mattharris75 Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) Since the finishing process is beginning on my first build, it's time to start thinking about my next one. I'm going to be building a cigar box guitar for fun, which I already have planned out. But, my next big project is going to be a bass. I've never owned a bass, but have always wanted one. So, my lack of experience has me open to a wide variety of options at this point. I'm looking to create a solid all around instrument with a fairly wide range of capabilities. I'll go ahead with the specs I know so far, and then list the items in red which are still completely up in the air and maybe some folks here will be able to chime in with some good ideas. Specs: 4 string 34" scale 24 frets Set neck 42mm nut width 19mm string spacing @ bridge 11" body width Open style headstock Black hardware Nitrocellulose lacquer finish Neck: Black limba/black accent veneer/padauk/black accent veneer/black limba Bloodwood fingerboard Headplate/backstrap wood??? Black accent veneers Bloodwood MRH logo disk Spokewheel hot rod truss rod .200 graphite reinforcement rods Body: Hard ash core Redwood burl top Bottom wood ??? Highly contoured body Hidden controls ??? Black accent veneers Hardware: Gotoh GB7 tuners Knockoff of Hipshot A Type bridge Pickups ??? (Possibly EMG-PJ set?) Here are some images of the design thus far: Quick render with wood choices thrown in Does anyone have any feedback on the items listed, or anything else? I'm quite open to suggestions at this point. In particular, pickup selection and methods for doing hidden controls. I've seen the way both Erikbojerik and Myka have done hidden controls and am contemplating which of these methods might be best, or if there is another alternative that might work better for me. Thus I have no pickup routes or control cavity drawn into the plan at this point. Edited December 3, 2007 by mattharris75 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyonsdream Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) I like the headstock alot and the hardware choices. I made one change which will be a big topic on this bild. Upper fret access. There isn't any! This is what I would do to change that Edited December 3, 2007 by zyonsdream Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted December 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 I knew someone would comment on the upper fret access. I can't see your image because i'm at work, and i'm guessing it's hosted at photobucket, which is blocked for me. I'll check it out tonight. But as for the fret access issue, originally the design had no lower horn at all, and looked cool, but was going to be hard to play seated. I thought this design looked unique, and considering the fact that i'm not a bass player, and don't really expect to be dancing up into the higher registers, I didn't think it would be a problem. I don't have it written down here, but if I remember correctly the neck meets the body between the 16th and 17th frets on the treble side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyonsdream Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 I’ve built guitars with poor fret access before because I personally liked the shape and I wanted it for my own collection so I can fully understand where you are coming from. I guess when I started building them in hopes of selling them I started to change my mind on fret access. I’m like you and rarely venture past the 12th fret (rhythm player here) so fret access isn’t all that critical for my playing style. I guess the builder in me and the player in me are constantly at odds anymore! The image is hosted in Photobucket. Let me know what you think when you can view the picture. Photobucket is one of the last things not to get blocked where I work at. I’m surprised I can even access this forum from work given the platform it’s on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted December 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2007 I like the headstock alot and the hardware choices. I made one change which will be a big topic on this bild. Upper fret access. There isn't any! This is what I would do to change that I actually like this a lot. I was going with the 'no cutaway' design in part just to do something different, but that lower horn really works with the design. I'm going to contemplate using it. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyonsdream Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 Cool, glad to hear you like it. It will be cool to see this one take shape! Which ever one it might be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted December 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 I went ahead and added the cutout, very similar to the one that you showed in your drawing. So, again, thanks for the idea. I'm now working on placement of the hidden controls, as can be seen in this new image. Looks like I'm going to have to cut down the stalk on the pots and either source or make some lower profile knobs if I want to make this fit. I haven't drawn in the control cavity itself yet, just the ledge and the pots/knobs. How much room do you guys think I should leave between the neck pocket and control cavity? I'm thinking that if I have 1" of wood I'll be OK. I've also decided on the back wood that I'll be using. I had this spalted maple sitting around that I was initially going to use for something else, but it should look nice on the back of this bass. Now I've just got to find some really amazing redwood burl for the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tophski Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 (edited) First I gotta say, I love this design, both with or without the lower horn cut away. Headstock works great too. Nice work. Second, and forgive my 'noviceness', but in keeping with the hidden controls type theme, has anyone ever tried loading the pickup(s) from the back of the guitar so as to leave the top unrouted? I realize that the distance between the poles and the strings is an important issue. I'm wondering if that could be compensated for with the neck angle, or height that the neck sits in it's pocket? It's just an idea that popped into my head when I saw your control shelf. Can't wait to see this done. Chris I went ahead and added the cutout, very similar to the one that you showed in your drawing. So, again, thanks for the idea. I'm now working on placement of the hidden controls, as can be seen in this new image. Looks like I'm going to have to cut down the stalk on the pots and either source or make some lower profile knobs if I want to make this fit. I haven't drawn in the control cavity itself yet, just the ledge and the pots/knobs. How much room do you guys think I should leave between the neck pocket and control cavity? I'm thinking that if I have 1" of wood I'll be OK. I've also decided on the back wood that I'll be using. I had this spalted maple sitting around that I was initially going to use for something else, but it should look nice on the back of this bass. Now I've just got to find some really amazing redwood burl for the top. Edited December 6, 2007 by tophski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted December 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 First I gotta say, I love this design, both with or without the lower horn cut away. Headstock works great too. Nice work. Second, and forgive my 'noviceness', but in keeping with the hidden controls type theme, has anyone ever tried loading the pickup(s) from the back of the guitar so as to leave the top unrouted? I realize that the distance between the poles and the strings is an important issue. I'm wondering if that could be compensated for with the neck angle, or height that the neck sits in it's pocket? It's just an idea that popped into my head when I saw your control shelf. Can't wait to see this done. Chris People have talked about doing that, but I don't know that I've actually seen it done. It's certainly possible, but if you were to lower the neck enough so that the strings are close enough to the face of the body for the pickup to work effectively you might experience some issues with the strings being too close to the body for good playability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tophski Posted December 6, 2007 Report Share Posted December 6, 2007 yes, playability would be another issue. I like to play alot with getting my thumb or fingers under the strings. I was just wondering what is the max distance the strings can be from the poles that one could get away with? Anyway, just an idea I thought I'd pipe up with...maybe I'll try it myself whenever I get things going here. First I gotta say, I love this design, both with or without the lower horn cut away. Headstock works great too. Nice work. Second, and forgive my 'noviceness', but in keeping with the hidden controls type theme, has anyone ever tried loading the pickup(s) from the back of the guitar so as to leave the top unrouted? I realize that the distance between the poles and the strings is an important issue. I'm wondering if that could be compensated for with the neck angle, or height that the neck sits in it's pocket? It's just an idea that popped into my head when I saw your control shelf. Can't wait to see this done. Chris People have talked about doing that, but I don't know that I've actually seen it done. It's certainly possible, but if you were to lower the neck enough so that the strings are close enough to the face of the body for the pickup to work effectively you might experience some issues with the strings being too close to the body for good playability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanthus Posted December 7, 2007 Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 I love the idea of recessed controls, and I'm thinking of doing something similar, ya know, in all that free time that I have to build projects..... Uh, yeah. Anyways. Check out this page for an example of hidden knobs. I'm wondering why you would choose to put the hidden controls in such an area, they're not what I'd call easily accessible. Then again, not many places are. I'd worry about bumping them with my body on the top like Myka's, with my knee if it were on the bottom... Someone definitely did do a "hidden pickup" design, it's in the archives somewhere, I'm sure. I don't like playing with the strings that close to the wood in the first place I doubt that a hidden pickup would help that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted December 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 I love the idea of recessed controls, and I'm thinking of doing something similar, ya know, in all that free time that I have to build projects..... Uh, yeah. Anyways. Check out this page for an example of hidden knobs. I'm wondering why you would choose to put the hidden controls in such an area, they're not what I'd call easily accessible. Then again, not many places are. I'd worry about bumping them with my body on the top like Myka's, with my knee if it were on the bottom... Someone definitely did do a "hidden pickup" design, it's in the archives somewhere, I'm sure. I don't like playing with the strings that close to the wood in the first place I doubt that a hidden pickup would help that. Yeah, i've seen Myka's and Erikbojerik's recent example as well. The reason for the control placement is that it should be out of the way, given my playing style. I'll use this bass mostly for messing around on and a little recording. I don't expect to need to access them mid-song or anything like that. I'm still working on the control design and placement. Right now i'm leaning toward 2 slider pots and 1 mini pot, and they will follow the outline of the body more than just having a flat ledge. I've ordered precision and jazz pickup templates as well as a mini pot and a strat style jack to be mounted on the back. I just need to verify a few things before I order my slider pots, and then i'll be ready to finalize the design of the control layout and cavity and the miscellaneous other details like wire routing channels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted December 18, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2007 OK, the slider pots and mini pot arrived as well as the PJ pickup templates and the strat style output jack. The strat jack will be on the back. There will be no control cavity on the back, since there will be a back laminate covering the cavity where the jack goes. I am also planning on stowing the 9 volt battery for the pickups in this cavity as well, thus the size of the cavity. The actual control cavity area will be accessed from the side of the guitar. The controls will be installed on a macassar ebony plate That will be installed into the cavity from the side of the guitar and recessed from view from the front of the guitar. What do you guys think of this setup? Any obvious pitfalls that anyone can see? I can already tell that assembling and routing everything into the body will require a number of different steps done in a very specific order. I'll also have to spend a fair amount of time on the templates for this one to make sure that everything ends up in the right spot. Not a lot of room for error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted January 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 Still finishing up my first guitar build, but I've got the plans done and the woods nailed down for this bass. Here is the redwood burl top wood, the bloodwood fingerboard, and the macassar ebony that will be used as the top plate and backstrap on the headstock as well as on the neck heel and as the control cavity cover on the side of the guitar. The spalted maple back that I will be using was posted earlier in the thread. The body core will be hard ash, which I do not have yet. I will also be using a 2mm black wood fiber veneer between the core and the top and back plates. Also included is a shot of the neck woods. Black limba with padauk in the middle, also using the 2mm wood fiber veneers in between each stringer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeckalpha Posted January 10, 2008 Report Share Posted January 10, 2008 A Variax 700 has the pickup-less look. I'm currently designing a semi hollow bass for a friend that will be pickup-less from the front. I plan on using a piezo, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 This project has expanded into building two basses simultaneously. The first bass will be as described here, and the second bass will have a wenge top, but will have front mounted controls, rather than hidden controls on the side, and consequently will be able to have a belly cut as well. I've got both body blanks joined, glued, and planed. I also got the body and headstock templates rough cut. I'll clean them up on the spindle sander over the next week or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Killer body style, looks incredibly comfortable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Killer body style, looks incredibly comfortable. Thanks Jon. I'm thinking it will be comfortable as well. It's very long and lean. The body is about 18.5" long, and only 11" at its widest point. It is going to be fairly thick though. Well, the one with hidden controls will be, in order to accomodate that set-up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2008 I'm seriously considering abandoning one of my big design ideas on this bass, the hidden controls. I still think it would be a cool feature, but I think the overall bass is going to end up being too thick for my liking, and I also won't be able to do much contouring on the back, which will keep me from getting the organic appearance that I'd really like. The overall depth of the design as it stands is 63mm. I layered all the wood together to get an idea of how this would look, and I'm thinking it's simply going to be too bulky. I know it's difficult to tell without everything being cut to shape, but this will also be a very narrow bass, which will accentuate the thickness of it. I'm going to have to go with my gut here. I would love to keep this design element, but I think the smart decision for having a playable and aesthetically pleasing bass is to do away with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2008 Got the neck blank finished for the first bass. I decided not to use the limba, but used some red-ish mahogany instead to better match the color of the redwood top. So, the neck is mahogany/black wood fiber/padauk/black wood fiber/mahogany. I'm really happy with how the colors all work together. It looks beautiful to me. I'll be gluing up the second neck blank this week, which will be a whiter mahogany with black wood fiber as well, and black limba in the middle of the neck. I also got the wenge top for the second bass cut to width and planed. And I glued up and cut down the spalted maple back of bass number 1. I just need to figure out how I'm going to plane/sand it to thickness. Anybody with a thickness sander mind doing it for me? I'm going to have the same issue with the redwood burl top once I get it glued up, so I need to figure something out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuntinDoug Posted February 18, 2008 Report Share Posted February 18, 2008 That neck blank is just plain sexy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
black_labb Posted February 18, 2008 Report Share Posted February 18, 2008 looks good, have you considered using the smaller sized pots? alot of electrical stores have pots that are 16mm or so as opposed to the 24mm pots that are used in guitars usually. using them would make the hidden control idea easier to do. i do like that neck blank, nice looking timbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2008 (edited) Thanks guys. Black Labb, yes, I considered using the mini pots. In fact, I purchased one to get measurements off of. My initial idea was to use a mini pot for volume and two slider pots for the tone controls for each pickup. The mini pot isn't really the problem, the two slider pots side by side are a full inch across. Once I put the top and back plates in there, and enough beef on the top of the bass to reinforce the top and make it look right, it just gets too thick. I could have gone with 3 mini pots instead, and if I ever go back and decide to do a hidden control scheme that's probably what i'll have to do. But doing it that way takes away a lot of the novelty for me, and that was a big part of the attraction of it. Plus, I really like a highly contoured look for this body design, and the hidden controls would really limit me in contouring the back. I may end up turning some redwood burl knobs to make the front controls blend in a bit better with the top of the bass. Edited February 18, 2008 by mattharris75 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 More pictures of wood. The second neck blank is finished. Light mahogany/black wood fiber/limba/black wood fiber/light mahogany. Not quite as lovely as the other blank at the moment, but the mahogany pores will be filled with black epoxy in the finishing stages to really make it pop. Also, the wenge top for the second bass is glued and planed. This piece is going to make a great top! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharris75 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I'd been thinking about different ways to make the inside of my open headstock template perfectly straight. Because of how the tuners are oriented in this setup I needed each side to have a perfect 16mm of thickness, consistent across their length. I had thought about trying to jig it up to run it on the router table, but ultimately I came up with a very easy solution. I rigged up a fence on my spindle sander and simple ran it through there until it was to the exact thickness. Worked great, and such an easy solution. Sometimes it's easy to forget the wide variety of uses a tool can have. I also got all the neck dimensions laid out on both of the neck blanks. I'll be cutting the truss rod and CF rod channels this week and should have some time the following week to get the neck profiles bandsawed and routed. 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.