henry norton

[quote name='voxpop' post='728614' date='Jan 29 2010, 01:49 PM']looking good.....I love the maple board. great job.[/quote] [quote name='Plux_the_Duck' post='729107' date='Jan 29 2010, 08:39 PM']I'd love to have a maple neck for my VMJ fretless.... that would look most awesome!![/quote] Thanks for the comments - I'm really pleased with it, the only problem being it makes the rest of my 1982 Precision look kind of ratty and scruffy. I'm certain that epoxy coatings make maple fretless boards as relevant a choice as ebony and the best way to go on a 'proper' Fender. I'm making a copy of it for a guy in Brighton Plux so you might see it around your way in a month-or-so.

[quote name='Gwilym' post='730052' date='Jan 30 2010, 08:53 PM']i think that, in your own words, the same circuit in the same bass might "vary slightly". All I'm saying is that in my experience with my two basses, the tone between the two differ to an extent that I can only reasonably attribute that difference to the different woods used in the construction, rather than any slight dfferences due hardware and electronics, which are identical. Of course this is not a controlled scientific experiment, nevertheless it's my contention that tonewoods do have an effect on the sound of an instrument. Whether or not this effect is to a greater or lesser extent than the effect of electronics and pickups, I don't know, but it certainly makes a difference.[/quote] It's all about degrees though - I don't think anyone who's posted on this thread would deny wood choice wouldn't make some difference but to quote an earlier post; take two Precisions, one with an ash body and maple board, one with an alder body and rosewood board - the difference in sound would probably be quite marked played back to back but they would still sound like a couple of Fender Precisions. You couldn't say that if you back to backed an ash/maple Precision with an ash/maple Jazz.

What a fantastic, long and argumentative thread! It goes to show how little we all [i]really[/i] understand about our chosen instrument! Have you decided on woods for your custom build yet Lefty....? ....or are you gibbering in the corner after finally being driven insane by all the conflicting advice?

[quote name='Metalmoore' post='729401' date='Jan 30 2010, 03:09 AM']No exposed thread, if there was i was gonna use a set of pliers. I tried the once supplied with another schaller bridge but their site says they are the same size and it does actually work on the other saddles. WD40?? I have heard of it but never used it and not really sure what it does either... Could someone tell a DIY noob what it is all about? Cheers[/quote] Don't go drilling it out yet. It could be something as simple as the hex hole in the top of the screw might be blocked up with a bit of crap so the hex key won't fit in. Have a look down the hole with a torch and see if the head looks the same as it does on the other saddles. Actually, looking at my Schaller bridge the grub screws are longer than the saddle is thick so there should be a bit of grub screw sticking out from either the top or the bottom. If not, it might be broken or maybe just missing?

Can you not get the hex key in or will the one supplied fit but the grub screw won't move?

All done now - I've tried to take some clearer pictures too. The epoxy works really well, very smooth and quick with a good clear, bright sound yet doesn't sound harsh or glassy, in fact not dissimilar to my old ebony fretless. I use stainless rounds and they haven't made any impact on the surface either. I ended up making the profile slightly chunkier than the '57. It's the same width and depth but is more rounded rather than elliptical, so really gives you something to hold on to! Anyway, I've just been asked to make another one for a friend so hopefully we'll be seeing a few more fretless maple boards out there I'm working on a bunch of other things atm (not least trying to finish building my house ), but want to look into the epoxy board coatings a bit further so may try it on my rosewood short scale. I'll post it up when I get started.

[quote name='jakesbass' post='699109' date='Jan 2 2010, 10:35 PM']I can't remember where I heard this but I read somewhere that the so called 'carved' front and back tables on some chinese basses are actually pressed and steamed. Anyone who knows anything about wood knows that trees take a long time to take on their new role (ie being a bass) so those basses are very likely to try to return to their former shape. With that in mind if you're looking at a 'carved' bass make sure it is just that.[/quote] Blimey! They're getting quite cheeky with the descriptions these days, but you have to admit it's quite clever. That asides, plenty of 'old' basses have to be heated and pressed [i]back[/i] into shape because the front's been flattened, so it could work quite well if they do it right (as anyone with a set of Thonet bentwood chairs will vouch for )

[quote name='andy.' post='725714' date='Jan 26 2010, 09:47 PM']I may be buying a old jazz bass but theres something wrong in my mind with it. There seems to be something missing from the bottom end. Anyone got any thoughts?[/quote] Before you flex your plastic have you tried it acoustically? Just make sure it's the pickups (or strings) and not just a fundamentally tinny sounding bass.

I used to be a 34" man through and through (add your pun here please...........) but I've recently discovered shorter scales and love 'em. There won't be much of a difference sound-wise between the two although there may be slightly less choice string wise. A shorter scale makes not only the stretch a bit less but also eases the string tension if you're into bends and vibrato, as well as it just being a bit easier to play. My vote goes for 32"

Fender bass VI or the Schecter Hellcat VI will all give you that Duane Eddy twang or counrty & western tic tak. They all use light gauge roundwounds on a short scale length, but are solid. Semi hollow & semi acoustic basses will sound more, eh, hollow and acoustic, but won't necessarily give you more 'twang'. Smaller speakers would help too - 10s, 12s - keep the 18" folded horn for reggae gigs. It helps to play with a pick too.

[quote name='attackbass' post='725614' date='Jan 26 2010, 08:25 PM']i sold mine a while ago for 250[/quote] Damn! I'd have given you £255....

[quote name='spinynorman' post='725271' date='Jan 26 2010, 04:13 PM']So I bought Neepheid's. I was watching a good nick one on eBay a couple of weeks ago, just to see what it went for, and it made £350. They seem to be well thought of, even amongst fans of the Guild original. One possible drawback in some people's eyes is the 32" scale, though it actually doesn't feel like a short/medium scale bass. The other drawback is the wide body, which means very few cases or gig bags will fit. I've ended up with a gigantic Warwick acoustic bass gigbag. The alternative, if you can find one, is the Epi Jack Casady case, and I think you have to modify that.[/quote] I think they were all Korean (and 30.75 inch scale from what I've seen, so closer to short than medium). I've seen a few go for 300 - 400, and most seem to be fairly near mint condition. If you've got the spare cash you sometimes see them converted to Darkstars, which makes them very good indeed.

You can sand a later headstock to look like a '51 and you might, with a bit of chisel work get a single coil into the routing, but it'll take allot of work (and body filler ) to turn a contoured body into a slab sided '51 style body. It would probably be easier to find a bit of wood and make one.

Thing is, if the bass isn't worth much and you don't mind if it does go wrong then I'd go for it. Any replacement neck will cost you hard earned cash whereas defretting is virtually free. I've even played a fretless that hadn't had the empty slots filled, and it worked fine. I'd do it the way Karl describes, but don't worry too much about the finer details like perfect inlays, glassy smooth boards and suchlike - get on and enjoy playing it. Oh, I nearly got death threats when I proposed defretting my old JV Precision, so I'd keep your US P the way it is and buy a fretless neck for it if you decide you like it.

[quote name='Ancient Mariner' post='723231' date='Jan 24 2010, 05:02 PM']The settings won't affect the amp because the speaker will present a constant load. The idea of having a tone control in the speaker leaves me with mixed feelings, since most amps have a perfectly good set of tone controls to begin with, and one would specifically not want tone to change with attenuation. But there's another issue, in that a substantial part of what makes us want to play loud is the behaviour of speakers working hard and the way they sound when they're pushed a bit. I'm not sure this has been thought through very well, although I can't really say without trying the final product.[/quote] It's not a 'tone' control, it just reduces the speaker output, presumably by moving the magnet or coil closer or further away from one another. Looking at the graph it looks like a pretty linear response low to high although you're probably right about the speaker distortion - I doubt whether that's taken into account on the graph and overdriven speakers are as much of a holy grail as overdriven valve power amps, ie, unattainable without blood (usually from the ears....). It's a good idea but probably fairly limited, although I'd be more than happy to knock nine decibels off most guitarists I've played with

[quote name='Bloodaxe' post='724174' date='Jan 25 2010, 04:42 PM']In my experience, not really. Can't vouch for the JayDees, never met one in the flesh. A big factor, I suspect, is how the neck blank is sawn. Plainsawn necks are likely to have more inherent flex & Quartersawn necks less (for a rough 'n' ready idea, try bending a ruler edgwise - hard innit? - that's akin to Quartersawn. Bend it flatwise - segmented urea - Plainsawn stylee). Laminated Quartersawn should be even more stablerer. It's common sense to slacken the strings before adjusting the truss - especially if tightening it. Ditto, wise not to make huuuuge adjustments in one go. 1/4 turn ought to be OK, then tune it up & play. Tweak as necessary. There's a good few around who are over-cautious IMO, even to the point of changing strings individually. Personally I can't be doing with it - do you honestly believe that [i]any[/i] of the major manufacturers have a vast rack of new necks gently settling in with a "truss wallah" giving each one a bijou tweakette & then letting it settle for a day or so? I don't. If I drop a bass into The Gallery for a setup & am told it'll be "about a week" I also don't believe that the guys there diligently tweak mine a bit each day (as well as everybody elses) - they'd be out of business in a month! All IMO & note the qualified statements. That ranted... if you're in [i]any way uncertain[/i] then Overcautious is the way to go. It [i]might[/i] be that your "cheap basses" have fundamental issues like S bends, or poor quality timber, that can't readily be adjusted out. Pete.[/quote] +1 on all that - truss rods aren't magic but there again, why should guitar techs say otherwise if they're getting setup work off us mere mortals. A bass neck is a longer piece of wood, under tension and (probably more importantly), subject to the same dry/humid warm/cold conditions when living a 'normal life' as a guitar neck. I wouldn't say they're any more prone to warping than a guitar other than the fact there's usually more neck neck inches to go wrong. String tension shouldn't warp a neck though, it's made to have strings in tension strung along it.

Are you looking for new or used? Either way you might find it a bit tricky finding an unlined fretless Jazz - even for Fender Japan money. It's all Jaco's fault! Like Absolutpepper said, maybe you could go the Warmoth neck route - you could get a body off fleabay and add the pups & hardware you want then. You might still have change left from what you'd have to spend on an 80's Tokai Jazz. I had one for a while and yes, they're very good indeed.

[quote name='Beedster' post='722594' date='Jan 23 2010, 10:03 PM']Problem is that if you build a Fender from parts these days, unless you're 1. extremely patient 2. extremely lucky 3. extremely rich it makes so much more sense to buy an original bass. I've seen 70 Jazz PUPs sell for £900, necks for more, bodies for £700, even bridges for well over £100. As a project, a 'best of' would be great, an early 80's (heavy) bridge, recent neck and tuners, old body, old PUPs etc, would be interesting. Let me know if I can be of any help C[/quote] Probably all three! Like most 'classic' gear, it usually costs more to buy something piecemeal, especially Fenders. You do see a few Gibson EB-0 / EB-3s in need of restoration or repair going relatively cheap but they were always more prone to breakage and no good if you're a committed Fender User...

[quote name='RhysP' post='722991' date='Jan 24 2010, 12:43 PM']I think Wayne Charvel would have something to say about that! Wayne Charvel was building guitars in the 70s, and Grover Jackson (who went on to make Jackson guitars) was one of his employees. Wayne Charvel sold his guitar building business to Jackson, who continued to produce guitars under the Charvel name for a while before changing to his own name. There were indeed excellent guitars made in Japan using the Charvel name under licence in the 80s, but to refer to Charvel as "the Japanese arm of Jackson" is like calling Fender the Japanese arm of Musicman. [/quote] Fair point!

[quote name='Alfie' post='722604' date='Jan 23 2010, 10:12 PM']I have a real lust for a surf green precision bass, but they are like hens' teeth. The only real options for getting one for less than a grand are to make one myself (Warmoth) or to refinish my Squier. If I was to refinish the Squier I would like to use the opportunity to convert it from a PJ config to a standard precison bass, I really don't like the sound or the look of the J pickup. My question is, what is the best way to fill-in the J pickup cavity before refinishing?[/quote] The best way is to shape a piece of similar wood (alder, lime or suchlike), to plug into the old pickup hole. If you take your time and get it to fit well, you won't need much in the way of filler to get it smooth.

They were the Japanese arm of Jackson - purveyors of spandex, big hair rock guitars and very high quality by all accounts. If your mate can get over the pointy headstock cock rock image he's got himself a very nice bass actually, easily the equivalent of a Japanese made Fender, and you don't see many of them going for 50 quid with a case!

Blimey, Alembic doing super Jazzes. That's kind of like Ferrari making an SUV! It's very nice - especially the 5 - but I'd still go for a series 2...

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='722169' date='Jan 23 2010, 02:57 PM']Well, for ME I find a correlation between a nice resonant unplugged tone with lots of prominent string overtones when you put your ear against the upper horn of the bass, and a good plugged-in sound. But I imagine there is a trade-off with sustain so that might be the complete opposite of what you want. And I know relatively cheap woods like alder or ash are perfectly capable of giving that tone, just for some reason not all of them do. I don't know what contribution size of the body makes either, I guess a bigger fender-type body will contribute more to the sound than a small jap-type. As for selecting the wood, I've no idea but I suppose giving it a few sturdy taps and listening might be a good way![/quote] A 'cheapo' 2 piece alder body is no less likely to sound 'good' than an exotic sandwich of brazilian mahogany with quilted maple facings and wenge centre stripes. It needs to be carefully dried to about 6 percent moisture content and then kept in a relatively dry indoor climate 'til it's used. There's really not that much more to it except for allot of smoke and mirrors from some luthiers.

[quote name='AttitudeCastle' post='721958' date='Jan 23 2010, 10:54 AM']i played a T-bird the other day while testing out some Ampeg gear, (SVT 4 pro and 8-10 cab) KILLER combo, what the bassist fro "Ash" uses i think, (but the Autobots sticker makes up most of his tone me thinks) What is a good price to pay for a Gibson Thunderbird? The one in the shop wasn't priced at that time (there wasn't a tag, and i was too shy to ask as the guy at the counter was with his girl friend, unprofessional much!) Plus i've my eye on the Ampeg stuff XD[/quote] If you want close to the original t.bird sound for less than a new (or second hand), modern Gibson version you could try to find a 70s/80s Japanese made Geco Thunderbird. They're very well made and, like the original T.birds of the 60s, have much hotter, growlier (chrome) pickups than the later (black soapbar) versions. I've seen them go on Ebay for 350-400 quid, which is allot cheaper than the ten grand I saw being asked for an original NR T.Bird

[quote name='Prosebass' post='717646' date='Jan 19 2010, 12:34 PM']true, but in the early 17th century he was the pupil of Nicolo Amati of Cremona Italy noted as one of the greatest double bass makers ever to live. Watch this space for an MDF bodied plywood necked Picobass I am putting together as time permits. Fitted with a top pickup and top electronics courtesy of Silent Fly [SFX] it will be interesting to see how it sounds and maybe put this arguement to rest with some solid (well MDF solid at least) evidence. [/quote] Nice to see a maker setting out to clarify things instead of shrouding their art in mystery Thing is, the 'wood is good' argument has already been dis-proven by the likes of Kramer, Steinberger and Status.