Kiwi

Legend has it that when Geoff Gould was focussing on setting Modulus up around 1983, he left oversight of the neck production to someone else and they got the mixing of the phenolic resin (aka Bakerlite) wrong. This affected his agreement with Alembic and impacted on the necks made for Musicman as well. It's also affected all the 90's Quantum basses I've owned by Modulus but not the other models (Sonic Hammer, Flea). And also every one of the four Cutlass basses I've had featured overly flexible necks (but I know earlier ones are OK). Rob has done a huge amount of R&D on his necks, and his basses still sound like Status basses even when the electronics are completely replaced. So the sound is very much in the necks.

When I had a conversation with Rob Green about this specific characteristic, after he had done some work on a Modulus bass for me, he told me the fingerboard had quite a big impact on the rigidity and sound. Ken Smith also mentioned the same thing to me in a separate conversation and explained this is why they use such thick slabs of ebony for the fingerboard. He wants the necks to be just rigid enough for the mid range warmth which is so characteristic of his instruments. It was an idea also inspired by the upright basses that he collects.

Me too. It's not theory.

What makes you think its a theory?

I see where you're going with this - it seems potentially contradictory. I should probably clarify that it depends on construction and fingerboard material. Not too stiff because an overly stiff neck and phenolic fingerboard creates a very brittle sounding instrument. I've played early to mid nineties Status Empathy and Modulus Quantum basses with this quality. For extra context, other bass makers like Ken Smith aim for a neck that is just stiff enough because it introduces some warmth into the lower mid range and tames the highs a little. Overdesigned means designed far beyond what is needed to resist string tension. That could mean the number of layers of weave used (typically more than three layers), the orientation of the weave in selected locations and the choice of unecessariy thick fingerboard material. Purely based on observation alone, in the late 70's necks seemed over designed. Super rigid but also very easy to fret dress and achieve incredibly low action. The problems with aftermarket Modulus necks in the early to mid eighties were apparently due to Geoff Gould delegating the mixing of phenolic resin while he was off setting up Modulus operations and the person responsible not paying sufficient attention. It was why Alembic ditched graphite necks as an option. However, I've played early 90's Modulus basses with floppy necks too - just had a 92 Quantum 5 pass through my hands for set up and restoration with a neck that wasn't stiff enough to resist string tension and there was no way to set the bass up with reasonable action. I've also owned a 94 with a neck that was brittle and a 96 with a banana neck. And a 96 Sonic Hammer that was just fabulous in action and sound. QC seems a little inconsistent to say the least. Ironically the Modulus basses with flexible necks sounded great - really growly and warm.

I've found there are Steinberger replacements being made by a one man operation in Guangzhou but they are available domestically only in low numbers and for over 600 quid a pop. But it has to be said there's a huge difference between a simple structure and something that has to be stiff but not too stiff. Early necks from Modulus, Status and Vigier were over designed (which I like). Later in the nineties there were issues with stiffness and many still didn't have truss rods.

Drop me a PM if you would like to change your email. We've had to remove that ability from members due to accounts being set up and sold on by scammers.

Is it possible that people might have reported BC emails as junk instead of unsubscribing?

There's nothing here that we need to worry about. This advice is aimed at people who sell on Ebay, not Ebay itself. As Woodinblack says we are also limited to whatever information can be provided by the third party software we use which, currently, doesn't allow monitoring of successfully completed transactions.

This is a transition model NS5CR. It has the 35"scale, fingerboard linlays and slimmer neck profile of the LX not the 34" scale, dot inlays and chunky neck of the first edition NS5CR. Otherwise it's similar to the US made NS5XL in having brass hardware and all maple construction. But it has four controls instead of stacked eq and a rosewood fingerboard instead of pau ferro...which isn't much of a compromise TBH.

Click and hold on the title for a couple of seconds, the edit field will open up and you'll be able to amend it then.

2013/14-ish, I still have the photo somewhere.

Yeah, I haven't gigged it in earnest yet after...15 years! The one time I could have, it was still being shipped over from the UK so had to use the Status Series 1...speaking of which, that could potentially qualify as well for it's sheer versatility after modding it.

Good grief that must have been 2006. I didn't buy it until 2009 - just after I had to leave my corporate gig band due to work relocation. So more than 9 months later...! It's one of those instruments that just shouldn't be as good as it is on paper. All maple construction and Czech origins don't suggest anything special going on. My Pedulla is all maple too but sounds nothing like the Spector. I think the neck on this bass is perhaps a little less rigid so it sounds warmer. I was all set to slap an ebony fingerboard on it to deal with the warp but the steam treatment from Jon basically reset the neck sufficiently for a fingerboard and fret dress to soak up any remaining deviation