out to be a combination of neck profile and width that did it. I can do Jazz width if the neck is suitably chunky front to back - the Warwick Rockbass Corvette taught me that - but I still prefer a chunky P sized neck any day.

I presume you've tried adjusting the height of the bridge pickup closer to the strings and all that nonsense? Also check the state of the wiring/soldering?

[url="http://cgi.ebay.com/140591040751"]http://cgi.ebay.com/140591040751[/url] Ouch. Anyone need some spare Grabber parts?

You're right, I'm tying myself up in knots about something which doesn't need to be worried about yet - get the neck screwed in, bridges down, electronics wired up again and see. 3 relatively simple steps and 2 weeks hols coming up - I should have a working bass soon.

If truth be told, I was having another look at it last night and because I removed the sticky out bit of the neck heel and can get my thumb up to behind the 16th fret (will have to reshape the neck a little), I can reach the 21st fret quite easily with my index and middle fingers. Now I'm really confused. Do I need to do anything?

[quote name='JPJ' post='1334794' date='Aug 10 2011, 11:59 AM']Just a thought, but how much time do you spend playing up at the dusty end? Is it really necessary to contour the body? And If so, is it not better to contour the back of the body, where your palm goes, rather than the front?[/quote] Admittedly I do not play up there very often, my main reasons for having 21 frets are grounded in OCD desires to have a bass start on an E and end on an E, not a D#. However it is silly to add another almost unplayable fret onto a Thunderbird without doing something about it. I have been looking at the bass in my hands and I am confident that front bevelling is the way to go at the minimum, and probably some work done on the back too. Bevelling at the front allows you to angle your hand towards the high frets, thus making playing these frets a better proposition. I really can't see how changing the back only will help - having picked up a bass right now with a more aggressive cutaway at the bottom (curves between frets 19 and 20) it only works with the palm down because of that cutaway, there's no way you'd be able to do this on an unmodified T-bird cutaway - it sits between frets 16 and 17 and doesn't even have an appreciable edge roll-off, never mind bevelling). I appreciate that bevelling is not as effective as a full on cutaway, but if it helps without impacting on the overall shape of the body then I'm counting it as a victory, and if it doesn't help then I guess I'll have to look at a deeper cutaway anyway.

[quote name='tommorichards' post='1334658' date='Aug 10 2011, 10:39 AM']do a barrel roll? What about doing more of a cutaway?[/quote] I've been mocking up different cutaway ideas and they all look wrong and spoil the Thunderbird shape too much - the point of this is to make a headless Thunderbird, not a headless "thing that looks a bit like a Thunderbird". Bevelling is a subtle way of improving access which doesn't alter the overall shape (perimeter) of the body. A couple of people mentioned bevelling/contouring in this very thread, but I couldn't get my head around how it helped with high fret access until I had the neck in place and held the bass in a playing position. It does mean altering the angle at which you address the fingerboard, but the bevel makes that angle more possible than the vertical cliff face which normally greets you on a Thunderbird.

I think I've finally got my head around the whole cutaway bevelling thing. I also got some inspiration from the cutaways of various EB/SG basses (keeping it in the Gibson family ) - [url="http://www.flyguitars.com/gibson/bass/parts/cutaways.php"]http://www.flyguitars.com/gibson/bass/parts/cutaways.php[/url] I'm trying to keep the Thunderbird's combination of curves (the outside shape) and straight edges (the raised middle section). Basically the edge rounding becomes a flat surface to form the bevel. I intend to start the bevel at fret 18, follow the shape of the body to the edge of the raised centre section then come back in to meet the line of the body near the pickguard screw hole before the one at the point of the lower horn. The angle of the bevel will be between the level of the lower deck of the body at fret 18 to the bottom of the neck pocket at the front of said neck pocket. Which will hopefully look something like this: Thoughts before I irrevocably go down this path?

[quote name='StevieD_FenderP2009' post='1333504' date='Aug 9 2011, 12:59 PM']Honestly wish I hadn't bought this bass.[/quote] If you can, put it back. Problem solved.

A +1 for Axesrus.

Still scheming on how best to modify the body without losing the overall Thunderbird aesthetic. In the mean time I have removed the extraneous nub sticking out from the body (the new neck pocket is plenty deep that it doesn't need it). I've also mostly stripped the neck and gave the body a bit more of a scrub (that matt black is bombproof though!) Looks like I have enough thickness to do some tapering where the body meets the neck, got to slim down that heel a little!

I don't know what that means, other than I'm guessing it's a bad thing and to expect fireworks/loss of magic smoke soon?

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1331589' date='Aug 8 2011, 12:47 AM']Very cool. Now to get that dusty end access sorted.[/quote] Yeah, the final structural things (where to put the neck screws) are predicated upon what I decide to do about that. Expect some ideas being thrown around in the thread soon.

Well, I would guess that's us past the point of no return. It's a bit of a tighter fit than I wanted (had to make a new template, it seemed I had picked up some NDF from B&Q - [i]no[/i] density fibreboard ), but it's easier to remove wood than it is to add it

[quote name='EdwardHimself' post='1330728' date='Aug 7 2011, 10:57 AM']When you say the "hump" you mean the neck volute right? Well it's looking pretty good now, still a bit of sanding work to be done to get it really smooth but looking good so far.[/quote] I wouldn't call it a volute, just where a flat surface meets a rounded surface

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1330693' date='Aug 7 2011, 10:34 AM']So where did you deliver the final coup de grâce, out at your dad's or your own workshop (soon to be Jayne's studio )[/quote] I removed it at home with a good old tenon saw

Well, that's knackered that then: There was a bit of a hump to get rid of at the head, so after some attacking with a chisel and sandpaper I got this: Still some shaping to be done at the headpiece, but it's definitely a headless neck now

[quote name='EdwardHimself' post='1328638' date='Aug 5 2011, 12:54 PM']I like that colour. Of course the problem is that it does come off with repeated use. I like the look of that hardware anyway. Looks nice.[/quote] I'm sure it's lovely if everything's the same. I'm just bitter because I've been sold cosmo black stuff on the basis that it's proper black before and got an unpleasant surprise

Hardware's here. Slight raised blood pressure moment when the person the courier claimed had signed for it had no recollection of doing so. Found it somewhere else at work (phew). Looking good (nice and proper black, none of this "cosmo" black rubbish, eh Gotoh?), unfortunately I have band practice tonight and a gig on Saturday, so I won't be able to muck about with it much until Sunday. Also, the Humbrol enamel didn't take to the pickguard, came out/off when I made an attempt to level it off, hmph.

Damn it, forgot about those!

[quote name='Al Heeley' post='1288300' date='Jun 30 2011, 10:15 PM']you're making a pretty big assumption that most people are swayed by one (or more) posts from opinionated people.[/quote] If you think that doesn't happen around here then you either don't come here that often or you've got your head in the sand. There are a few people on here with a big enough name (whether warranted or otherwise) from whom a negative word on the price or provenance of the item would completely derail any sale attempt. The whole sale thread hijacking thing is just damn rude. You don't go to the car dealership with a megaphone, stand in front of a motor you feel is overpriced and start bellowing that fact out into the street do you? No, if you think there's some wiggle room then you enter into a PRIVATE negotiation with the salesperson. Why do people think that the normal rules of engagement and social norms do not apply on the internet? Arbitrary nonsense! That's like saying "you can't complain that my kid hit your kid because it happened in the sandpit". That's quite enough analogies for one post

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='1326207' date='Aug 3 2011, 10:00 PM']You can easily damage your hearing by wnding up the volume without realising how loud your headphones really are.[/quote] I have a simple test for that - I take the headphones off and put them in my lap and play some music through them. If I can hear the music at that range then it's too loud.

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='1326386' date='Aug 4 2011, 01:20 AM']I'm utterly perplexed (and obviously nosey), how come you've had one that long and you've only been playing for 4 years? edit : Oh I have a couple of leads from circa '82 they are smelly and I wouldn't trust them at all. [/quote] Heh, I did have a brief flirtation with skinny stringed guitars in my yoof. I had one of these: I didn't stick at it, didn't learn much, couldn't play the songs I wanted to so it became an ornament until I flogged it and the wee amp. That lead (and a few plectrums) are the only remnants of that era which remain today. Also, I'm only counting playing properly (as in actually sticking at it) in that time. I bought my first bass (the Epi EB-3) back in 2003 (I think). Thankfully the laziness wasn't terminal this time