Andyjr1515

So out had to come the heat gun again. At first I thought it might just be overspill from the fretboard glue but not...definitely glued in. Not a bad job, though. I started at the heel and quite quickly was able to start levering it out from that end - the aluminium of the rod quickly heated the glue enough. And I found out what was holding the headstock section in place, with all those cracks, under the string tension. It was the glue on the trussrod . As soon as the trussrod was out, this just dropped off: Which is, actually, a great thing - because the split at the scarf joint appears to be clean and should, with care, slot back together with the grain from both sides interlocking with some titebond to hold it together (clamping will be more of a challenge - but I do have a cunning plan )

So, while I am waiting for the wood to arrive for the present full build and therefore with an empty workbench top, I got the towel out and got the Washburn on it: I have to say, this is one of my favourite acoustic basses ... Note the iron next to the SW Bassbash mug! Well, usually, that is hot enough to get a fretboard off. Clearly, the first few inches were easy enough because the truss-rod has already sorted that . I follow the gap with a steel acoustic guitar side bending sheet to stop it re-gluing behind me: Now, normally, this is plenty of heat. It's slow (I usually reckon on 10 minutes ironing per inch!) but adequate. But not on this. By the smell, it was hide glue and definitely was going to need more heat to remelt! So out with the heatgun...and that is serious paint-stripping heat! NOT something I would recommend...but needs must : And slowly but surely, the steel sheet started moving further up the board. Towards the body, I protected the varnish from the heat with some 2.5mm wenge sheeting I had in my bits box: And - eventually - off! The dark mark on the neck wood is just that, a dark mark. It's not a burn...all of the heat was on the fretboard. Mind you, I'd be surprised if there are no burn marks to sand off on the fretboard when that's cleaned up! Now...normally, to get the trussrod out you just lift it out. But not this one...because it's glued in. Of course it is

The basic issue - though not necessarily the root cause - was quite quickly obvious. I took off the strings and loosened off the truss rod - it was VERY tight. Putting a straight edge over the frets, there was still a very marked bow in the neck, in spite of there being no string tension. In terms of the potential fix, I outlined to @Fishman the steps, which were basically, take fretboard off and truss rod out then assess whether it could be fixed and if so how. If it could be, it would be a case of sorting the splits, removing the headstock section entirely and regluing, replacing the truss rod, assessing and correcting the set-in bow, defretting, regluing the fretboard, levelling, refretting, levelling. Not guaranteed to work and not a quick job. Did @Fishman want me to proceed. Yes, he did

This is a 'when I have a moment' job so the posts may be a bit spasmodic, but I'll do a progress thread - good or bad - as it may be of interest to some of you. When I passed @Fishman's Wal save back to him earlier in the week, he also passed across to me his newly-acquired Washburn AB20 acoustic bass to 'see if there was anything you can do with it'. We'd talked about it before - he had told me that the neck was cracked near the headstock and we'd agreed that I'd have a look and give a view if it was fixable. And cracked it certainly was I was expecting the standard 'Gibson' grain break, but this was quite different. One of the culprits was immediately obvious - the trussrod was trying to force its way out of the back of the neck. You can't see it very well in the picture but there was a distinct lump as well as crack: But more than that, probably from the same cause - the truss rod - the scarf joint was also broken: And the scarf neck section was pulling away from the fretboard: Was it fixable? @Fishman asked. Possibly...but then again, it might end up as a bag of bits

..and nicely chromed it is too! In the flesh it looks splendid.

I gather it is a modern take on the original BBOT that is equally OCD unfriendly

Neck wood is on its way Might be with me tomorrow, all going well

Hmmm...David Dyke is certainly very busy. Even though it was only half a dozen items from their in-stock finished, it has taken twice as long and counting (and chasing) to come from East Sussex than this below has taken to come from Maine, USA : A beautiful Hipshot B-style, on brass (I like a bit of mass for the bridge) at 18mm spacing. Great service from Best Bass Gear in Kennebunk, Maine ... 5 calendar days from placement of order They will definitely be going on my 'suppliers to use again in the future' list. So this means I can start to work out the neck angle (I always start with the physical bridge at hand) so when the neck splices eventually do arrive from E Sussex, I can make some better progress.

Congrats, Lis

Very nice indeed

Coming up very nicely.

It's back to my adage that building basses and guitars is a series of compromises held together by hope If you didn't have the cutaway at the tailstock, then you could fit a two piece in without moving the neck or stretching the body. Or you could leave the cutaway and stretch the body...or move the neck. It's sometimes a bit like parking in an empty...having too many choices is sometimes more challenging than not having enough

For a 34" I think where you have it looks OK, @Jimothey

Yes - it can make a big difference. Clearly, you can 'stretch' the body length to compensate but it does change the sit on the strap and the feel of the scale length. With a bridge fully back, you can get a 34" scale feeling more like a short scale and vice-versa. I can never believe that a Cort Curbow is full scale 34" when I put one on the strap... What scale is this?

Oooooh...that's nice

Looks nice. And the darkening effect of the finishing oil will deepen it to the full cherry. Looking forward to seeing it.

OK - in hope that this will clarify rather than further confuse...and with thanks to the folks whose photos I've purloined from Google: Objective: For buzz-free playing at decently low action of the strings above the fretboard, the neck needs to be pretty much flat However: In the absence of a trussrod, the string tension is going to do this - The string tension is pulling the headstock towards it and, because the neck is flexible, it bends. This would play buzz-free...but the action would be unplayably high. Common Solutions - Build the neck completely rigid and so the string tension cannot bend the neck. This can be done. Vigier guitars do not have a truss rod - the necks are very stiff. or - Fit a trussrod that is capable of trying to bend the neck in the opposite direction and, counteracting effect the string tension, leaving the neck straight. Truss-rods - the two common types So the trussrod's job is to resist that bending leaving the neck straight, even under full string tension. There are two commonly used designs of truss rod: Trussrod Design 1 - the (usually) two-way self bending trussrod This rod will bend independently of being in a neck or not. Turn the allen nut one way, it bends one way; turn the allen nut the other way, it bends in the opposite direction: It is fitted straight in a slot in the neck and, in the absence of any strings, adjusting the nut will make it bend, and the flexible neck has no option to bend with it: It doesn't matter whether the adjuster is at the headstock or the heel - the effect is just the same: Trussrod Design 2 - the single-acting rod Here, if the rod was not fitted, tightening the nut would not make it bend. But the way it is fitted, where the rod is anchored at both the heel and at the headstock end and the slot it sits in is, in itself, curved... ...means that as the nut is tightened, the rod tries to straighten itself. This makes the neck bend downwards. Ref the Ric issue on the pre-84 models (although their actual design is different to either of the above but the principle will be the same). You can imagine what stresses are on both the neck and the trussrod thread trying to get the turning nut to bend that stiff maple neck! But, of course, if you helped it along by physically bending the neck downwards at the headstock, the rod would straighten and the nut would feel looser. So, to take some of the stress off the rod and thread, you could pre-bend the neck, tighten the nut until it seated against the neck wood and then when you took the pressure off the neck, it (the neck) wouldn't be able to straighten again because the shortened trussrod wouldn't let it. Hopefully makes some sort of sense

I see where your original question comes from @Reggaebass . The link that @PlungerModerno includes above say that pre-1984 Rics need the neck to be physically bent and then the truss rod nut tightened to hold it in that bend. In reality, the rod will be doing exactly the same thing but simply will not be physically capable of actually moving the neck by itself, but nevertheless is strong enough to hold it there once the bend has been induced. For completeness, I'll see if I can find a few photos that illustrate the two truss rod types. And while all that is going on, hopefully @Geddys nose 's neck is gradually assuming its original shape

I've never worked on a Ric but I know their trussrods are a bit unusual (I think the lefty loosy, righty tighty is reversed?). But of the two physical principles used: - one is where the rod independently curves one way or the other based on the nut adjustment (typical of a modern two-way rod) and the neck simply follows the curve of the rod - the other is where the rod is clamped either end to the internals of the neck and shortening the rod 'pulls' the headstock towards the back of the heel (typical of a traditional one-way rod) - in both cases, the strings are trying to 'pull' the headstock towards the bridge

If you envisage the strings at the top of the neck pulling the neck in a bow shape as tightening the tuners make them shorter, the single action truss rod is doing the same at the back of the neck as the nut is tightened, making the trussrod shorter. I'll try to get a moment to draw a picture tomorrow.

Do you mean in normal use or to solve @Geddys nose's problem?

No - not quite. The strings pull the neck into a bow and arrow kind of bow - and the trussrod's job is to counteract that by trying to pull it into a backbow. If the two tensions balance, then the neck ends up straight. So if the truss rod has been left in its tightened state, but the strings are left slack, then the neck will indeed take on a back bow. Left too long like that and the back bow sort of sets into the wood. So if @Geddys nose does the opposite - leaving the trussrod loose but tightening the strings, then the strings will pull the neck into a bow and arrow forward bow. The plan is, if he leaves it like that for a while, then the back bow set into the wood will be corrected and the neck will be straightish when neither the truss rod nor the strings are tightened. That's the hope, anyway

OK I've just had a quick look at Ben's videos using the same products and it is very similar to the stain/tru-oil processes that a number of us use. The thing I am certain about is that you won't want to sand it right now in its dry stained form - you will sand down to bare wood or lighter wood far too quickly. My method starts in much the same place as Ben's but might be different after the first couple of coats of oil. So I suggest that you follow Ben's method, which is now to go straight to the finishing oil. If you get to where you want to be with just that method, then that would be brilliant - and let us all know . If you get to where you are happy with the basic finish and colour but find the surface a bit rough then I can give you some suggestions of the options to retain the finish but make it smoother to the touch if that is any help

What I meant was what final finishing coating are you putting on it?

Yes - it sounds like either the truss rod has been overtightened in the past, or maybe tightened properly but then the strings left slack or removed for a longish time and the wood has eventually taken on some of that shape. There are more dramatic ways of sorting this, but often the same process is reversible by broadly doing what you are doing...but it will take time. So, if you have the time, I would go for thicker strings as @Supernaut says, and tuning up two semitones as @PlungerModerno says with the truss rod completely slack and leave it for at least a week then see if it gets you where you want it, because flat is very, very close to where it needs to end up and so it won't take a lot to give just that smidgen of relief...