Andyjr1515

Thanks, folks - always appreciated The next four photos belie the significant number of hours spent... First the bridge earthing is sorted. I don't know what other people do, but I solder the earth wire onto a small patch of copper shielding for my bridge earths - ensures a good connection and no lumpy bit holding the bridge off its seating: Then it's the battery clip and the pots - here we have two done and one to go. Note the locators on the pots that stop the pot twisting: Still go to install the jack socket and tidy up the knob clearance cutaways, but here we are with all four controls and the tuner block installed: Fully accessible (and very easy to use....phew! ) but completely hidden from the front:

That body wood looks really, really nice

One of the finish off jobs before doing the final finish on the headstock was ferrules or no ferrules. Decided they would be a good thing: The cut outs should be deep enough and long enough to prevent string marks so later this afternoon I can do the last coat of finish on the headstock.

That's a wonderful looking and very well crafted bass. A delight to see

OK - maybe a BIT of an exaggeration There was also another band between us and the gods, but we were first on, opening the festival on the main stage, using The Blockheads' sound system and with exclusive use of The Blockheads' sound guys (who were brilliant) - so, for an old-gits-ropey-at-times-band, that's pretty damned close We were on that early, I reckon we were the 'need someone on stage to see if the sound works OK and the emergency escape provisions are up to scratch' band, but hey, still does it for me! I'll try and post some shots. The sound was great and ohhhhh what a luxury to have someone else worrying about the set up for a change (I'm usually the Head of Knobs ... or was it Nobs) in our band. And The Blockheads - they were brilliant. And Norman Watt-Roy....there were some stupendous bass sounds coming from his fingers....

Gig went well (phew) I really like this Osmo Polyx. Just got to do the final tidying up in one or two places, but the finish is pretty much all on and sorted. It's held the colour of the sanded wood to a remarkable degree: ...but the wood is gorgeous to the touch: I have a bit of a crazy week coming up, but it's now all about the electrics installation and the final hardware installation and set up. Always takes longer than you expect but the end is now well in sight

Just got the pictures - it looks GREAT by the way - and the action doesn't look so high... Other thoughts - I can't remember the scale length of your build (my guideline measurements above are what I use for a 34" scale bass) but could it be that the strings need to be different gauge? String tension will impact on the bending effect of fretting down - on a fretless, you need to make absolutely sure the string is contacting the fretboard at exactly the 12th fret position. Just placing your finger on the fretmarker isn't accurate enough. I use my fingernail, and double check the gap between the fretboard and the string to make sure it is exactly right.

[quote name='Bastav' timestamp='1499580576' post='3332258'] So I strung it up to do some final intonation testing before installing the bridge. It's a little strange but I've got it intonating decently at around a cm longer than the anticipated scale length, anyone know why that would be? There's some neck-dive, we'll see if I can counter that with some weight-thing at the butt end. For string anchoring I'm using some drill stops [/quote] My ipads playing up and I couldn't see the pictures, but in terms of the intonation, I would generally be expecting the upper strings to be 1-2mm back and the lower strings 3-5mm back. 10mm doesn't sound quite right and you probably need to track down the issue before you fix the bridge. It will usually be that either the: - action is too high. The string is therefore bending excessively as you press it down to the fretboard and thus raising the pitch as it would if you were doing a conventional string bend. - the strings are very, very, very old To intonate, everything needs to be pretty much set up as you will have when it's ready to play - truss rod set, nut height there or thereabouts, action at playing height, strings in reasonable condition and of the same gauge as intended for playing. Hope this helps

I'm still very pleased with the Osmo Here you can see the difference between the body - that has had one straight coat & wipe and one slurried coat & wipe - and the fretboard north of the 24th fret in the pic that hasn't: ...and here you can see not only that wiping minimises the impact on the ebony, but also that the maple and sycamore are now pretty indistinguishable! : Anyway, better get off to what is probably the biggest gig our old-sods'-band have done. It's maybe a bit of an exaggeration...but only a bit...we're supporting The Blockheads! A crime against humanity or an absolute triumph for care in the community? You decide.....

It's often a bit of a conundrum... The problem is that any irreversible mod - even one clearly for the better - will generally reduce the re-sale value of the instrument. And for a neck re-shape on a classic high-value brand such as Warwick that would be certain and significant. If you are never, ever, ever, under any circumstances going to sell it, then, as Jecklin says, it isn't complicated and shouldn't be overly costly, particularly if it's an oiled finish. As he says, basically the centre point is not touched at all - so there is no issue with breaking into the truss-rod channel. With a check that the neck will not have originally been fitted with additional carbon fibre rods, then basically the luthier takes away the meat from the haunches (actually heading away from a D towards a C or even V), usually with nothing more severe than a cabinet scraper, sandpaper and re-oil. But if - as is more likely - you [i]might[/i] sell it in the future, then the only sensible option (assuming that selling the existing bass and buying one that suits better isn't the preferred route) is to make the change reversible - and that means swopping out the existing untouched neck and fitting a custom-made neck / bought neck / bought and modified neck, transferring the hardware, etc.. Then when you come to sell, you just swop it all back again. For something like a Warwick, this can be quite expensive (the woods alone can be eye-wateringly expensive) - and you might find custom neck makers reluctant to reproduce the design-registered headstock shape exactly per original - but at least the original instrument retains its value. Hope this helps

[quote name='walshy' timestamp='1499263600' post='3330381'] Firstly, excellent work! I use Osmo Polyx oils a lot, make furniture, kitchens, shepherd huts etc... And it is as good as they say. Doesn't stain, heat ring, wipes clean with warm soapy water. Super flat Matt finish to glossy. You can certainly buff it up to a sheen, we use lint free cloths or woollen mit. It's a wax oil so you can put a finish underneath, we have painted, waxed, oiled underneath but always do a test first. Happy to help if I can. Can't wait to see the finished build. [/quote] That makes me feel even better about it Thanks for the confirmation that they seem to be mighty fine products

OK - I now pretty much know how I want to proceed with this. First I wanted to compare:[list] [*]Freshly sanded wood (left) [*]Osmo Polyx Raw treated (middle) [*]Untreated wood simply dampened with a cloth (right) [/list] Well - it certainly does do what it says on the tin! : The next was to see the effect of applying some Crimson White Stain - significantly thinned - on the figuring. So:[list] [*]Left has the thinned Crimson stain, left to dry then coated with a single wipe of Osmo [*]Right is raw timber with a single wipe of Osmo: [/list] As expected, even though the Osmo does itself supress the flame figuring a tiny bit, the Crimson stain completely masks it. I was expecting this but, with the Crimson stain being so watered down, I'm surprised that the flame is completely gone! So conclusion - stick with Osmo only. Next experiment was whether the Osmo would 'slurry and buff'? The answer is yes - and the resulting finish is so much nicer than the usage recommendation of just wipe on. I'm going to let the test area dry overnight but even not fully set, it feels silky... All being well, I should be able to sand it all back down in the morning and apply the first of the final finish coats

[quote name='allighatt0r' timestamp='1499262088' post='3330366'] Sounds like you've had too much paint fumes... no one in their right mind should be getting this excited [/quote]

Top left area is the Osmo, top right is Tru-oil and bottom is unfinished: End grain is even more impressive - top is Osmo, middle is Tru-oil and bottom is unfinished: And this has had a quick trial coat all over, including the fretboard to see how it performs: I have to say, this is a bit of a revelation Next check is to see how quickly, how well and how non-tacky it all dries. I also am using the thin trial coat to show up any sanding scratches or missed bits before I do the proper coats. The whole thing will be sanded down one more time before then. Other checks and trials include:[list] [*]Will this slurry-and-buff in the same way as, say, tru-oil? [*]If you do that, do you lose the lightening? [*]I also have received the Crimson White Stain. Can this be used under the Osmo? [*]How much does that then lose the figuring? [/list] Going to have a busy and interesting afternoon!

I'll post some pictures later today, but first impressions using the Osmo finish is that it is SUPERB!

[quote name='Mottlefeeder' timestamp='1499101566' post='3329185'] When I tighten the truss rod, I tend to straighten the neck with hand pressure to make the operation easier. Loosening the truss-rod reduces the pressure anyway, so I did not think it was a problem. I only remove one string at a time, because I'm working on the basis that a truss-rod force with no counter-acting string tension is as bad as string tension with no counter-acting truss-rod force. You have much more experience, and you do it differently, so what is the rational behind your advice? David [/quote] Decent question, David. I'm not sure my experience counts for much but the conventional wisdom is probably based on historical failures of truss rod threads, nuts and allen sockets. The problem isnt as much the rod itself, but the forces involved in turning the nut when it is under maximum tension is always going to be much higher than when it is under less tension. If everything is spot on, it will be OK - the nut or allen socket not soft, the correct and unworn spanner or allen key, the threads on the rod and nut to correct hardness and no dirt, corrosion, etc.. But sometimes one or more of those is not spot on and if the thread strips or breaks or the allen socket rounds off...well then there's a very serious problem. All that slackening off the strings does is reduce that risk. And it's perhaps more about how serious the consequence of failure is than how likely it is to happen. As an aside, there are some basses and guitars where I personally don't slacken off - you can generally tell by how stiff the nut feels whether it is a potential problem. There are others where I would always slacken off. And sometimes it depends on the value - the beautiful and valuable '86 Wal I'm doing some neck work on at the moment is one of those...

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1499085623' post='3329023'] Is it a uv blocking finish to stop sunlight changing the wood colour over time? [/quote] I think to a certain extent - it's designed to try to retain the 'just sanded look' long term. Having said that, I'm a bit sceptical of some claims or some suppliers....

Don't get too excited, folks! The specialist finish should be with me by the end of tomorrow, so we shall see how that goes. I've sanded off the tru-oil back to the wood so that it has the best opportunity of working: You can see how much the figuring disappears against this one when the tru-oil was on it - but also the 'wetting' effect of the oil (albeit against the most contrasting background): It's subtle, but I'm hoping the Osmo will be too The hope is that I get a bit more of the figuring with a bit less of the darkening. I'll let you know Wednesday / Thursday

[quote name='Norris' timestamp='1498930390' post='3328091'] I hope you've kept some offcuts to practice on (Ever sucked an egg? ) [/quote] Actually, you're talking to someone who time and again has chucked 'stuff getting in the way' only to realise it was offcuts for currect projects In this case, however, I've kept them all!

Like pretty much everything else related to this build, there's a lot of experimentation and testing with the finish. What I'll be trying to do is to balance the figuring (which is quite something on the sycamore) against the lightness of colour. The standard 'slurry and buff' produces the most glorious feeling smooth, silky, organic result. It also brings out nicely the quilting on the sycamore. It does, however, darken the wood (pretty much to the same extent as if you wet it with a damp cloth). How much that is depends on what you contrast it with. Against dark, it looks pretty light and whitish: But against lighter backgrounds, it looks more tinted: For the sake of a little bit of experimentation, I'm going to try a specialist wood finish - Osmo Polyx Oil Raw (3044). I've got some on order that should be with me on Tuesday. It has the reputation of lessening the 'wetting' effect of wood when you apply the finish and leaving it [i]closer[/i] to the sanded look. Now the reason I need to experiment is when you read how it does that. All finishes 'wet' the wood. Trouble is it wets more - and therefore darkens more - wherever there is end grain. The Osmo has a tiny bit of white in it which fills the more open pores and therefore darkens a bit less in those areas. Sounds good, you think. But of course the figuring is enhanced by the very same phenomenon. So using this [i]might[/i] reduce the figuiring. Only one way of finding out.... I'll let you know

[quote name='Mottlefeeder' timestamp='1498854064' post='3327630'] Looking at your truss rod cover, is it shallow enough to allow it to be removed while the strings are on? It looks quite thick in the picture. David [/quote] You have to slacken them off at the back tuners and just pull the strings clear either side of the nut but you don't have to unclamp them. Not a problem really because you need to have the strings slackened off before you adjust the truss rod in any event.

While pondering on that, though, the exciting bit (for me at least) is that I've started the finishing. I make it a general rule not to show the shots for the first couple of coats, but it bodes well. Yes - it's darkened it, but what a lot of figuring there is in that wood! I should be ready show a couple of shots sometime tomorrow...

[quote name='HowieBass' timestamp='1498833270' post='3327458'] Could you inset some brass washers where the strings thread through the headstock? [/quote] I want to retain the 'teardrop' opening if I can. Hence me thinking in terms of brass tube sunk into the vertical holes, but with and angled top cut peened over and sitting in the teardrop. Hmmmm....maybe a picture would be a bit clearer than that description

[quote name='blablas' timestamp='1498831025' post='3327427'] Brass tubing - Steampunk. [/quote]

[quote name='Si600' timestamp='1498813520' post='3327186'] Are the grooves from the string holes a byproduct of stringing it and is there a way of having a ferrule to protect the wood? [/quote] Some is the original filing, but there are string marks too. As I mention above, I haven't decided yet whether to put ferrules in or not. I'm going to get some brass tube and have a play with a curved lead-in of brass first.