4 Strings

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1373277115' post='2135483'] IME the only reason that those bolt-on necks need shims in the first place is because they aren't made as accurately as through and set necks. That's not to say that all bolt-on necks are shoddily made (just look at Ritter), but at the cheaper end of the market (Fender and below) there seems to be less incentive to get the neck joint pitch exactly right when it can be fixed later with a shim. [/quote] Yep, they are made for mass production. There needs to be little accuracy at the neck joint (apart from keeping the neck along the centre line) as too long or too short gets taken up with the inch or so available intonation adjustment. I find the shimming potential to be a good advantage for bolt-on, but only required if it's not made properly in the first place. I wonder how many Fenders have shims. Nearly all of mine have.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1373276855' post='2135475'] They don't have either. Their necks are just glued on. [/quote] They are large empty boxes with a short neck too. The important resonance is through the bridge to the box. The neck is an accessory, replacement necks on vintage instruments have little effect on their value (assuming they are well made etc) as the box is the important part. The glued on neck is pushed into a wedge ensure good contact and pressure.

Seems like there's little difference in the touch. My Sabre has thin frets (converted from fretless at some stage in its career) my Stingray has jumbo. I notice other things to differentiate the difference between the basses. Would the general conclusion, apart from dave bass5's experiences, be that things like fret wear will be more important? Anyone used SS frets?

[quote name='Kiwi' timestamp='1373271204' post='2135385'] There's no best design, just different designs depending on what the priorities are . The bolt on design was developed by Leo Fender because he anticipated needing to quick swap a neck if one got damaged. Neck throughs have slightly better ergonomics for those who like spending a bit of time up the dusty end of the neck...which isn't where 90% of gigging bassists spend most of their time anyway. Although some say the bolt on construction adds a bit of mid scoop and loses a little sustain, it's technically possible these days to design a bass to sound the same regardless of which neck joint is used. If anything, wood selection and pickups have more of an influence IME and I doubt very much anyone will be able to tell the difference between the two joint types in the middle of a song anyway. I like the look of neck through, but nothing beats that micro tilt function in my 78 'Ray and 75 Jazz for setting the neck angle up just right. All wood dampens vibrations to some degree and selection of wood influences how that dampening takes place. Sometimes not enough dampening results in an overbright and brittle sounding instrument so there's a balance to achieve. Deadspots happen because the neck has less rigidity at a frequency that co-incides with a note being played on the neck. Neck laminations were developed by Alembic to isolate the influence of wood on the vibration of the string for that reason. John Diggins says he prefers set neck construction because it addresses the issues of deadspots while giving the ease of construction of a bolt on with the ergonomics of a through neck...or something like that...maybe someone can provide a direct quote. My Jaydee had deadspots anyway but they weren't significant like the 5th fret/G string deadspot on my '78 Ray. They're easy to solve though with a tweak on the truss rod, change in string gauge or even tightening the neck bolts can help. [/quote] The deadspots I understood came from resonant frequencies. Those of maple necks of the size of a MM or Fender is at the point you described, you can feel the whole bass vibrate as it dampens the string. Laminated necks reduce the effects of dead spots. Funnily enough, my old Jaydee is remarkably free of dead spots.

[quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1373273303' post='2135416'] Rickenbacker first? I think Tutmarc might be a bit upset about that... [/quote] Thanks for that, I learned something there! http://tutmarc.tripod.com/paultutmarc.html

[quote name='neepheid' timestamp='1373273443' post='2135419'] I'll bite (owning several set neck instruments) - why do you think the joint moves in any way after the clamping pressure is released? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose? If it moved after the clamps are released then I would guess it would pull apart like a Curly Wurly when string tension is applied. [/quote] Not movement so much as transference of vibrations. It was a thought that the bolt-on retains the compression.

Neck-through is the best design. No joint, simplicity itself and the integrity of the wood is the same from top to bottom. (Do we congratulate Rickenbacker for being the first to do this - I mean the original designers not the present 'management'?) It's expensive though as you need longer pieces of straight wood and the length means more susceptible to resonant frequencies meaning sandwich construction is necessary. But, I've been thinking about neck joints, and how the Fender style bolt-on neck works and whether it might be better than a nicely made set joint. If I understand correctly, apart from practical strength etc, the joint is to transmit the vibrations without loss. Our through neck does that well. In making a set neck, it's clamped together while the glue dries and is then left to relax upon removal of the clamps. In making a bolt-on, although there is no glue, it's as if the clamps don't get taken off. The joint remains under the heavy compression of the screws. I'm wondering if this compression makes this simple joint, designed for mass production by machine workers, actually better in vibration transfer. Assuming good materials, nice flat mating surfaces etc in all cases. Would an even better joint be screwed and glued? Or am I talking out the back of my neck?

Shoot me down, but would raising the location of strap button on the body to further up (away from the controls) help? Could try it out with gaffa.

[quote name='bcbass' timestamp='1373215529' post='2134814'] I like how it sounds,I think it's same as B301,same pickup and wood(body+neck),just different body shape.Nice bass guitar. [/quote] Wish I knew what a B301 sounded like! Jazz looking pup in the middle, I'm expecting a P sound

[quote name='BetaFunk' timestamp='1373109009' post='2133782'] my Shergold Marathon [/quote] This is really nice too - I must be going through a non-Fender phase! Black 'n Maple always works for me. A single pup n mid-position. How does this sound?

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1373225193' post='2135059'] Talking of 'Oomph' here's a pic of my Sabre, bought from a jazz trumpet player from Germany through the very helpful paullkeeves on this forum. Was apparently originally bought by a german upright jazz bass player, presumably as a fretless, hence the ebony fret board and dots on the top of the neck lining with the frets, and then had frets installed, hence the frets(!) and addition of dots (which also explains the last dot). It's an early one the serial no. is C002838 It's a very powerful sound, plays very well and is made from the nicest pieces of wood. [url="http://s1341.photobucket.com/user/4Strings1/media/P7070002_zpsd93213a5.jpg.html"][/url] [/quote] Haha, I've just noticed its got the Sabre E-string-out-the-saddle syndrome! I'd just put flats back on it and not played it yet, looks like I'll need to redo the pic!

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373226747' post='2135094'] That neck is going to look amazing! I am so jealous of you, I would love to have my own built but I can't afford it and I haven't had enough experience with basses to know what I want as of yet. [/quote] I thin that's fair enough. I had a single bass (a Jaydee Roadie) for 25 odd years before buying different basses in recent years in search of the perfect bass. I didn't lose any money on buying and selling (in fact made a little bit!) so nothing regretted but, yes, I think it has taught me more of what I actually want. I'm not an exotic player who needs a unique instrument with which to express my art, but going to see the work in progress and bits of wood at Ruach made me realise I wasn't going to find my perfect bass from those mass produced in american factories - good as they are. This has a budget of £1200 which, although a little over at the moment is still cheaper than buying a standard new bass. You can get a US Standard Jazz or Precision for this but you'll struggle to find a Stingray and half the price of a Warwick Thumb. The downside will, of course, be resale. Anything with Musicman written on it keeps it's value and is very easy to sell. A bass made to measure is of little interest to anyone else so will not be worth the same. In the end I have just had to decide that I'll be keeping it. One advantage is, of course, if there's anything I don't like, I can change it! Nothing will be sacred, I can even get the colour sanded off and have the body carved a different shape!

Utility bass? [attachment=138552:Brutal GandL.jpg]

Sold the Musicman and the Jazz basses to fellow BCers, so now have the cash ready for the Ruach Utility Bass (RUB?)! Well, Heath came to visit yesterday and a pleasant evening had, talking wood, hardware and sketching body shapes. He brought the wood along and here's a pic of the neck with a bit of water dampening to bring out the figure. This is an unfinished, sawn lump and the picture doesn't really show the depth of the 3D effect. [URL=http://s1341.photobucket.com/user/4Strings1/media/P7070004_zps8fed5f97.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1341.photobucket.com/albums/o760/4Strings1/P7070004_zps8fed5f97.jpg[/IMG][/URL] The body also has more figure than I was expecting, but unfortunately on the back! We may be able to turn the slab if we're careful with horn and bottom bouts. Here's the master sketcher at work on the dining table, we're taking inspiration from other utility type basses, mostly Leo's designs (not sure how much he contributed to body styling) from MM and G&L and also Wal Mk 1 and Mk3. The result is still a work in development, I'm going to look and tinker over the coming couple of weeks (Heath is busy finishing other guitars anyway so nothing is being held up) but you can see the gist. The bridge end, which you can't see, is a little more stubby than a Fender, a more modern sort of shape with a Jazzy-esque bottom bout. [URL=http://s1341.photobucket.com/user/4Strings1/media/Ruach%20Utility%20Bass/P7070008_zpsd3542571.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1341.photobucket.com/albums/o760/4Strings1/Ruach%20Utility%20Bass/P7070008_zpsd3542571.jpg[/IMG][/URL] If I'm happy with the body in two weeks, headstock design next. This is a great way to buy a guitar!

Talking of 'Oomph' here's a pic of my Sabre, bought from a jazz trumpet player from Germany through the very helpful paullkeeves on this forum. Was apparently originally bought by a german upright jazz bass player, presumably as a fretless, hence the ebony fret board and dots on the top of the neck lining with the frets, and then had frets installed, hence the frets(!) and addition of dots (which also explains the last dot). It's an early one the serial no. is C002838 It's a very powerful sound, plays very well and is made from the nicest pieces of wood. [URL=http://s1341.photobucket.com/user/4Strings1/media/P7070002_zpsd93213a5.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1341.photobucket.com/albums/o760/4Strings1/P7070002_zpsd93213a5.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1373015744' post='2132729'] your amp have a "post" DI ? if not then get one that does. Also try to get "your sound" such that is not overly dependent on your specific speaker cab (i.e. use one with a flat-ish response) because engineers don't like miking up bass due to it being more difficult to control bleed at low frequencies. -- edit -- Another option is buy yourself a DI box than take a signal directly from your amps speaker output e.g. [url="http://www.andertons.co.uk/pa-outboard/pid10282/cid624/img-stage-line-dib100-passive-di-box.asp?LGWCODE=10282;56375;2717&utm_source=googlebase&utm_term=241140&utm_medium=pricecomp&utm_campaign=GoogleShopping&gclid=CNfet4-FmLgCFYW23godwWoAFw"]http://www.andertons...CFYW23godwWoAFw[/url] [/quote] But no matter what signal you give the sound man he can still eq it to make it sound like the last band he did. Unless you have a particularly distinctive sound (JJ Burnell for example) it's difficult to over-ride him. Hence, from my experience, a nice chat with him of what's best for your band and he'll probably comply.

Funnily enough I have more of an issue with drum sounds than bass. I always have a chat with the engineer if (on the rare occasion we go out foh) to describe how I want things (yes it does end up being down to me!), otherwise depth charge kick drums, bass guitar and keyboard end up fighting and blurring at the bottom end. We mostly play soul and so I tell them to have the bass below the kick and keys are generally to be kept out of 'my' frequencies. For us the kick drum should sound like a kick drum, but louder, not a bass heavy earthquake. And, yes, there should be some mid in the snare sound, often this ends up with a harsh scoop. I find this affects our overall sound more than subtleties in my own tone. Maybe that's the next step. The engineers I've spoken to are normally happy to have a go at this. Oh, to be able to have our own engineer!

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1372957919' post='2132175'] Hey, who you calling Jumbo? I can't say I really noticed the difference going between the two fret sizes, but it's a big thing for guitarists who bend strings and it totally changes the feel. In theory big frets should last longer, but it probably depends more on the material used and the material the strings are made of. Stainless steel strings seem to eat frets much quicker. I'd be surprised if many bass players have a strong preference, but this is Basschat and anything is possible! [/quote] I suppose I should avoid references to the whether the cap fits or not!

What's the deal with frets? Fender use big 'Jumbo' size, my MM Sabre has thin frets (not sure what you'd call those, I suppose in Americaspeak they'd have to be 'Regular'. Does jumbo mean tall or fat? Should basses use jumbo only? Why fat frets? Do they last longer? Are they supposed to sound different? Do they just feel different? Why thin frets? Are they smoother to touch? Look more elegant? Cheaper? For banjos? Is there a middle option? Is this the best or worst of both worlds? There's the 'Dunlop' fret size chart, but what does this mean in practice? [attachment=138316:frets_sizes.jpg]

[quote name='bcbass' timestamp='1370873047' post='2106646'] [url="http://postimg.org/image/6ymg1fkhp/"][/url] [url="http://postimg.org/image/hetdc9x0j/"][/url] Guild SB 201 from '82. [/quote] This is groovay! What does it sound like?

Well, along the lines of Utility, the bridge. Nothing more utilitarian than the Fender BBoT! However, surely we can do better than that. I like the idea of individual bridges, like the Hipshot version. It's string through (string passes through the mounting bolt). Not sure I understand how the intonation works. Does the saddle just slide, but what locks it in place? [attachment=138292:Hipshot bridge.jpg] A variation on this theme comes from Ibanez which is neater being string through without the top loading option: [attachment=138293:Ibanez BRidge.jpg] Then there's this particularly nice looking thing, but the intonation is slidey rather than screwey, might be a little awkward for fine adjustment, but locks down. Not sure if it needs to lock down, but there we are. It looks like string through would be ok but would need space behind the bridge for the hole etc. I'm keen for the bridge to be as far 'South' as possible to keep the neck short and improve the balance. [attachment=138295:Toone Bridge.jpg] Can no-one make this stuff in the UK? Does anyone know of any manufacturer of hardware in the UK?

Another might be Gibson EB through Marshall with 4x12s. I'm thinking Jack Bruce and Andy Fraser (although they achieve totally different sounds!). Can I also suggest a possible classic in the making? There appears to be a number of people with Barefaced cabs who play Stingrays through a Streamliner. Maybe coincidence, maybe I've just noticed them because that's what I use.

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1372884183' post='2131246'] Along with adjustable string spacing, and thru body aswell as top loading, oh..... [/quote] Here you go, pretty much identical to the US Jazz deluxe I swapped for a Stingray. [attachment=138248:Fender deluxe bridge.jpg] Just a variation on the BBoT theme. They had the multi-grooved saddles in the 60s, and all US basses are through body with the top loading option. I know they're really crude, but that could be seen as elegant.

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1372855223' post='2130719'] ..I for one much prefer a more comprehensive bridge assembly etc. [/quote] You mean one that's adjustable for individual string height and intonation? Oh.

Poop?