Neck removal and truss rod advice?

[99mustang]

I am about to start my little project on my Squier Pbass and will be removing the neck so the body can be painted.

The neck may be off for some time. Would it be better to release the tension in the truss rod until it's refitted or leave it as it is?

Cheers,

John.

[KiOgon]

It's not likely to make any difference IMO, I'd leave it as is, it's gonna need a real good setup when you've done - whatever.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='KiOgon' timestamp='1323543158' post='1464480']
It's not likely to make any difference IMO, I'd leave it as is, it's gonna need a real good setup when you've done - whatever.
[/quote]

Seconded.

[KiOgon]

BTW, Don't just leave that neck in a corner somewhere, I'd lay it on a flat surface, heel on the flat then supported under the nut area, at a steady normal room temperature & humidity, in a safe place.
Also take the opportunity to give it a good clean, check all the frets for wear, dents, lifting, sharp ends etc. etc. treat it to a lemon oil freshen up (if it's rosewood). Just check the truss rod nut turns both ways OK & reset to where it was, (approx). Make sure all the tuners are good, clean, free running + all screws present & tight.

Plenty to do while you're waiting for the paint to dry

Cheerz, John

[99mustang]

The Squier is quite new, no wear at all. Bought it from a charity shop few months back. Looks like some bought it for a son or daughter who gave up playing very quickly, not a mark on it. Truss rod moves freely, had to set it when I got it. The intonation was out.

Just out of interest, would I be best stripping the body to bare wood or just prep the current black to accept new paint. The paint i'm looking at suggests a black undercoat so it would save a lot of time plus money by painting over current finish.

Cheers.

John.

Ps, my Badass Bass II arrived from the States last Friday, sexy piece of kit

Edited December 11, 2011 by 99mustang

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='99mustang' timestamp='1323605131' post='1464840']
...Just out of interest, would I be best stripping the body to bare wood or just prep the current black to accept new paint. The paint i'm looking at suggests a black undercoat so it would save a lot of time plus money by painting over current finish.

..[/quote]

It all depends on what you are painting it with and how compatible with the original finish it is. Personally I'd take back down to the grain filler level just to avoid any misshapes.

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1323614247' post='1465021']
It all depends on what you are painting it with and how compatible with the original finish it is. Personally I'd take back down to the grain filler level just to avoid any misshapes.
[/quote]

Surely a Squier factory finish is going to be 2-part polyester or something equally inert? A new finish might even be more likely to react with any filler than the poly coat. I'd suggest keying a small bit of the original and spraying just that to check for good adherence and compatibility - stripping the whole lot off and getting a new flat black undercoat is a lot of work only to get you back to where it started.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='LawrenceH' timestamp='1323649533' post='1465512']
Surely a Squier factory finish is going to be 2-part polyester or something equally inert? A new finish might even be more likely to react with any filler than the poly coat. I'd suggest keying a small bit of the original and spraying just that to check for good adherence and compatibility - stripping the whole lot off and getting a new flat black undercoat is a lot of work only to get you back to where it started.
[/quote]

Horses for courses. I prefer to do the job right so I have no hesitation in taking it down to the grain filler (which is the subdermal level so there's no point going any deeper - unless you actually want to change the shape of the body.. even by a few mil). It's not so hard and after you've done it a few times you get your technique down. Test for compatibility by all mean but be prepared to wait months for conclusive results and/or wait to be disappointed as your new finish refuses to permanently bond with the factory finish.

[Billy Apple]

The truss-rod provides an opposing tension to prevent the tension on the strings pulling the neck forward (forward bow). If you remove the strings, over time the neck will have nothing to pull against and develop a back bow. Loosen off the nut, counting the turns anti clock-wise just until the nut turns freely. When putting the neck back on, turn the nut clock-wise the same number of turns when you took it off.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='billyapple' timestamp='1323671555' post='1465553']
The truss-rod provides an opposing tension to prevent the tension on the strings pulling the neck forward (forward bow). [b]If you remove the strings, over time the neck will have nothing to pull against and develop a back bow. Loosen off the nut, counting the turns anti clock-wise just until the nut turns freely. When putting the neck back on, turn the nut clock-wise the same number of turns when you took it off.[/b]
[/quote]
Sorry bud. This is a misconception. What is there to force a back bow? Without the strings the wood is simply relaxed into it's natural position.
That's not to say it can't happen (caused say by humidity etc) but 99% of the time it won't. As for counting the turns - every set up, height adjustment or new set of string etc requires a different t/r setting, slackening it off then putting it back to where it was will only give you a ballpark setting and even then it might be way off.

[Billy Apple]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1323683762' post='1465633']
What is there to force a back bow? [b]The truss rod under compression in the neck, that's what[/b].

Without the strings the wood is simply relaxed into it's natural position. [b]It's not in it natural position, as the truss rod is pushing it outward at both ends, when the internal pressure from the rod is removed, then the neck is relaxed in it's natural position[/b]

That's not to say it can't happen (caused say by humidity etc) but 99% of the time it won't. As for counting the turns - every set up, height adjustment or new set of string etc requires a different t/r setting, slackening it off then putting it back to where it was will only give you a ballpark setting and even then it might be way off. [b]Well, yes, but you wouldn't want to re-string a bass with no counteracting force on the truss rod[/b]
[/quote]

Two separate pro luthiers told me to do this when I removed the neck from my P Bass, as it was set aside for about a month. The truss rod is in compression, with the strings in tension, produce the relief on the neck. If the tension is removed there is only one force acting on the neck. As for counting the turns, when I did this it was bang on first time when I put the neck on a new body, but yes, of course it might need further adjustment. Anyway, doing this worked perfectly for me and I was glad of the advice.

So, sorry Bud, I just don't agree with you

[99mustang]

I will probably be using this paint [url="http://www.specialistpaints.com/image_uploads/large/Royal_Blue_Flake_2.jpg"]http://www.specialistpaints.com/image_uploads/large/Royal_Blue_Flake_2.jpg[/url]

With a number of coats of 2k laquer over the top.

Will probably just prep the current top coat and see how it goes. If It does go pear shaped I can always strip it back further.

As for the truss rod, now I'm in a quandry with two staunchly opposing views, hmmmm.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='billyapple' timestamp='1323720237' post='1466278']
Two separate pro luthiers told me to do this .....[/quote]

Well here's another one saying it's all guff.

It would be fine if wood was as mailable as metal and could be permanently bent into shape by these tiny forces and distances but it's not. Under these conditions it is extremely elastic stuff. Yes wood can "move" after the fact but that is more down to how it wants to rest because of it's own unique make up (possibly not being seasoned long enough before working on) reacting to it's environment. If for arguments sake you wanted to induce a "natural" back bow to a neck you'd have to go through a lot of pissing about to achieve it - overly bending it (to allow for an amount of spring back) and steaming it under compression and whatnot ... and even then it needn't be permanent - simply leaving it for a month or two with the t/r cranked up won't cut it. People sometimes don't get just how little the t/r moves under operation - speaking of which the term "back bow" should be understood to be a term used to describe a direction of movement, not to scare the bejebus out of folk with tales of permanent damage.

It's unfortunate you mistook some of what I said before (and I can understand why, with you having already consulted 2 luthiers about the exact same subject over the same bass ) and I'll say no more on the matter. If loosening the t/r works for you then fine... the fact is that it would have worked fine without it too... it is a tiny concern and is certainly not worth any of us getting our knickers in a twist over.

[V4lve]

Is the rod is a double bar single end adjustment type like the one in my OLP then I doubt you could produce back bow even if you wanted to.

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1323773035' post='1466727']
it is a tiny concern and is certainly not worth any of us getting our knickers in a twist over.
[/quote]

In a practical sense I think you are quite right, the vast majority of times it will make no difference.

But the theoretical key to this issue and what is poorly understood, even by those engineers who don't really work with wood, is that wood exhibits significant viscoelasticity rather than being purely elastic. You allude to this of course, but it means that (again 'in theory') Billy and the other people who get all wound up about neck tension in storage have a point. Even modest stress sustained for sufficiently long will result in what's termed viscoelastic creep leading to permanent deflection. How long is 'sufficiently long' is the question! Heating/steaming the wood under compression effectively speeds this up. Unlike what you seem to say earlier (I may have misunderstood your meaning sorry), loosening the strings with the truss rod under tension doesn't 'relax' the wood it just releases one side of a balanced-tension system.

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1323773035' post='1466727']
People sometimes don't get just how little the t/r moves under operation
[/quote]

This is a bit of a red herring though, what matters is the induced stress and resultant deflection in the wood, whether it comes from a small movement via leverage is neither here nor there.

I should reiterate that I absolutely agree it's really not likely to make a practical difference over a relatively short period. Chances of it having a big enough effect to pull the system out of range of the truss rod action are even less likely. But I wouldn't be surprised if basses kept for years with nasty bows that were initially temporary start to show permanent creep deflection, independent of environmental conditions. Of course, the two could interact with environmental factors inducing changes in the wood that in turn significantly increase the tension (I should maybe say at this point that my father-in-law is an engineer who specialises in timber construction!).