Graphite Vs Wooden Necks

[Chris2112]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='845855' date='May 23 2010, 04:36 PM']Why does it have to be wood [i]or[/i] graphite?[/quote]

Well, there have been a few things like this in the past, namely Zon, Modulus and Status graphite leading the way with various hybrid necks and treaments for woods. However, I've always felt that if it's going to be a graphite neck, have a classic take on it like the Status woven fibre ones.

Interestingly, I remember Fender32, a user of Talkbass, had a jazz bass with a GMT woven graphite neck. (Green Machine Technology, Rob's company prior to Status). The neck is an early one, I remember him describing the profile as quite square, which was the norm on the old Status stuff, and he also mentioned that you could make out the imperfections in the cloth weave too! Must have been a very cool thing to see in person, that bass!

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='RhysP' post='845661' date='May 23 2010, 12:22 PM']To be honest I think if you gave 99% of players a carbon fibre necked bass & told them it was a painted wooden neck they wouldn't be any the wiser.[/quote]

Which is probably why they've never caught on. Wood's been doing a sterling job on guitar necks for centuries.

[RhysP]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846276' date='May 24 2010, 09:56 AM']Which is probably why they've never caught on. Wood's been doing a sterling job on guitar necks for centuries.[/quote]
They haven't "caught on" mainly because of the conservative nature of the majority of bassists & guitarists - if Leo bloody Fender had started using them everybody would think they were f***ing awesome.

[Conan]

[quote name='RhysP' post='846309' date='May 24 2010, 10:31 AM']They haven't "caught on" mainly because of the conservative nature of the majority of bassists & guitarists - if Leo bloody Fender had started using them everybody would think they were f***ing awesome.[/quote]

Totally agree!!

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='RhysP' post='846309' date='May 24 2010, 10:31 AM']They haven't "caught on" mainly because of the conservative nature of the majority of bassists & guitarists - if Leo bloody Fender had started using them everybody would think they were f***ing awesome.[/quote]

It's a sledgehammer/walnut situation though surely? I can see why carbon fibre is useful in Formula 1, but I can't see it being worth bothering with on a guitar when they're already using wood and it works. If there was a massive need to make bass necks lighter or stiffer then maybe more people would be interested in using carbon fibre.

Nothing to do with being conservative, it's just that - like you said - for 99% of bassists there's no point in using exotic composites.

[Shaggy]

Any info on the long-term stability of graphite? Most plastics ultimately get brittle with age.

(not that it'll worry me, but my sons will be inheriting an assortment of manky old gear, including the aforementioned Ovation Magnum 1 )

[Kiwi]

[quote name='Shaggy' post='846328' date='May 24 2010, 09:47 AM']Any info on the long-term stability of graphite? [/quote]
My old Alembic was amongst the first basses ever made with a graphite neck. Seems to be holding up ok

[LukeFRC]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846325' date='May 24 2010, 10:42 AM']It's a sledgehammer/walnut situation though surely? I can see why carbon fibre is useful in Formula 1, but I can't see it being worth bothering with on a guitar when they're already using wood and it works. If there was a massive need to make bass necks lighter or stiffer then maybe more people would be interested in using carbon fibre.

Nothing to do with being conservative, it's just that - like you said - for 99% of bassists there's no point in using exotic composites.[/quote]

no they want exotic top woods and figured maple!

[RhysP]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846325' date='May 24 2010, 10:42 AM']Nothing to do with being conservative, it's just that - like you said - for 99% of bassists there's no point in using exotic composites.[/quote]
That is absolutely NOT what I said.
All I said was I pretty sure 99% of bassists wouldn't notice any difference in FEEL if they weren't told it was a carbon fibre neck.

I also clearly stated why I think carbon fibre is superior to wooden necks.

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='RhysP' post='846374' date='May 24 2010, 11:38 AM']That is absolutely NOT what I said.
All I said was I pretty sure 99% of bassists wouldn't notice any difference in FEEL if they weren't told it was a carbon fibre neck.[/quote]

True, you didn't say what I said you said, you said they wouldn't notice the difference. But most people don't like paying extra if they can't notice the difference.

[quote name='RhysP' post='846374' date='May 24 2010, 11:38 AM']I also clearly stated why I think carbon fibre is superior to wooden necks.[/quote]

Fair enough but I wasn't arguing superiority, all I said was that wood is good enough for most people which is why carbon fibre never caught on.

Carbon fibre is a much better solution (in performance terms anyway) for road car bodywork but the overwhelming majority are still built with metal alloys. And it's not because car buyers are too stuffy and conservative.

[RhysP]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846389' date='May 24 2010, 11:53 AM'].......But most people don't like paying extra if they can't notice the difference.[/quote]
I don't think cost is really an issue anymore. OK, most basses with carbon fibre necks tend to be pretty expensive, but if you look at the cost of, for example, Status, Zon & Modulus basses people are willing to pay just as much and a lot more for basses with wooden necks.

[thisnameistaken]

Yeah I guess.

Personally if I could get a painted front on the headstock and a satin finish on the back, and preferably a wooden fingerboard (I don't like phenolic boards), and it didn't cost any more than a decent wooden neck, then I'd consider a graphite neck, but we're getting into "Why not just have a wooden neck" territory there.

If it came with a cast-iron guarantee not to have any dead spots anywhere on it, then that would interest me. But AFAIK basses with graphite necks are prone to dead spots too.

[Fat Rich]

[quote name='Shaggy' post='846328' date='May 24 2010, 10:47 AM']Any info on the long-term stability of graphite? Most plastics ultimately get brittle with age.

(not that it'll worry me, but my sons will be inheriting an assortment of manky old gear, including the aforementioned Ovation Magnum 1 )[/quote]

Plenty of old Status basses from the early 80s that look and play like they were built yesterday. My '93 series 1s are as perfectly straight as they were when I bought them despite having no truss rod, they have low action whatever guage strings you put on them.... no adjustment necessary.

Graphite basses should last forever, but unfortunately my '90s wood necked Fenders haven't lasted quite so well... playable but not as good as they used to be.

But there's no way you're going to get a graphite neck to sound like a wooden bass and vice versa, so I reckon you need one of each. Or several of each!

[Lfalex v1.1]

[quote name='Fat Rich' post='846422' date='May 24 2010, 12:20 PM']But there's no way you're going to get a graphite neck to sound like a wooden bass and vice versa, so I reckon you need one of each. Or several of each![/quote]

Works for me! Now I've got the justification, all I need is to find a Lane Poor/ Aguilar Modulus Flea in Silver flake, a Vigier Passion IV (S2) and a Status S2 (Neck through)... Oh and about £3K. For second-hand ones, naturally!

[ped]

Horses for courses, really. Graphite is more stable, might sound different to a wooden neck on the same body, can be made without a truss rod...

They aren't 'better' and it isn't a 'Vs' situation. To use the example of an F1 car, graphite is clearly a better material than steel. In a bass guitar, it's all subjective. It just so happens that my main bass has a graphite neck, no truss rod, hardly any relief and a very low action. It was made that way in '88 and that's how it's staying. It works, and the sound of what I perceive to be the neck mixed with a soft body wood creates a wonderfully clear and defined sound with a really tight bottom and sort of compressed top end.

My fretless has a mixture of maple and carbon. To be honest as it has a steel fingerboard it is also extremely stable and is impossible to compare to anything else as it is so different (although I guess I could compare to to a LeFaye Remington Steele - chance would be a fine thing!)

So I think for me the advantages are thus:

1 Rock solid, stays in place construction
2 No truss rod (some say this affects the sound, too)
3 I like the feel - because the back of the neck is shiny it isn't 'grippy' and feels fast
4 The neck profile is very slim because the material is so strong and there's no need for a truss rod to take up any space
5 The sound - I think they have a definite character to them as mentioned above.

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846325' date='May 24 2010, 10:42 AM']Nothing to do with being conservative, it's just that - like you said - for 99% of bassists there's no point in using exotic composites.[/quote]

To say that is beside the point. Surely us basschatters look beyond the obvious as our interests and curiosity dictate that to know such things and to have an informed opinion is what makes us so cool to be around!

99% of people wouldn't shoot with a 1950s film camera, but I do, because I like it. I also like graphite. Most people haven't even tried it, which is fine. But for those of us who have used it for years or even just had a quick go, the benefits are obvious - as are the differences that some may see as drawbacks. I don't think the fact that most people wouldn't notice is one of them!!

ped

P.s here is a short clip that to me highlights the character of a graphite neck with the right body wood. It's the compressed high end clack that I love! [url="https://dl.dropbox.com/u/85432/jam%20clips/Half%20moon%20short.mp3"]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/85432/jam%20clips/...oon%20short.mp3[/url]

[ped]

[quote name='RhysP' post='846309' date='May 24 2010, 10:31 AM']They haven't "caught on" mainly because of the conservative nature of the majority of bassists & guitarists - if Leo bloody Fender had started using them everybody would think they were f***ing awesome.[/quote]

Spot on!

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='ped' post='846676' date='May 24 2010, 05:22 PM']99% of people wouldn't shoot with a 1950s film camera, but I do, because I like it.[/quote]

I don't use a 1950s film camera because it doesn't say Fender on it, and because I'm too conservative. It's nothing to do with me not really being that excited about cameras.

[quote name='ped' post='846676' date='May 24 2010, 05:22 PM']I also like graphite. Most people haven't even tried it, which is fine. But for those of us who have used it for years or even just had a quick go, the benefits are obvious - as are the differences that some may see as drawbacks. I don't think the fact that most people wouldn't notice is one of them!![/quote]

And I'm sure if the default neck material was carbon fibre everybody would be using carbon fibre. But it isn't. Why isn't it? Because wood doesn't need replacing.

Actually, if you're going to argue for some everyday object to be made using carbon fibre, pick furniture. After lugging three couches up four flights of stairs this weekend I would gladly accept any weight saving in a couch.

[richrips]

Technological conservatism.... the reason Fender et al see ever increasing sales of designs dating back 40-60 years.

In one sense, if it ain't broke don't fix it. You can get great sounds out of old designs so why upgrade? you wanna sound like a 65 strat through a twin reverb? why not?

On the other hand, could this attitude be having a negative effect on musicians in general? By sticking to tried and tested "traditional" designs, we inherently limit the tonal possibilities available. Unfortunately, styles and tastes of music evolve and a "traditional" instrument maynot be capable of producing the sound an artist wants on his/her recording. The result? Traditional instrument gets left out, and replaced by something which can make the sound needed. With regards bass, this is typically a keyboard, synth or computer/software. Surely then the survival of bass guitar (played live and on popular modern music) relies on it's ability to produce the sound needed. This can only be possible via technological advancements in instrument design, and manipulation of the electronic signal produced.

If people begin to associate bass guitar with "vintage" sounds and "old" music (i suspect many already do), they would possibly be less likely to choose to feature bass guitar on their new record if they intend it to sound modern, opting instead for keys/synth/computer sounds?

My point is, are we shooting the future of bass guitar in the foot by being conservative in our approach to technological advances in bass design? Is every lovely sounding '62 reissue jazz (rosewood, 3T sunburst) purchased a potential nail in the coffin of live bass playing?

Discuss/abuse as you deem fit!

Rich

(p.s. i think cost is the main reason carbon hasn't gone mainstream, rather than looks imho)

Edited May 24, 2010 by richrips

[E sharp]

I've used the same graphite necked bass for every gig bar one since 1993 . It's a stingray with a retrofit Modulus Quantam neck .

I just love graphite - no truss rod (I've never ever touched one , nor do I intend to) .

It sounds different to every other wooden necked Stingray I've ever played .

Though other things can make a differnce to tone .

Early graphite necks could warp , as graphite has a memory . Steve Smith , who used to work with Bernie Goodfellow , fretted the Stingray for me (it was originally a fretless Modulus neck) , and told me that molecular memory was the reason why a few early carbon necks warped .

I have a Jazz with a Graphite neck (but wooden fingerboard) , that has a minor warp in it . Rob Green made the best of it he could , but the cost of a proper fix , would be the cost of a new bass , so it's now gathering dust . But it is usable up to a point , and sounds more wooden than graphite , and this may more to do with the fingerboard wood , as opposed to a full carbon jobbie .

I think bass players are more ' cutting edge ' than guitarists , as the graphite trend (albeit quite small) shows . I doubt if Rob sells many of his excellent guitars on his web page .

They can sound different , and to my ear far more flexible . If I kept mine in a case again , rather than the gigbag , I doubt if I'd ever have to tune it ever again , bar string changes .

I'm suprised that no one has mentioned the Viger Excess models and the like , as they all now have wooden necks , graphite rods , and no trussrods (Vigier state the trussrods can affect the tone - as Ped stated) . This may be a good halfway house for many .

Everyone should try one , as it is not really an issue with the cost anymore (if high end is your poison) , as the excellent value Status Smartbasses showed - a graphite necked bass with actives for around £600 .

Like alot of things (ie 6 string , light cabs , micro heads , valve amps) , once bitten , you're unlikely to deviate much , just ask Rich aka OTPJ .

Edited May 24, 2010 by E sharp

[ped]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846706' date='May 24 2010, 06:03 PM']And I'm sure if the default neck material was carbon fibre everybody would be using carbon fibre. But it isn't. Why isn't it? Because wood doesn't need replacing.[/quote]

..It does for those who want the benefits, because wood just can't do what graphite can, and vice versa.

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='E sharp' post='846749' date='May 24 2010, 06:50 PM']I'm suprised that no one has mentioned the Viger Excess models and the like , as they all now have wooden necks , graphite rods , and no trussrods (Vigier state the trussrods can affect the tone - as Ped stated) . This may be a good halfway house for many .[/quote]

Actually yeah removing the truss rod would be a welcome change, I seem to have had a disproportionate number of truss rod -related issues with my basses over the years.

[quote name='E sharp' post='846749' date='May 24 2010, 06:50 PM']Like alot of things (ie 6 string , light cabs , micro heads , valve amps) , once bitten , you're unlikely to deviate much , just ask Rich aka OTPJ . [/quote]

Hmm. Well I went back to four strings from six...

But yeah I would be willing to try graphite if I could get a satin neck, rosewood board and a painted headstock, but it would have to do something amazing like be totally deadspot-free for it to be worth me replacing a wooden neck that's already doing a perfectly good job.

Edited May 24, 2010 by thisnameistaken

[OutToPlayJazz]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846782' date='May 24 2010, 07:26 PM']Actually yeah removing the truss rod would be a welcome change, I seem to have had a disproportionate number of truss rod -related issues with my basses over the years.

Hmm. Well I went back to four strings from six...

But yeah I would be willing to try graphite if I could get a satin neck, rosewood board and a painted headstock, but it would have to do something amazing like be totally deadspot-free for it to be worth me replacing a wooden neck that's already doing a perfectly good job.[/quote]

Disproportionate number of neck issues? Satin neck with rosewood board & painted headstock? Sounds like you need to call 01206 868150 for a quote!

[martthebass]

If there's room for a Graphite necked bass in your collection then have one. Out of the 3 basses I own, if I could only keep one it would be the all graphite one. Why? Because it's amazingly stable, takes string guage changes (to a point) without re-setting up and sounds just like a wooden necked bass if I want it to. Conversely it sounds like a graphite necked bass if I want it to. That's what eqs and pre-amps are for.

As I am 'allowed' to have more than 1 bass, I'm more than happy to own basses made out of wood and enjoy them fully and without prejudice .

Edited May 24, 2010 by martthebass

[Chris2112]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='846706' date='May 24 2010, 06:03 PM']And I'm sure if the default neck material was carbon fibre everybody would be using carbon fibre. But it isn't. Why isn't it? Because wood doesn't need replacing.[/quote]

I disagree. I think if all basses could come with graphite necks, they'd receive much wider praise. Of course though, its cost that stops this being possible.

Just imagine all the cheapo basses that could have benefited from a nice graphite neck! If not just for the tone, for the stability and dead-spot-destroying effect they give!

[Lfalex v1.1]

[quote name='E sharp' post='846749' date='May 24 2010, 06:50 PM']I'm suprised that no one has mentioned the Viger Excess models and the like , as they all now have wooden necks , graphite rods , and no trussrods (Vigier state the trussrods can affect the tone - as Ped stated) . This may be a good halfway house for many .

Everyone should try one...[/quote]

(I mentioned the Vigier Passion S3 back on Page1. It's a 10/90 through-neck)
For some reason, all but one of the Excesses I've played have been a bit "ordinary".
I do think that truss-rods make two differences, one practical and one sonic;

If you've got a truss-rod, you can modify your neck relief to suit your playing style as well as / instead of tinkering with the action. If it's right from the outset, a rodless neck will be fine- provided it stays that way. Which is where the stability of carbon/graphite comes into play.

Sonically speaking, the absence/presence of a truss rod is noticeable. My S3 just sings. However, when slapped, I find it lacks a certain "clanging resonance" that my Status Streamline has in abundance. That bass has a truss-rod. My Warwick Infinity does it best, but I reckon that's down to the heavy (and hard!) Zebrano body.

If I ever ordered a custom wood/graphite instrument, It'd probably have a Zebrano body.
Oh no! another idea...