DFW Posted December 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 Thanks a lot man, I really appreciate the support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhoads56 Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 Now THATS starting to get there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AlexVDL Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 Its sort of really cool in a freakishly ugly way... If that makes sense... Which it doesnt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottyd Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 THats what im talking about! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 It's still nasty, but creative and interesting nasty instead of plain ol' ordinary nasty. I can't lie and say that I love it, but I do like the revised version better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 2, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Alright, I've decided to fan the scale as I'm going to be tuning this thing in fifths and want to retain as much tone as possible. Also put in the backwards bass clef hole, and I like the way it looks, so I'll likely keep it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
verhoevenc Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Oh man, that made a WORLD of difference between the first one! I was NOT a fan of the first one, but I like this one! The loss of the spike on the bottom is good, as well as the two different woods. The scroll on the lower horn is a definate plus too. And I like the idea of the bass clef design on the upper horn, however I wouldn't hollow out that section.... the reason people do those deep set type things that give the huge long upper horns is ballance... and sustain. I'd keep that as solid as possible for the latter plus (the sustain). So why not inlay the design out of some figured wood.... or ebony would be easier cause you could mask mistakes with black epoxy like normal inlaying, etc. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanielM Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 why fan the scale for a fifths tuning? maybe it's because I also play cello (fifth tuning) which has no fanned scale that I don't see a problem with a straight scale... also this design is a mile better than the first try. prefered the mk II without the fanned scale and the more upright like bridge though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 Well, I fanned it for the same reason anyone fans anything, for the sound. Bigger sound waves sound better on bigger strings (in both gauge and scale), and vice versa. I can understand a cello not having fanned scales, as the concept wasn't invented until the last decade or so, and cellos have been around for centuries and have changed construction minimally. I'm just trying to keep up with the times and get the best tone I can. And thanks to everyone for the support, at least y'all agree it's interesting, albeit sometimes "nasty" interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
verhoevenc Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 I'm going to very much so tell you to make some veneer lines where the fanned frets WOULD be (since it's fretless and all) cause keeping track of where you are without frets is hard enough... imagine having to do so on SEVERAL scales... you're ASKING for difficulty. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AlexVDL Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 Not a fan of the 3rd design... the centerline of the fretboard doesn't match the body's centerline, which makes it look crooked. Or you should not use the 2 tone wood thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 (edited) I'm going to very much so tell you to make some veneer lines where the fanned frets WOULD be (since it's fretless and all) cause keeping track of where you are without frets is hard enough... imagine having to do so on SEVERAL scales... you're ASKING for difficulty. Chris I know very well that it will be incredibly difficult to play, but I've got a good ear, and no plans for it to deteriorate, so I'm just going to trust that. I've been able to switch between fretless guitar, bass and upright with ease thanks to listening, so I think I can handle it. If not I'll toss some lines on there though, good call. Also, I never trusted frets in the first place. I'm the one who decides the notes, not my instrument, and not anyone prior. I'm the decider! ... Heheh Oh yea, and I'll reorient the neck so that it lines up in the middle, and change a few bodylines as well. As I said, I'm still getting used to the program and I'm pretty tired of editing one aspect and having it throw everything else out of whack. Edited January 3, 2007 by DFW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 yeah those pesky frets...i would hate to see those little metal pains in the ass get in your way...you going to leave it natural or do you have a nice dye in mind for it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElysianGuitars Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 Well, I fanned it for the same reason anyone fans anything, for the sound. Bigger sound waves sound better on bigger strings (in both gauge and scale), and vice versa. I can understand a cello not having fanned scales, as the concept wasn't invented until the last decade or so, and cellos have been around for centuries and have changed construction minimally. I'm just trying to keep up with the times and get the best tone I can. And thanks to everyone for the support, at least y'all agree it's interesting, albeit sometimes "nasty" interesting. wrong, fanned frets were invented in 1562... http://tkinstruments.com/id128.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 If it's the tone you're worried about, I say just go with a longer overall scale, and keep the higher strings matching in scale. You're fretless! I don't see much point fanning your nut and bridge. You might be right to a certain extent about the longer scale sounding good for the low strings, but I've never heard of anyone feeling that the higher strings sound better with a shorter scale. Guitarists like fanned frets (well, those that like the system!) for ergonomic reasons (ease of fretting certain chords) as well as maintaining reasonable bend-ability in the higher strings. I don't think the same logic applies to a fretless bass, or at least not to a high enough degree to make it a design choice. Longer overall scale will accomplish what you want to accomplish. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 (edited) Well, you guys have proven why I'm here. Consider the 445 year old fanning idea nixed. Hah, shows how much I don't know. I guess I was just trying to run too far from tradition. But, I do know kittens are cute... right? Maybe not all kittens... And yea, it's going to be natural. As to the woods, I was thinking rosewood body, and flame maple neck and fingerboard, as well as the recessed wings. It'll be a set neck with a deep and heavily slanted pocket... you know what, I'll just SketchUpify the ideas I have for the body pieces and see what you pros think. Thanks a lot again, all the trouble you're all saving me is much much much appreciated. I owe you guys. EDIT: So here's what I'm thinkin for roughish cuts. I'd like a one piece neck with a rear routed truss and some sexy wood for the strip, perhaps Padouk or Purpleheart, or something else similarly striking. I'm going to inlay the clef in flame maple to match the neck and wings, the string stop will be ebony, and the bridge wood will be determined once I really know what I'm doing, and I'd appreciate suggestinos. The rosewood body is going to be rear routed as minimally as possible. Should I make the neck pocket deeper to allow more gluing area, and compensate in neck depth? I'm already afraid I won't be able to locate figured maple in that size (3'x3'x34). If I've no chance/choice I'll change neckwoods, but I think one-piece would be devilishly sexy. I've always loved fretless all maple necks... mmmm... And the wings will match the fingerboard, whatever wood I settle on. I'll shape the middle of the neck, the top 80% of the headstock, glue the neck to the body and the head to the neck, shape those joints, glue on the wings and shape them, then shape the body. Feel free to school me if this sounds stupid. Edited January 3, 2007 by DFW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AlexVDL Posted January 3, 2007 Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 That's going to be one heck of a string neck/head glue joint. You sure you're not going to make the neck out of one piece maple, or do a scarf joint or so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2007 (edited) That's going to be one heck of a string neck/head glue joint. You sure you're not going to make the neck out of one piece maple, or do a scarf joint or so? Well, the joint is pretty much like that on a double bass, and I'd like to keep the contrasting woods and make the carving job a bit easier. Here's the joint assembled and partially shaped: Edited January 3, 2007 by DFW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 the more you develop this design, the more I like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 Good to hear, I'll keep doing that then. I might built a normal necked version beforehand just to get the neck joint and headstock construction practice under my belt before I do the main one at school Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goat Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 That is one cool Bass! I can`t wait to see it done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFW Posted January 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 I've got a new design, as I'm on vacation I'm ill equipped to digitize it in a clear fashion but here's a pic of the sketch I drew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 there is nothing more exciting than a pencil sketch...except maybe an actual progress pic or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WezV Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 Its an interesting looking idea, i like sketches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.