Kiwi

still no graphite neck?

[quote name='Telebass' post='332262' date='Nov 19 2008, 01:21 PM']Headless? Hmmm...If I could have a 'modern' bass, it would be a Status S2 headless. With a single passive P pickup. That, I would step up for.[/quote] It can be done, if you ordered a Status Smart bass.

What about this bloke then?

chaps, my [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320318873997&ssPageName=ADME:X:AAQ:GB:1123"]Trace brochure[/url] could help resolve discussions like this

[quote name='mike257' post='332030' date='Nov 19 2008, 12:26 AM']Good, innovative design is surely about presenting a solution to a problem. When Leo set about assembling the electric bass, it wasn't to pass the time on a quiet Sunday afternoon. He recognised the problem, and attempted to solve it, and solved it pretty damn well. The reason all the radical innovations since then have failed to revolutionise bass design is because they were solutions looking for a problem, or the problem was too small. Innovation in bass design, when it comes, will be driven by necessity. As much of an achievement as the Stick or the ever-growing ERB might be, and I do believe they are, in most mainstream musical contexts they just aren't in the picture right now.[/quote] Thats the point I was making and was also made by LWTait. The design of the bass as it currently stands is more or less fit for purpose - definitely flawed but more or less OK. There isn't sufficient market demand to drive a change in conventions. For there to be any significant paradigm shift, there needs to be a major driver either by technology or market demand.

jeez nearly 700 votes!

[quote name='Leowasright' post='331681' date='Nov 18 2008, 06:16 PM']It's mainly down to the fact Leo Fender got it pretty much right in 1950/51 and got it almost perfect in 1960 (my biased view). 58 years later the electric bass that Leo Fender designed/invented is pretty much STILL what bass players want. At the time (1950) the instrument was pretty darned revolutionary... Think on....[/quote] I think Leo didn't get it 99% right and I think its a mistake for anyone to idolise Leo Fender. If the bigger picture is taken into consideration he was just one of a succession of designers contributing to a gradual evolution in MUSICAL INSTRUMENT design. He an adapted existing idea (the solid body guitar designed by Les Paul) into a different format. Les Paul did exactly the same thing in taking a hollow body instrument and redesigning it so it was less prone to feedback. Ned Steinberger took the standard conventional layout of a bass and made significant improvements in making it headless (which he also adapted from existing ideas elsewhere). Regardless of marketability, I think headless instruments are the most significant improvement in bass guitar design in the last 40 years. Its an incredibly elegant solution to a number of playability issues. So what if it doesn't look "right"? Lets be clear that this is just a question of taste, not functionality. Tastes, as we all know, change like fashion. The prominence of the Fender bass was thanks mostly to producers and sound engineers in the 60's and 70's preferring those instruments as an industry standard to make eq'ing easier and that is what has led to the legacy in music we have today. Fact is, all these people are all standing on the shoulders of giants. No single person is a genius or made a giant leap, they're all part of a process of adaption and evolution. Its Darwinism.

hahaha, ok if he's telling porkies, maybe I will withhold Jon's posh coffee supply until he surrenders.

Forgot to mention that Jon said he plans to let the bass grace the home page of the shuker website for a bit too.

[quote name='Paul Cooke' post='326716' date='Nov 11 2008, 01:25 PM']Basstalk (the American based website) have a preferences facility to select only certain forums in which to "search" for new posts... this means that the vast majority can be filtered out by the user to suit his/her tastes... (you just need to be a member to use that, not a supporting member)[/quote] It's possible to subscribe to forums here as well. Go to the pull down menu in the top right hand corner when you are viewing the forum and click on subscribe. [quote name='Currrls' post='330862' date='Nov 17 2008, 06:03 PM']What about an IRC channel. don't know if anyone uses them already but it might work[/quote] I used to be an avid IRC user before Bassworld. I personally like the idea of a dedicated channel but its harder to manage and if more than 10 members are using it heavily then its hard to track conversations without going to private rooms. Also if an IRC channel was too popular, would it drain interest from the rest of the forum?

hi chris, welcome aboard

[quote name='LWTAIT' post='330773' date='Nov 17 2008, 04:27 PM']its a problem i had in my graphics coursework, that you had to give a reason why you were designing what you were designing. there had to be gap in the market or a problem with the original product. their isnt either of these things with bass.[/quote] that's what I was hinting at, too.

[quote name='Prosebass' post='330735' date='Nov 17 2008, 03:41 PM']Granted uprights still sell alongside modern basses and I love EUB's having owned a Framus but I would love to see a different "mindset" in how bass design could go forward.[/quote] Like this? [quote name='Prosebass' post='330733' date='Nov 17 2008, 03:33 PM']Thats what I'm getting at, can it be improved ? The Precision and Jazz are design Icons having lasted 57 and 48 years respectively. Does this mean we are all ultra conservative or that the original designs were so good ?[/quote] Lets not look at the bass guitar in isolation, the original designs were an improvement on earlier guitar ideas too (including those by Les Paul). Have recent innovations I've already mentioned been successful? Sure to a certain extent, we still have instruments with graphite necks and laminations and active circuits and headless designs and fanned frets and 15 degree twisted neck and vibrato bridges and onboard tuners and stereo circuitry and optical pickups and neck LED's. Put all those together in one instrument and compare/contrast it to Leo's Fender P. How does that stack up in terms of design? And then lets consider whether that instrument is MARKETABLE? If it doesn't sell but is still innovative, is it successful?

There's a certain performance envelope for any piece of design that is based around fitness for purpose. So long as the bit of kit does what its supposed to and doesn't cause more problems than it solves then there's little reason for its to evolve. Any attempts to force it to evolve are often meaningless in the long run. Sales hype, decoration or otherwise frivolous features often masquerade as innovation (tm) (pat. pending). Usually the most significant way in which otherwise stable design ideas develop is with the advent of new technology eg. graphite composites, or new manufacturing techniques, eg. laminated necks or the use of NURBS modelling in CNC milling. Ergo, you could also say the precision bass shares 100% of its design with a guitar. The only thing fundamentally different is the scale.

[quote name='OldGit' post='330350' date='Nov 16 2008, 11:18 PM']However, at least in the old workshop, his coffee leaves a bit to be desired .[/quote] Still? Even after I got him a kg of single estate bourbon coffee and a link to a website where he can get more? Has he got a mini fridge yet so the milk doesn't go off? I'll probably end up having to give him that as well. Jeez the things I have to do for a decent cup of coffee...

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='329737' date='Nov 15 2008, 05:27 PM']Here's hoping. I'm kinda limited though as I only like natural or black. I don't fancy any of the coloured ones - maybe a Blue Dawn but they never come up.[/quote] [url="http://www.gumtree.com/london/75/29305875.html"]http://www.gumtree.com/london/75/29305875.html[/url] Probably better not let this one get away then...?

If you mean the grain, aim for a late 80's instrument. If you mean the polyester finish then most basses before the late 90's had it and most produced even today. We could probably date your preferred instrument if you gave us the serial plus shots of the bridge and neck joint. Stingray necks are approximately half way between a j and p bass.

I tend to use compression after the synth pedal to even out any cone-blowing peaks

1984-85 was one of the worst years for Musicman instruments. My mate Hugh had an 84 stingray with a wonky neck. Apparently Leo's company was subbed to make necks for Musicman at the time and they didn't do very good work. Some were shipped without attached truss rods (ie. fitted but not anchored). Certain parties even suggested the drop in quality control was deliberate...

Jon was in Shepherds Bush to catch the Stranglers at the Empire tonight and dropped off a first run of the body using a cracked piece of mahogany waste he had lying around. [attachment=16015:prototyp...irst_cut.jpg] The edges haven't been radiussed, the two halves of the run are slightly out of register, the pickup routs are a mess (because of the CNC machine's own limits) and slightly too close to the neck and I'm not certain about the return for the headless tuners either. The neck pocket is also going to be done by hand to ensure a close fit ... ...however I'm quite pleased with how sexy the shape is and with the neck it should balance almost perfectly on the leg. The body is very wide but definitely feels good. There's support in the right place for the right forearm and I'm thinking about chambering where the wood is thickest. The rough cut is very thick still so I'm in two minds about whether to leave it like that and have two very deep but also quite comfortable chamfers, or to make the body thinner but less contoured.