Out the factory neck shims: Are they common?

[BigRedX]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1378837570' post='2205412']
OK here is my terrible drawing of how I have acheived a better overall action with shims or microtilts (pre EB Rays), I have tried to accentuate the angles so we are talking tiny amounts in reality, for me this is only applicable for basses where the neck will only straighten from a certain point before giving a back bow.

[url="http://s997.photobucket.com/user/stingraypete/media/20130910_190855_zps5b25b63b.jpg.html"][/url]
[/quote]

You get exactly the same effect by simply lowering the bridge.

[BigRedX]

And you can show this by tilting the whole drawing of the bass at the same angle as you adjusted the neck due to the shim. Then by lowering the bridge you can get the string back to the same relation to the length of the neck as you would have had by shimming it. The only difference would be the angle between the string and the front of the body.

[Mr. Foxen]

Through necks tend to need a thicker fingerboard, and the fingerboard tends to be expensive fancy wood, so bolt neck is cheaper in that respect, unless the bridge is routed into the body.

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1378838969' post='2205442']
And you can show this by tilting the whole drawing of the bass at the same angle as you adjusted the neck due to the shim. Then by lowering the bridge you can get the string back to the same relation to the length of the neck as you would have had by shimming it. The only difference would be the angle between the string and the front of the body.
[/quote]

By tilting from the neck pocket you are keeping the correct string to body angle at 90 degrees and passing over the pickups evenly too, lowering it your way on a Jazz would mean the bridge pickup would need screwing in further, on a Stingray the strings would pass over the poles at a funny angle.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1378839497' post='2205450']
By tilting from the neck pocket you are keeping the correct string to body angle at 90 degrees and passing over the pickups evenly too, lowering it your way on a Jazz would mean the bridge pickup would need screwing in further, on a Stingray the strings would pass over the poles at a funny angle.
[/quote]

You are clutching at straws here. There is no correct string to body angle. Pickups are designed to go up and down in height. Changing the height of the pickup doe not change the angle at which the strings would pass over it.

[stingrayPete1977]

By tilting the neck you are moving the problem to the best place for it.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1378840686' post='2205476']
By tilting the neck you are moving the problem to the best place for it.
[/quote]

Huh?

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1378839497' post='2205450']
By tilting from the neck pocket you are keeping the correct string to body angle at 90 degrees and passing over the pickups evenly too, lowering it your way on a Jazz would mean the bridge pickup would need screwing in further, on a Stingray the strings would pass over the poles at a funny angle.
[/quote]

Know why there is two screws on one side of a MM pickup? So you can change its angle. Fender would have used less screws if he could without losing function.

[stingrayPete1977]

The problem is stemming from the neck not being straight from the end of where the truss rod is effective to the heel end of the neck. A good through neck has that problem resolved as part of the build almost like a built in shim at the heel area by calculating the stresses and strains before the bass is even built, you could even put a longer truss rod in so adjustments can be made over a longer area of the playing area.

[White Cloud]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1378832539' post='2205308']
I have heard some people ( well , one person , to be precise, and other folks seemed to agree with him ) claim to be able hear the difference between a wood shim and a card shim under a bass neck . Needless to say , I am sceptical about that claim . Lots of basses have shims , including some very expensive ones . If the bass plays well , sounds great and has no reliability issues as a result of being shimmed , why worry ? Yes in an ideal wiorld , all basses would play perfectly without them , but expect to pay substantially more for the same bass without a shim in that ideal world . Precision manufacturing costs money , and the reality is that bass makers at nearly all price points need to keep costs down to avoid pricing themselves out of the market .
[/quote]
I agree.

[MisterFingers]

I have just got a bass back from a luthier which has had a perspex shim put in. There's no doubt that it has affected the sustain of the instrument, so it'll have to go back, as I'm not happy with that tonal change, even though the action is now how I wanted it. I have no idea why he did this (haven't spoke to him yet), as there was a couple of (presumably non-plastic) shims in already. I'd rather put up with a higher action and better tone, than the opposite.

[Mr. Foxen]

Shim material is pretty unlikely to have made that dramatic a change. Lowering action can a bit, generally up to a point, high action sounds better. The high side of 'right' basically (where I keep my stuff), lots of people are into the clinky clunk thing though.

[mcnach]

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1378823271' post='2205123']
I suspect that the shim has always been considered to be part of the factory adjustment procedure in bolt-on basses. If the pocket is designed to give the correct neck angle and elevation with a small shim in place, there is scope to adjust the angle in both directions (either by using a larger shim or removing the shim) to correct for manufacturing tolerances. If it was designed for the perfect angle without a shim, adjustment would only be possible in one direction and any instruments that needed to be adjusted for less neck angle would have to be rejected. Viewed this way, it seems like a smart bit of design for production line instruments.
[/quote]


That's also my view.
After all, Fender was all about making it simple and cheap to manufacture. You don't need a neck pocket and neck made to tiny tolerances, extremely precisely... all you need is to be reasonably in the ballpark, then finalise it during set up with an appropriate shim when needed. It works beautifully. It may not be very elegant, but it certainly works.

[BassTractor]

The laws of physics always work, as do geometry and logic, at least on this low level.
A bass guitar with a shimmable bolt-on neck is essentially like two planks connected by a hinge. As long as the strings are straight, and StingrayPete claims they are, then it does not matter at all whether you move the left plank or the right plank.

This however has one exception: the possible thickness that the shim introduces in the equation, as in the [b]lift[/b] it provides the neck.
That again depends on what the shim is supposed to do, how the pocket is made (its length), how and where neck and body are attached to each other (placement of screws in relation to placement of shim).
When the neck is lifted, this does slightly change the effect of the curvature of the neck. Mind you: the purpose of the shim is change of angle, not lifting.

However, this slight complication does not detract from the fact that two planks and a hinge are the essence.
BRX is right. SRPete is simply wrong.

Minute changes at nut and saddle, or indeed pickup angle, probably don't even have theoretical interest.

Fact. IMO.

Edited September 12, 2013 by BassTractor

[stu_g]

most shims i have had in any guitars or basses ive had have tended to be a piece of sandpaper