Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Andyjr1515 said: Mmmm - I think you are right, looking at those. So @rubis would be probably talking only one set of radii Looking just how thin that rhs fretboard is, I would be very surprised if the bottom of the fretboard had to be concave carved. I'm sure it's just pressed on and clamped against the radius as in my option 1 Those mustang necks aren't a good gauge The board on my P is still pretty thick, and it's def. radiused top and bottom - I wouldn't want to steam/clamp/glue this board back on if the bottom was flat - it'd be quite a pig to do I reckon. Looking at the end grain I'd say it's cut bottom first (concave) out of a rectangular piece, then mounted, then the top carved to match. Then again, I'm getting well out of my depth on this now!!! 😁 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 Just now, Bridgehouse said: Those mustang necks aren't a good gauge The board on my P is still pretty thick, and it's def. radiused top and bottom - I wouldn't want to steam/clamp/glue this board back on if the bottom was flat - it'd be quite a pig to do I reckon. Looking at the end grain I'd say it's cut bottom first (concave) out of a rectangular piece, then mounted, then the top carved to match. Then again, I'm getting well out of my depth on this now!!! 😁 Actually - I think you are probably spot on! And remember - on this subject, I REALLY don't know what I'm talking about 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 2 minutes ago, Andyjr1515 said: Actually - I think you are probably spot on! And remember - on this subject, I REALLY don't know what I'm talking about Lol - you might say that, but I've got one right in front of me and I still can't work out what they have done 😁 I can however see why fender went back to slab later on as the work involved in this method just to get the truss rod a bit higher does seem a bit extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted October 13, 2018 Author Share Posted October 13, 2018 Gawd me 'ead's spinning now 😣 I must admit I assumed (I know you should never do that!) that the radius was 7.25" and the topside and bottomside were parallel, I will have to look more closely at this, and if I go down the DIY route (and knowing how stubborn I am, I probably will) then maybe some sort of compromise or easiest route might be in order! Thanks again gents, I love all this, it's the internet at its best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, rubis said: Gawd me 'ead's spinning now 😣 I must admit I assumed (I know you should never do that!) that the radius was 7.25" and the topside and bottomside were parallel, I will have to look more closely at this, and if I go down the DIY route (and knowing how stubborn I am, I probably will) then maybe some sort of compromise or easiest route might be in order! Thanks again gents, I love all this, it's the internet at its best 7.25” top and bottom would look right in my opinion, just based on staring at mine for a while I think as long as you get the thickness right then it will broadly look no different to mine. The biggest thing will be trying to match some of that wear at the end of the board which has that “old smoothed wood” look about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted October 13, 2018 Author Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Bridgehouse said: Those mustang necks aren't a good gauge The board on my P is still pretty thick, and it's def. radiused top and bottom - I wouldn't want to steam/clamp/glue this board back on if the bottom was flat - it'd be quite a pig to do I reckon. Looking at the end grain I'd say it's cut bottom first (concave) out of a rectangular piece, then mounted, then the top carved to match. Then again, I'm getting well out of my depth on this now!!! 😁 Thanks Bridgehouse, this is the sequence I was thinking too First step would be to radius the neck blank, at 7.25" convex, then the underneath of the fingerboard at 7.25" concave, then glue it on - it would help with clamping that the bottom of the neck blank and the top of the fingerboard would still at that stage be flat. Then finally route the top radius as per any other (normal neck build) Sounds easy when you write it down Edited October 13, 2018 by rubis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 4 minutes ago, rubis said: Thanks Bridgehouse, this is the sequence I was thinking too First step would be to radius the neck blank, at 7.25" convex, then the underneath of the fingerboard at 7.25" concave, then glue it on - it would help with clamping that the bottom of the neck blank and the top of the fingerboard would still at that stage be flat. Then finally route the top radius as per any other (normal neck build) Sounds easy when you write it down Rather you than me Then again, although there’s extra steps involved I suspect it’s not that tricky. At least you can mount the truss rod a bit higher for that authentic look Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpondonBassed Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 Would you not expect there to be a difference in the top and bottom of the fretboard that is equal to the thickness of the board? In other words, the arc of the top of the fretboard should share the same centre as the bottom arc. The way you are describing it with 7.25" top and bottom, it wouldn't look obvious across that short segment of the two circles but it would if you extended the arc of the two circles. l They'd intersect eventually. Shouldn't it be 7.25" for the top radius and 7.25" minus the thickness of the board for the bottom radius? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 25 minutes ago, Bridgehouse said: 7.25” top and bottom would look right in my opinion, just based on staring at mine for a while I think as long as you get the thickness right then it will broadly look no different to mine. The biggest thing will be trying to match some of that wear at the end of the board which has that “old smoothed wood” look about it Me too - on some of the photos. The only thing....and it might be an optical illusion...is that on a number of them I've looked at, I reckon that the FRETS might be a tighter radius than the board. Doesn't it look the same to you? But bear in mind I have astigmatism and varifocals. Which is another reason you might want to disregard my comments... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Andyjr1515 said: Me too - on some of the photos. The only thing....and it might be an optical illusion...is that on a number of them I've looked at, I reckon that the FRETS might be a tighter radius than the board. Doesn't it look the same to you? But bear in mind I have astigmatism and varifocals. Which is another reason you might want to disregard my comments... Yep - frets def look like they are at a tighter radius. Maybe it’s how they are shaped at the edges... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 1 hour ago, SpondonBassed said: Would you not expect there to be a difference in the top and bottom of the fretboard that is equal to the thickness of the board? In other words, the arc of the top of the fretboard should share the same centre as the bottom arc. The way you are describing it with 7.25" top and bottom, it wouldn't look obvious across that short segment of the two circles but it would if you extended the arc of the two circles. l They'd intersect eventually. Shouldn't it be 7.25" for the top radius and 7.25" minus the thickness of the board for the bottom radius? I reckon that they are the same radius and that means they look like there is more wood in the centre than the edges... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bridgehouse said: I reckon that they are the same radius and that means they look like there is more wood in the centre than the edges... Which, thinking about it, is what @SpondonBassed says above Parallel would mean the radius at the top of the frets would be more than 7.25" so, if they used the same block, it would appear to be tighter Edited October 13, 2018 by Andyjr1515 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgehouse Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 29 minutes ago, Andyjr1515 said: Which, thinking about it, is what @SpondonBassed says above Parallel would mean the radius at the top of the frets would be more than 7.25" so, if they used the same block, it would appear to be tighter I think we have the answer then! The board is 7.25 at the top and probably at the bottom, thus appearing a bit looser, and the frets a bit tighter due to also being 7.25 Cor. I'm sticking to a one piece fretless neck - this stuff is too hard for my little brain 😁 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted October 15, 2018 Author Share Posted October 15, 2018 I think something like the jig in this build thread from the TDPRI forum might be the solution to my neck build conundrum http://www.tdpri.com/threads/mojotrons-former-build-challenge-thread.263775/page-6 This is another quite interesting thread on building veneer necks, albeit with a CNC machine in this thread http://www.tdpri.com/threads/cnc-broadcaster-build-and-then-some.112695/page-7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norris Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Just an idea... Could you radius the neck blank, then fix some sandpaper to it to concave-radius the back of the board? i.e. use your neck blank as a sanding block. You'd probably want to make up a jig to keep it all aligned. That's assuming you haven't tapered the neck yet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 On 13/10/2018 at 14:13, SpondonBassed said: Would you not expect there to be a difference in the top and bottom of the fretboard that is equal to the thickness of the board? In other words, the arc of the top of the fretboard should share the same centre as the bottom arc. The way you are describing it with 7.25" top and bottom, it wouldn't look obvious across that short segment of the two circles but it would if you extended the arc of the two circles. l They'd intersect eventually. Shouldn't it be 7.25" for the top radius and 7.25" minus the thickness of the board for the bottom radius? This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted January 12, 2019 Author Share Posted January 12, 2019 Right.....how time flies! I haven't been entirely idle for the past couple of months, but I haven't been as busy with this as I had hoped to have been. I have been experimenting with a router jig to get that troublesome veneer fingerboard radius, and got part of the way there. I have used some parts from 3D printers I got the12mm bar for the bearings to slide along, as it needs to be quite long to fit a bass neck onto, and have been trying to make a holder for my laminate trimmer (for lightness, so it doesn't bow in the middle while travelling lengthways. I'm pretty sure it will work (eventually!) but there is a lot more trial and error than I had thought. I had envisaged a device which would allow the trimmer to travel side to side on a curved holder, as others had done, which would give the required radius, and hoped to have been able to have it reversible so that it would do concave and convex, but that might be a bit ambitious! I haven't abandoned the idea, but I have put it to one side for now and taken the easy/sensible option of ordering an aftermarket neck from Musikraft. I have heard good things about their necks and they seem to be the only ones to offer the period correct veneer board, the price is reasonable too. The only problem, of course was getting a rosewood fingerboard as there are problems exporting it, so I had to make one compromise. They offer a great service where you can spec pretty much anything you like, so I went on their site and was able to order a neck which will exactly meet my needs. These are the options I have gone for Options: ORIENTATION: Right for Right Handed Players HEAD SHAPE: J/P Style HEEL SHAPE: Rounded J/P Style NUMBER OF FRETS: 20 Fret (Standard) NUT WIDTH: 1-3/4 P Style (44.45mm) HEEL WIDTH: 2.4375 (61.91mm) Vintage Fender TUNER HOLE SIZE: 2 Step 11/16 X 9/16 Vintage Fender TRUSS ROD TYPE: Single Acting Adjust at the Heel FB RADIUS: 7-1/4 NUT SLOT STYLE: 1/8 Standard Fender Style SHAFT WOOD: Rock Maple FINGER BOARD STYLE: Veneer Vintage Fender (20 Fret Only) Will Come With 50/50 Side Dots + $80 FINGER BOARD WOOD: Brazilian Walnut - Reclaimed Lumber from The Coney Island Boardwalk TOP DOTS & INLAY: Imitation Clay BINDING: None SIDE DOTS: Imitation Clay 2mm FRET WIRE SIZE: 6230 Vintage Small FB EDGES: Semi Rolled Standard BACK PROFILE: Fat C 1.0 X 1.0 FINISH: Raw (No Warranty) MOUNTING HOLES: Do Not Drill Mounting Holes All vintage spec and with the fattest neck possible, exactly as I would have hoped to have built it myself. This way will also mean I will not have the headache of fretwork and fettling to get it acceptable. The fingerboard material is a little unusual....."FINGER BOARD WOOD: Brazilian Walnut - Reclaimed Lumber from The Coney Island Boardwalk"...……..sounds quite cool coming from the Coney Island Boardwalk but from what I can gather, it's a very similar colour, and I had intended to try using brown dye to darken the fingerboard for a more aged look anyway (apparently brown leather dye works well). The build time is 6 to 8 weeks, which is perfect, as it's going to be my birthday present. Hopefully it may arrive early enough to get it finished in time for St Patricks Day, when I can wet it's head with a Guinness or two! Here are a couple of pics I found of a relic'd Musikraft Jazz neck which gives a pretty good idea of what they do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 I'm interested in how your experiments go with the router jig. Never thought about the 3d printer stuff...sounds a good idea! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon. Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just catching up on this thread, but wanted to say that the workmanship and attention to detail is amazing! What a great job on the relicing of the body. It might be too late, but if you are still looking for stamps for the neck-pate numbering, the originals would have been imperial measurements, rather than metric. Probably something like 5/32. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted February 5, 2019 Author Share Posted February 5, 2019 (edited) Thanks Simon, I got some 4mm stamps after Bridgehouse very kindly measured the numbers on his own bass (lucky bugger). The neck plate will probably be the next little job I can do while I'm waiting for the neck to arrive. I did the aluminium pickguard shield tonight. I worked out the wording from various photos around to be 'ALCLAD 2024T3 Q' and '2 KAISER' ………...like this I found some stamps online which looked to be near enough same size and font, some red enamel spray paint, a plastic clipboard and one of them roller things for getting dog hair off your trousers! After masking off the shield at what looked like the same width of gaps, I applied the lettering and I'm quite pleased with the results. Edited February 5, 2019 by rubis 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted March 16, 2019 Author Share Posted March 16, 2019 (edited) I've been having a bit of fun with the hardware, making it look 'less new' I took the pickup covers off and rubbed them down with fine wet and dry and then 0000 steel wool to give them more of a matt finish like this Then I read about using this stuff on the polepieces of alnico pickups On the photos of vintage P basses I have studied, some have rusted polepieces, some are blackened, I decided that blackening them would be both easier and kinder to the pickup! Here is a sort of before and after comparison Edited March 16, 2019 by rubis 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted March 16, 2019 Author Share Posted March 16, 2019 (edited) Next step was Dr Fakenstein's acid bath! Bought some concrete cleaner and some plastic tubs and put the metal parts in to tarnish. You put a bit of the acid in the larger container which needs to have an airtight lid, then float the smaller tub with the parts in, inside and place it somewhere safe outside, checking on it every 30 mins or so until you get the desired look. The process definitely works better on nickel coated parts, rather than chrome, and I resisted the temptation to soak them in the liquid, as I had noticed on the pre-relic'd bridge I bought that the baseplate looked a bit blotchy, as if some sort of liquid (etching fluid or acid?) had been put on it and globules had formed and left to dry. It didn't look all that authentic to me, anyway so I polished it up and put it in the tub and (to me anyway!) improved it a bit. this was before I re-did the baseplate This is after. I got a bit 'acid happy' and put in the brass pickup plate and the pots, just to take a bit of the shiny newness off them! Edited March 16, 2019 by rubis duplicate picture 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyjr1515 Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 40 minutes ago, rubis said: Next step was Dr Fakenstein's acid bath! Bought some concrete cleaner and some plastic tubs and put the metal parts in to tarnish. You put a bit of the acid in the larger container which needs to have an airtight lid, then float the smaller tub with the parts in, inside and place it somewhere safe outside, checking on it every 30 mins or so until you get the desired look. The process definitely works better on nickel coated parts, rather than chrome, and I resisted the temptation to soak them in the liquid, as I had noticed on the pre-relic'd bridge I bought that the baseplate looked a bit blotchy, as if some sort of liquid (etching fluid or acid?) had been put on it and globules had formed and left to dry. It didn't look all that authentic to me, anyway so I polished it up and put it in the tub and (to me anyway!) improved it a bit. this was before I re-did the baseplate This is after. I got a bit 'acid happy' and put in the brass pickup plate and the pots, just to take a bit of the shiny newness off them! I was with it until the pots went in! Do they still work?? Other than that slight worry, the rest of it is very impressive. Your methods are producing some very natural looking ageing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubis Posted March 16, 2019 Author Share Posted March 16, 2019 (edited) 😅 I hope so Andy, they weren't in there for more than 1/2 hour to be honest, it's quite a slow process, perhaps because the containers I used were bigger than the ones I have seen people using on the YouTube clips I watched, so maybe the fumes are less concentrated? Some of the metal parts took longer than I was led to believe from the clips, and the chromed bits are very subtle, which is probably a good thing! Anyway, if the pots are buggered, they are fairly cheap to replace, fingers crossed, and thank you for your comments! Edited March 16, 2019 by rubis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cLepto-bass Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 I love everything about his build. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.JPG.484dea520126d2f30d4e6f746e51bf39.JPG)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.