Andyjr1515

This is looking great. Splendid choice of neck...

[quote name='walbassist' timestamp='1380312690' post='2223806'] Yep, that sounds way too high to me. How low is the nut cut? Fretless basses can have the strings actually touching the 'board at the nut.... it's all about the relief! [/quote] Yes - and +1 to this

Have a look at the Warwick 'Just a Nut' It's cheap and micro-adjustable. For the Jack Bruce Special tribute I built, I set the strings [b]just[/b] touching the fretboard.

[quote name='Billy Apple' timestamp='1380224462' post='2222618'] What I was thinking was when I do get moved and settled I might indeed get another neck.. and do a new build entirely! I've got an idea to go completely in the opposite direction from the La Cab, and do one with loads of bling! Consider my re-profiling not proceeding, but if anyone has had it done, do tell? [/quote] I've re-profiled necks a number of times, especially my own. If the neck doesn't feel right, it niggles me and I find I have to do something about it. Saying that, all the disasters you talked about at the beginning can happen but, done properly, most rarely do. The main reason for this is that usually, it is more subtle changes that make the difference. The biggest challenge is matching the finish colour...pretty near impossible unless you get an experienced builder involved and, as the others say, it would then be as cheap to buy a new neck. However, it is the back of the neck that gets altered and does it really matter if there is a slight shade difference? The breakthrough problem is only going to happen if you REALLY slim the neck down...and by then it would be also unstable. Bear in mind that the truss rod, etc, is going to be in exactly the same place for whatever profile the supplier supplies - so as long as you are not going outside the dimensions already offered, then it is exceptionally unlikely to happen. The easiest fix to get rid of the 'chunky' feel is to take some material off either side rather than the actual depth, turning it into a soft 'V' profile. This will, in my personal experience, do almost nothing to impact adversely two of the issues you quote - breakthough, instability. It is, incidentally, a great profile shape that has moved out of fashion for totally inexplicable reasons. However, having said all the above, if you want the neck to look as pristine and even-coloured as when first received in the post, like the others say, probably easiest to buy a new neck and flog this one. Hope this helps

The body looks great. Bodes well for a corker :-) Andy

Looks really, really good :-)

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1377211064' post='2184975'] Nearly down to all the wood. Just got the top face to do. Will i have to sand it with a fine sandpaper before i spray a primer? Just ordered this bridge for it. [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/schaller_3d5_b.htm"]http://www.thomann.de/gb/schaller_3d5_b.htm[/url] [/quote] Yes - I sand it first with coarse (c 80 grit) then wet it with a squeezed out cloth - this reveals the scrapes and dings. Repeat until all the scrapes and dings are gone, then sand progressively down to around 400 grit. It should then prime well and flaw-free.

This is looking really smart. These kind of refurbish are a lot of work but often produce very nice results. Andy

[quote name='neepheid' timestamp='1375914531' post='2167510'] Sorry, it completely slipped my mind. The switch I linked has 4 terminals, 3 in a row and one on the edge of the case. I've labelled them like so: 1 = neck pickup hot 2 = output from switch (goes to volume pot) 3 = bridge pickup ground 4 = neck pickup ground AND bridge pickup hot Hope that helps, and sorry for not doing this when I said I would. [/quote] I don't know this switch, but I think the normal config would have the bridge hot at 3 and bridge ground at 4. This should avoid the bridge signal cancelling out the neck signal in the middle switch position.

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1374168860' post='2146100'] I was just wondering. Does it matter how far behind the saddle the pins are? [/quote] Hi Myke It makes a difference to the bridge 'break angle' - the angle between the horizontal string in front of the saddle and the string end behind it. This in turn affects the down force on the saddle and therefore affects directly the transmission of vibrations to the soundboard. The general rule is that the pins are close to the saddle, but this means filing relief slots in front of the pins to prevent kinking the string ends. Do a google or YouTube search on acoustic bridges and you will find loads of photos and articles on this. Andy

By the way, ref good woods for bending, etc, I can recommend walnut, I am told mahogany is also good but I understand that rosewood can be a pig. There's some decent summaries here: [url="http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm"]http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm[/url] Andy

I tend to agree with Henry on this one, Myke. You might end up buying another couple of extra sides, but solid wood behaves so differently to ply, I think you are best starting as you mean to continue...that is, with real wood. I think you've seen this but the attached [url="http://www.ajrguitarmods.co.uk/swift%20iv%20acoustic.htm"]http://www.ajrguitarmods.co.uk/swift%20iv%20acoustic.htm[/url] was my very first attempt at an acoustic anything and it worked out just fine. It just needs some careful thought before each action, lots of looking at YouTube clips and not being afraid to ask the clever folks here for guidance This is a great forum for the latter Andy

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373315426' post='2136135'] Well I'm glad you think so! Unfortunately it seems to be a slow starter as I can't find any plywood thin enough and I don't have a planing machine (not sure you can plane plywood, as it's made of layers) the thinnest available near me is 3.6mm. I may be able to get 1.5mm, if they can order it in, but that may still be too thick? [/quote] Hi, Myke Never made a bass uke but I doubt that you want to be thinner than 1.5mm... Most Ukes seem to be between 1.6mm and 2.5mm so I am sure a bass would be no thinner (and probably the upper end of that range). An acoustic guitar comes out at around 2.4mm and (I gather from the attached link) that a bass uke is similar or same scale length as a 3/4 size classical. I'm sure you can get some 2mm ply from the internet but why not go for the real thing - mahogany? It usually comes thicker so you have to plane / sand / scrape it down, or the attached idea is no bad approach - start with a second hand 3/4 classical: [url="http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-Bass-Uke/"]http://www.instructa...d/DIY-Bass-Uke/[/url] 3/4 classical guitars are usually bought for younger musicians who either abandon or grow out of them - very cheap good ones can often be seen on ebay or gumtree. The advantage is that the wood will already be the correct thickness, there or thereabouts Andy

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373312093' post='2136068'] I probably will to be honest. Well it's not that interesting. I have a ukulele at home which I am always using the two high strings (E and A) to jam on. So since I can't afford a Kala U-Bass I decided to build one. At the moment I'm trying to find a bit of thin plywood to build a prototype on and I'm not sure what woods to use yet. So essentially a U-Bass. [/quote] Sounds pretty interesting to me, Myke! I think any acoustic, uke or otherwise, requires such a steep learning curve and the results can be hugely impressive and satisfying Andy

[quote name='KingBollock' timestamp='1373058269' post='2133407'] Yeah, I spotted that after I pressed post. I know all too well about intonating a bass right now. I have been making new saddles for my bridge and I have spent a lot of time messing about getting it just right. The stupid bridge is designed in such a way that once you've got the intonation right you have to remove the string to get at the grub screw that clamps the saddle in place. Making the saddles is a damned fiddly job, too. They're 12mm x 6mm x 4mm yet each one is taking over an hour to make! Tapping M3 holes is a pain in the bum and I've already broken one tap, another and I'll have to buy a new set. And the saddles are so small that I can't wear my gloves when making them, so until I've nearly done and can file and sand the sharp little edges off them they're bloomin' painful to work with. Fortunately I am a pick player because otherwise I wouldn't be able to play with my right hand right now because the tips are shredded. [/quote] I think you are very brave making your own saddles in the first place! Hope your fingers recover soon...

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373058911' post='2133414'] So compensating it is just filing it down to get the innotation bang on? [/quote] Yes - exactly. On a standard electric or bass bridge, you can move the saddles forwards or backwards until it's just right. On a fixed bridge, it has to be pretty much in the right place to start with and then the only extra is filing so the 'peak' of the saddle is further forward or backwards for that particular string. With a bass, the basic position and then the angle (top G string shorter, bottom E string longer) is very important if you are using a fixed bridge but the extra tweaking around the width of the bone saddle would be pretty much imperceptible to our ears

[quote name='Greggo' timestamp='1372968554' post='2132335'] Is the string tension generally a bit higher on a straighter neck? [/quote] No - a bit like a stratocaster floating bridge, the bend on the neck is balanced against the string tension so is in equilibrium at a certain pitch. However. the distance you have to press the string is different depending on the straightness of the neck and that affects both the probability of fret buzzes and also the feel of the bass.

[quote name='KingBollock' timestamp='1373056102' post='2133369'] It might just be the light, but that second (straight) bridge looks compensated. Like the second one here: I have one similar to the third one on my Spanish style acoustic guitar. It might be worth considering. [/quote] Actually, if you look closely, the top picture in the original post is also compensated (2nd string filed so the string is at the back of the saddle, etc) The trouble is, the saddle only gives you 1-1.5mm difference, and you need at least 3mm basic difference (just look at the saddle positions on a well-intonated standard bass or 6 string and put a rule along the mean) and then each string is a little bit forward or back from that - so generally the better acoustics have an angled saddle AND a compensated bridge. I know it defies logic, but when did our guitars do anything different

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373051334' post='2133309'] That's amazing thank you! [/quote] No probs. I've just had a peep at the calculator - for bass it just gives one measurement for the bridge because it assumes the saddles are adjustable. Have a peep at the acoustic (6 string) option - it gives the top E position and the bottom E position and you can see the difference, hence the angle - this will be much the same for a bass and the calculator will work for any scale length

Hi Yes - you need an angle one way or another (an angled bridge or angle the bridge) or you really won't be in tune on the upper notes. Also, the bridge is set a few mm back from the scale length (yes, I know - it's weird). On the Stewmac website there's a calculator which you put in the scale length, etc, and it will tell you EXACTLY how many mm from the nut the bridge needs to be each side of the fretboard, including therefore the extra mm on the bass side to get the required angle. Hope this helps Andy

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1372951855' post='2132074'] In a previous life I played in a synth band that had no backline. Everything went directly into the PA. Getting to gigs was easy and the FoH sound was always good (if a little quiet compared with bands that had drums and guitar amps) but on stage it was always a struggle getting mix where the singers could hear well enough to tell if they were in tune and everyone could actually hear the drum machine and sequenced parts to play in time with them. Then we acquired a pair of our own wedge monitors and a power amp. Using those on stage for the instruments and leaving the main PA foldback for the vocals and suddenly we could hear everything properly and performing on stage became so much easier. That taught me a lot about how to get a decent sound on stage that allows the musicians to be comfortable. [/quote] There's a lot here I would agree with. Clearly, personal experience, but for what its worth: We put everything through our own PA (small / medium venues 400 max) except the drums that has its own amp for the electric kit or acoustic if the stage is big enough. Our FOH is MILES better than any other band we have played with (and they all say 'we must give that a go') because it avoids the 'deafness creep'of each player turning up to hear themselves and also to 'cut through the mix' - a joke really when they have their own 50 watts right behind them...exactly whose mix are they trying to cut through . To the audience, this ends up as just a b****y ear-wrecking white-crackling noise. BUT and it is a BIG BUT - monitoring is a problem. We have a couple of wedge monitors and our main vocalist also takes an aux monitor off the PA into a single earpiece to hear himself and his own instruments. The rest of us have a general band mix through the wedges. This is then the problem area - getting the wedges loud enough without ending up with feedback. We are investigating in-ear but individual mixes are v expensive. The cheap step is to have in-ear with the general mix which MAY be good enough. I'll let you know. Anyway, back to the FOH - we get asked back to venues because 'your sound is so good' (and that's not to do with the quality of our playing ) and we can absolutely control the volume with a balanced mix from unobtrusive background for people who've come to talk to each other, through to venues where people just want to dance to a wall of sound. I'm sure many of you will disagree with this approach but, what the hell... Andy

[quote name='booboo' timestamp='1372891926' post='2131442'] first and last for me, it gives you a clear picture of relief at around frets 7-9. I find the relationship between relief and string height really changes the whole feel of my basses for better and worse. [/quote] Yes - I certainly agree with the last bit . It affects the feel much more than just string height...especially on a fretless

1st and 16th looking for just perceptible movement at 8th fret - same as on a 6 string

[quote name='pete.young' timestamp='1370891260' post='2107063'] Probably cheaper to buy a Squier VMJ Jaguar than have the routing work done, get a custom scratch plate made and buy another pickup. [/quote] Then, when you've done that, pop a bit of veneer on and hey presto...the black Squier looks like this [attachment=137047:IMG_1502.JPG] Andy

Well, my background was always 6-strings, and then tenor and alto sax - all of which I generally play in our old-gits' band (oh, and also the bongos. Everyone laughs at my bongos but they're the only ones I've got and I'm quietly proud of them ). BUT, as a band we swop around quite a lot and our bassist fancies himself as a lead player (he's pretty good, though we don't tell him that). During those numbers, I get to play his fretless bass and I JUST LOVE playing it. The tenor sax just takes the edge, but playing the bass beats all the other instruments hands down. Could not explain why and I'd never played one before a couple of years ago but it is just great to play bass. This is the bass, by the way...I built it for him based on the fabulous Jack Bruce Thumb 4. It came out well [attachment=137045:IMG_2562smenh.jpg] [attachment=137046:IMG_2563smenh.jpg] Andy