Changing the scale length

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1322604162' post='1453544']
Before and after pics please.
[/quote]
Pics is not enough, we need a video for Youtube.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Dave D' timestamp='1322601392' post='1453474']
Wouldn't it be easier just to hold the bass 4" further to the right across your body?!!!
[/quote]
That would be 3.7"

Edited November 30, 2011 by EssentialTension

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='fryer' timestamp='1322600923' post='1453463']
I've tried a capo, and the frets and intonation are fine. Re the strings, I am going to fit the adaptor so I can use single ball end strings. Just got to have a look at the truss rod. Not sure about the dot markers.

Where's my saw.
[/quote]
May the force be with you.

[Fat Rich]

[quote name='benebass' timestamp='1322426766' post='1450804']
........
The only shorter headless I've seen using double ball ends is the Status King Bass, which has the 'Bendwell' system to make up the string length.
.......
Cheers,

B.
[/quote]

This is probably your least destructive option (apart from not messing up... erm, I mean modifying your bass at all).

Keep the original double ball end retainer, replace the 2nd fret with a nut and remove the first couple of frets and hollow out a bit to look like a bendwell then you won't need to chop the truss rod.

But I think you'd be better off trading the bass for a proper short scale jobby,

[andybassdoyle]

IF you did it, which seems unlikely, what would you actually gain. It must be easier to simply switch the neck or the bass? Don't close any doors you don't have to close etc...
??

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='andybassdoyle' timestamp='1322661836' post='1454082']
IF you did it, which seems unlikely, what would you actually gain. [b]It must be easier to simply switch the neck[/b] or the bass? Don't close any doors you don't have to close etc...
??
[/quote]

That won't work either as the bridge and pups will be in the wrong places relative to each other and the neck too.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Ou7shined

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1322662334' post='1454090']
It would if the neck is made specifically.
[/quote]

Well no. Because the pups should be placed in a "sweet spot" which in relation to the harmonic distance between the nut and bridge.
A custom neck and shifting the bridge will work.... but moving the bridge on a headless ain't as easy as all that, leaving you with the option of re-routing for the pups.

[BigRedX]

Err... wouldn't this "sweet spot" be in a different place for every fretted note anyway?

To OP if you do decide to get sawing we expect progress reports in the Build Diary forum.

[skankdelvar]

Why not simply move the bridge closer to the neck?

[size=3](Puts hands in pockets, saunters off whistling)[/size]

[Fat Rich]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1322663829' post='1454121']
Why not simply move the bridge closer to the neck?

[size=3](Puts hands in pockets, saunters off whistling)[/size]
[/quote]

Or get your arms extended so the bass feels shorter?

[Dom in Dorset]

Simply stand further away and let the perspective handle it.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1322663793' post='1454120']
But the "Sweet spot" moves every time you fret a note changing where the harmonics lie. Besides that Pups move position depending on who makes the instrument. There is no hard fast rule they should be in position "X" . Even look at Fenders. Two positions of the Bridge pup on a Jazz. On a P the split is in a different position to the single and then the Telebass has it at the neck. That's before you get into things like reverse Ps . There is no right or wrong position just what sound right and doesn't to the ears of the listener.

As long as the 12th fret is put in the middle distance it would work.
[/quote]

A lot of R&D has gone into finding the opitmum placing for pups. Hence the need for things like Leo's test-bed bass...



When I rout for a pickup (unless otherwise directed - MM sweet spot, P bass sweet spot etc) I place it in a harmonically pleasing position. Obviously there is no one defining sweet spot but you can't just go banging it in any old place, because it just doesn't sound right - I learned this the hard way. But you look that way my deary and I'll look this.

AFAIA there is no system yet available where the hardware automatically auto-intonates to the the played fret so this argument about shifting harmonics is moot as there is little we can do about it. It's about as helpful to the cause as saying avionics is pointless because planes can't go backwards. (I have no idea where that example came from ) ... I guess this is the point where you say "Ah but MIG-29's can fly backwards".... then I remember I have work to do.

[Doctor J]

If you google "really bad ideas which will end in disaster" there is a link to this thread on the first page.

Please don't cut up your bass, mister.

[Ou7shined]

You've misunderstood what I meant about "harmonically pleasing" which is ok as I was being intentionally vague about it - I use a bit of theory and physics not just my ears (which are obviously useless by your presumption anyway)... I have no idea about the 22 fret 24 fret neck example you mentioned but I do know (and I though most people did too) that you can't just swap them about and Bob's yer auntie.... Tonewood argument? No, there's no argument, you're just having a pop at me and my sh*t ears... Oh my goodness look at the time... I've got basses to build.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1322666824' post='1454184']
So if there is no one defining sweet spot then the talk of a sweet spot is bollox as there is none.
[/quote]
Equally, one might argue that if there is no [i]one[/i] defining sweet spot there may be [i]many [/i]sweet spots, each of which is definable by its location and subjectively pleasing 'sweetness'.

OTOH, the argument might go that - as an objective recognition of subjectivity - there is no [i]sour[/i] spot spotty spot spot.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1322669369' post='1454231']
Or there is a sweet spot for every fret so we really need 21/22/23/24 pick ups.
[/quote]
Piezos under every fret and a sliding mag pup that runs the length of the body with a little printed scale along the side, calibrated for every key. Job done.

See, I'm full of bounce and positivity today.

[color=#ffffff].[/color]

Edited November 30, 2011 by skankdelvar

[MB1]

But I think you'd be better off trading the bass for a proper short scale jobby,

MB1.
However!
if you do plan to go ahead with it ,remember your local pensioners at this time of year!
...The results could provide them with a source of warmth for several hours!

[Fat Rich]

Arguing about the "sweet spot" positioning of pickups in this particular case is like arguing about the colour sticky plaster to use after he cuts his head off.

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1322667856' post='1454201']
You've misunderstood what I meant about "harmonically pleasing"
[/quote]

Probably then, since the scale length constantly changes, what is 'harmonically pleasing' more often than not will depend a certain amount on the keys and neck positions a player tends to use most often.

However a complicating factor is that although scale length changes with fretting, string thickness and tension for a given string stays the same. So the harmonic character of a string with solo neck pickup [i]doesn't[/i] sound the same to our ears as the same string fretted further up through the bridge pickup, because not everything has been scaled proportionately. That suggests that absolute placement will have a defining character whatever the key, notably at the extremes. However, a cm here or there on a [i]solo[/i]'ed pickup especially as you get closer to the neck is going to make very little audible difference over the effect of key choice (which is pretty marginal in a semitone range as long as it doesn't force changes of position).

[derrenleepoole]

Seriously, a decent short scale Squier VM Jaguar bass can be had for about £170 new, probably get a good one second-hand for quite a bit less! Why on earth would you risk butchering a perfectly good bass when it's clear you're perhaps not totally sure it's going to work!

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1322669972' post='1454243']
I was thinking something like a Westone Rail with the pup attached to your left hand through a rig of strings and pullies.
[/quote]
Even better. I like your way of thinking.

FWIW, re: your earlier observation; in the late 50's I think Gibson moved the neck p90 rout on the Les Paul Special (double cutaway) due to neck flap and general instability. IIRC and all that.

.

Edited November 30, 2011 by skankdelvar

[Happy Jack]

I think this would be a good time to introduce the notion of a bass with frets which sink (as if by magic) into the fingerboard, thereby creating an instant fretless bass.

You could use the empty space under the fingerboard (created by ditching the trussrod) for the mechanics to support this.

Logically, this would also be the moment to build in fanned frets.

And valves. Valves are good.

[skankdelvar]

My favourite convertible-neck bass video. No retraction involved.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I86kTWgMQuk&feature=related[/media]

Local Man: "I'm not remotely bonkers".

Edited November 30, 2011 by skankdelvar

[ShergoldSnickers]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1322676646' post='1454416']
My favourite convertible-neck bass video. No retraction involved.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I86kTWgMQuk&feature=related[/media]

Local Man: "I'm not remotely bonkers".
[/quote]

He obviously first tested his theory on 'trousered' and 'non-trousered' leg configurations.

[fryer]

So as long as I get the nut in the right place, where the 2nd fret was, it should be ok ? It sounds ok with the capo, so I don't think the pup position needs to change.

I think the only problem will be the fret markers, as lond as I can alter the truss rod.

Anyway, I've got the saw ready.

[attachment=94223:M-AKKU_MSA160C_CE-S001_p2_1.jpg]