Get your own CUSTOM* bass in 2 WEEKS*

[LukeFRC]

44 minutes ago, prowla said:

Not an 'eel then?

Heel? That’s at the other end of the neck... 

[BITE Guitars]

10 hours ago, LukeFRC said:

I think it’s called a volute 

Yes, but wrongly so. We elaborate on this misnomer here: https://bite.guitars/neck/ under the heading "Reinforced Headstock Heel"

[BigRedX]

On 16/02/2020 at 10:34, BITE Guitars said:

There are two ways you can go about building an angled headstock. The first one is pictured below, you route it all from one piece. It's a bad idea because it gives you the short grain in the headstock, prone to break and bad for resonance.

Alternatively, you can glue it together from two pieces as a so-called scarf-joint, still you have a glue joint where you don't want to have one for strength and stability reasons. The second picture shows the leverage forces at work in an angled headstock.

The third picture shows how we route our neck-headstock transition: we leave an extra amount of wood underneath the neck's weakest spot. You can compare our drawing with Fig. 4 pictured. This is the extra plus of stiffness our basses have for strong output and sustain.

Source: https://www.premierguitar.com/articles/26529-whats-in-a-neck?page=2

 

Interesting, and thank you for taking the time to come a explain your thinking behind the construction of your basses.

However, it is my understanding was that the Fender method of non-angled headstock construction was done simply because it allowed them to use smaller pieces of wood for the neck blanks as well as reducing the amount of skilled craftsmanship required, and Fender were all about keeping the production costs down. Any additional benefits appear to have been "invented" later. Personally in 45 years of playing guitars and basses with angled headstocks I have never come across any problems either with weakness at the head/neck transition or deficiencies in tone; although that is far harder to quantify as tone is entirely subjective and I've never payed two instruments that were sufficiently identical in all other ways for me to be able to say categorically that the headstock angle is what is causing the difference in sound (and no-one else has either).

Also IME non-angled headstocks come with their own sets of problems - variable break angles of the strings over the nut leading to a mismatch in the compliance of the strings and tuning issues caused by string trees/retainers. 

And what is so bad about a glued scarf joint? Modern machining and gluing techniques will guarantee that the join is at worst as strong as the surrounding wood and if done properly will be stronger. And why is a joint at this point on the guitar or bass less good than the one between the neck and the body? Or the joint between the fingerboard and the neck? Or even the multiple joints that are made between the various pieces that go to make up the body itself? 

[Stub Mandrel]

18 hours ago, BITE Guitars said:

Yes, but wrongly so. We elaborate on this misnomer here: https://bite.guitars/neck/ under the heading "Reinforced Headstock Heel"

That point's right...

[LukeFRC]

6 hours ago, BigRedX said:

And what is so bad about a glued scarf joint? Modern machining and gluing techniques will guarantee that the join is at worst as strong as the surrounding wood and if done properly will be stronger. And why is a joint at this point on the guitar or bass less good than the one between the neck and the body? Or the joint between the fingerboard and the neck? Or even the multiple joints that are made between the various pieces that go to make up the body itself? 

Or even... if the aim was extra stiffness (which was the reason given) the most common way of doing that is to use laminates in the neck (which is another join or eight) - if you really go to town you turn the wood laminates (like Warwick do) so the grain isn’t going the same way.

oddly to use Warwick as an example - when they were made in smaller numbers they didn’t have a volute (or whatever we call it) - when they produced more out of less aged wood they introduced it. 

[stewblack]

I think we're all getting a bit bogged down here. Can't we just talk about how pretty my configuratored orange flowery P-Bass is? Much more satisfying than all this John Craven's newsround stuff.

[stewblack]

16 minutes ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

 

Beauty is in the eye if the beholder. Doesn’t do it for me I’m afraid.

Bah.

[BigRedX]

14 hours ago, stewblack said:

I think we're all getting a bit bogged down here. Can't we just talk about how pretty my configuratored orange flowery P-Bass is? Much more satisfying than all this John Craven's newsround stuff.

Sorry, as the instruments are essentially Fender copies with a funny shaped headstock the reasons behind the construction are far more important.

And I think it is important that manufacturers and luthiers explain the thinking behind the features on their instruments, and why they have stuck to traditional designs or why they have changed them. After all anyone with the appropriate tools can easily make a P or J copy. Their very essence is to be able to be made with simple machinery and relatively unskilled labour.

[BITE Guitars]

On 20/01/2020 at 12:43, jazzmanb said:

We're so used to the Fender head stock,its a design classic that its really hard to accept anything other than imitations of it.The headstock is what made me say "what is that ?" when I saw the bass on youtube 

A fresh review of a BITE Jawbone out now: 

 

 

Also, what is that now?

Edited February 22, 2020 by BITE Guitars

[prowla]

Regarding the Bite headstock...

...it's not to my taste!

[stewblack]

2 hours ago, prowla said:

Regarding the Bite headstock...

...it's not to my taste!

BOOM BOOM 

[jrixn1]

7 hours ago, BITE Guitars said:

A fresh review of a BITE Jawbone out now:

That was a promotional video, not a review.

[prowla]

6 hours ago, stewblack said:

BOOM BOOM 

Andthankyouverymuchindeed! 🙂

[binky_bass]

@BITE Guitars You're comment on glued scarf joint headstock being weaker is simply not true, if you are indeed a fully trainer luither, or have one on staff, you will know this is not true. The correct joining techniques used with the correct glues will result in a join stronger that the surrounding wood. I feel that a lot of what you have said in response to some comments here are more to justify your design choices as opposed to being factually correct. This either shows that you don't have particularly good subject knowledge or are trying to pull wool over our eyes in convincing us that your techniques and designs are all superior than other manufacturers.

You have a great test bed of enthusiastic players here and the one consistent comment seems to be a dislike for your headstock shape, should you not take this into consideration? We are all you potential customers and are mostly all saying the same thing to you. Worth taking on board I'd think... 

Also, if people want a traditional body style such as a P or J then they're almost certainly going to want the whole bass to reflect that style, this headstock will cut your potential buyers in half whereas having a more traditional headstock wouldn't put people off. I understand the want to be different, but you are doing it at the cost of potential customers. Can you not offer a more traditional headstock option for those who want it? If you want to be unique, then why not offer a unique body shape to go with your headstock? Just changing the headstock and keeping the traditional body seems like a recipe to minimize customers.

I don't mean to be overtly negative, but the above is my reflection on your company from this thread and your comments within it, from other people's comments it would appear some feel similarly.

As already mentioned, an update to the correct flag would also be wise. In the current climate of things I can imagine using a version of the Union Jack that was last flown 219 years ago could be enough to turn someone away. Unless you did that by design because you don't recognize Ireland being part of the Union? (Joke)

Edited February 23, 2020 by binky_bass

[CamdenRob]

I’m obviously not the first to point this out, but that headstock / logo combination really is horrible.

It would look better if you got rid of the excess wood on the end (which looks like it’s just there to fit the enormous logo on) and took the “bite” out of the bottom instead of the top.

To be honest though, from a sales point of view - and to echo others above, you’d sell loads more units going for as close to the Fender design as you can get away with, with custom colour / wood options, delivered in a few weeks. I reckon people would go for that. Something traditional - which 99% of players want anyway, with the “feel” of having something built specifically for you 😊

[prowla]

57 minutes ago, binky_bass said:

@BITE Guitars You're comment on glued scarf joint headstock being weaker is simply not true, if you are indeed a fully trainer luither, or have one on staff, you will know this is not true. The correct joining techniques used with the correct glues will result in a join stronger that the surrounding wood. I feel that a lot of what you have said in response to some comments here are more to justify your design choices as opposed to being factually correct. This either shows that you don't have particularly good subject knowledge or are trying to pull wool over our eyes in convincing us that your techniques and designs are all superior than other manufacturers.

You have a great test bed of enthusiastic players here and the one consistent comment seems to be a dislike for your headstock shape, should you not take this into consideration? We are all you potential customers and are mostly all saying the same thing to you. Worth taking on board I'd think... 

Also, if people want a traditional body style such as a P or J then they're almost certainly going to want the whole bass to reflect that style, this headstock will cut your potential buyers in half whereas having a more traditional headstock wouldn't put people off. I understand the want to be different, but you are doing it at the cost of potential customers. Can you not offer a more traditional headstock option for those who want it? If you want to be unique, then why not offer a unique body shape to go with your headstock? Just changing the headstock and keeping the traditional body seems like a recipe to minimize customers.

I don't mean to be overtly negative, but the above is my reflection on your company from this thread and your comments within it, from other people's comments it would appear some feel similarly.

As already mentioned, an update to the correct flag would also be wise. In the current climate of things I can imagine using a version of the Union Jack that was last flown 219 years ago could be enough to turn someone away. Unless you did that by design because you don't recognize Ireland being part of the Union? (Joke)

I missed that last bit - the company seems to want to insult its potential customers.

[Skybone]

And the term "Custom Bass" is all well and good, if you want a variation on a Fender styled bass.

However, the amount of customisation available is down to a set number of options. Yes, it'll be different from other Bite Basses, but a calling it a custom instrument is pushing it a bit. It's personalised at best.

I applaud your get up and go, in setting up a new company to sell guitars with personalised options is a brave thing in this day and age, and I wish you every success, given that you are up against some very stiff competition from all areas of the market place.

[Graham]

17 hours ago, BITE Guitars said:

 

On a positive note, I did like the sound of the bass in that video

[Pea Turgh]

That’s a lovely tune he plays at the end.  Hell of a player.

[BigRedX]

On 23/02/2020 at 08:56, binky_bass said:

@BITE Guitars You're comment on glued scarf joint headstock being weaker is simply not true, if you are indeed a fully trainer luither, or have one on staff, you will know this is not true. The correct joining techniques used with the correct glues will result in a join stronger that the surrounding wood. I feel that a lot of what you have said in response to some comments here are more to justify your design choices as opposed to being factually correct. This either shows that you don't have particularly good subject knowledge or are trying to pull wool over our eyes in convincing us that your techniques and designs are all superior than other manufacturers.

To be fair to @BITE Guitars their comments on the scarf joint were about "tone" not strength. 

However I have yet to see any real evidence to back this "tone" claim up.

Bite Guitars seem to be good at ignoring the comments they have no response to.

[binky_bass]

A well crafted scarf joint will have absolutely no discernable effect of overall tone. 

The major difference would be through neck vs bolt on neck. As Bite Guitars offer only bolt on neck, I still can't see their point being overly justifiable. 

I'll take a scarf joint through neck all day long over a flat headstock bolt on. Just my humble opinion of course!

[LukeFRC]

5 hours ago, BigRedX said:

To be fair to @BITE Guitars their comments on the scarf joint were about "tone" not strength. 

However I have yet to see any real evidence to back this "tone" claim up.

Bite Guitars seem to be good at ignoring the comments they have no response to.

To be fair they probably don’t want some negative forum pile on. I don’t blame them. 
 

their site has the same “marketing” engineering schtick that so so many manufacturers have - the only difference between Bite guitars and AN other is they seem to have a massive lack of graphic and product design  aesthetics  when it comes to the one bit they have varied from Leo’s designs... 

 

[binky_bass]

We aint's no fools we aint's. 

Edited February 24, 2020 by binky_bass

[Stub Mandrel]

1 hour ago, LukeFRC said:

the only difference between Bite guitars and AN other is they seem to have a massive lack of graphic and product design  aesthetics  when it comes to the one bit they have varied from Leo’s designs...

While I feel that the headstock is not pretty, it is far from the only ugly one. And remember the hideous G&L headstock is one of Leo's so he didn't get it right every time...

Although the Bite design might put some people off, there are a few things stopping a change:

• Inertia.
• The impact of 'validating' the criticisms, especially when there are clearly some customers who are happy with it.
• The sort of people who spend hours picking apart their design and business model probably aren't their target audience. Dare I say they might be seeking younger and more adventurous musicians who want a cost-effective route to a 'custom' bass (and I would argue they are more 'custom' that Fender CS basses which are really 'limited editions' not (potentially) unique to the customer ones).
• Cost of a new design.
• Existing stock.
• It's quite brave - compare Ashdown being equally bashed about for their similarly priced basses being even closer copies, is it possible to win?
• Upsetting early adopters who may in future show brand loyalty.
• Emotional investment, especially if one of the owners of the brand invented it.
• It has achieved it's main functions - being recognisable, memorable and (unlike most) actually relevant by the link to the brand name (in twenty years, if I'm still around) we will still be saying 'do you remember Bite headstocks!)

With all that lined up, assuming that they are achieving the sort of sales levels their business plan projected it could be quite brave to change horses midstream. That said in time, a revised or alternative design (perhaps one that makes a 'fender-like' shape by taking the bite out of the bottom) may be used to extend sales.

All in all, although that headstock isn't to my taste, I wish them luck because any diversity in the market is a good thing.

[prowla]

25 minutes ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

Maybe not any Diversity 😂

More Banjo than bass...