Jump to content

tophski

Established Member
  • Posts

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by tophski

  1. Holy @#$%! that's a HUGE neck! Cool looking though, can't wait to see the body with that.

    He heh, it's not that it's a huge neck, it's that it's a small body. B)

    the body is only 11" at its widest. Wide bass bodies seem to be the thing these days, so I wanted to try to go the other direction with it, and still create a really modern feeling design.

    And as far as neck dive, the body core is hard ash, and is quite heavy. That should help with the neck dive issue, but I guess we'll find out! :D

    personally, I love the small body and shape you have there.

    in my utterly unprofessional opinion as a builder, but professional opinion as a musician, you have a real winner there.

    I also loved your original design as well, regardless of the upper access.

    That open head design is great, after seeing yours I'd love to give that a shot on my first bass.

    (I'm also glad you're keeping them 4 string) :D

    Can't wait to see them finished.

    chris

  2. Well thats the thing, when i purchases the guitar I was like, "Free-floating bridge, hmmm ok why not?". Later I realized that I don't really use the whammy bar that much, Only for a little accenting, and when I bend notes the bridge would pull up a bit and I couldn't bend as far. So when the bridge broke I could have purchased a rose and given that a try but I think I like a simple fender bridge better.

    my point was: why not reuse the body, strip it, fill in the trem cavity and make it a hardtail, or fit a fender trem, then refinish the whole shooting match.

    If you like the guitar as it was minus the bridge, that's a pretty good project right there imo.

    c.

  3. 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.

  4. 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. :D

    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.

    Bassplan1bcopy.jpg

    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. :D

    th_spaltedmapleback1.jpg

  5. Actually you're both right, he plays both positions. I popped in the R30 dvd and noticed he plays alot over the neck pu or between the neck and neck pu on his jazz bass. On his Ricky he used to play alot over the bridge pu, but he's all over and uses the full area to achieve different tones.

    Over the bridge pickup you get a more tight treble tone, and over the neck pu you get a more full rounded bass tone.

    I own a Geddy Lee jazz and I must say its a very nice sounding bass indeed, and a pleasure to play. I've been playing bass in a disco/funk band and it sounds awesome. I can also get that grinding dirty sound on my original recordings as well (straight in and it sounds awesome).

    As far as the finger/pick debate, I'd definately go for fingers..you might not get the tone at first, but after you work at it through the painful experience of building up your callouses, you can get a wide variety of tones from your fingers. Definately more versitile.

    Can't wait to see your bass man, you're starting with some gorgeous wood. :D

    c.

×
×
  • Create New...