Andyjr1515

No, definitely the work of the dark side... Damn, I'm bewitched! I want that guitar......I NEED that guitar!!! It's calling to me. QUICK - SOMEONE TIE ME TO A MAST!!!!!!!!

I tell you - that's top drawer stuff. If you keep up like this, you're going to be one to watch for the future! Please do tell me ahead of any months you enter the Build of the Month compo and I'll make sure that mine 'just isn't quite ready yet...'

That's simply beautiful. Once of those 'I'd love to own that...' moments

For what it's worth, I always head towards the 'soft V'. I find it has the depth when I'm doing bar chords, but there are no bulbous sides to get in the way when I'm trying to get around the fretboard fast. It's each to their own, of course....

That looks VERY good.. Good by any standards, let alone a first build

I've been a bit slow on this @Lofteren. Is it the bridge or the stoptail hole that is skewed? If we talk 'fit for purpose' solutions rather than perfection it makes a difference. The stoptail holes are all about holding the bushes in against the pull of the strings....exact positioning isn't critical. The bridge holes and bushes are more about holding the posts steady against side loads from string bending and tremolos (if fitted). There is a downward force on the bridge from the strings, so as long as it doesn't rock in its bush it will be fine. It's worth noting that bridges on some arch tops, mandolins and violins aren't pegged or glued at all!! So as a pragmatist, my own solution for the bridge hole would be to pack the hole with some slivers of veneer, use a modelling knife or file to square it up and hammer the bush in straight. Actually, my pragmatic solution for a stoptail hole would be similar except the priority would be ensuring the fill was hard enough and the fit tight enough to prevent the strings pulling the bush out. Personally, I would use a hardish wood (I would use veneer again) as a packer rather than filler or epoxy and not expand the hole any more, which would risk losing the strength and homogeneity of the existing wood that hasn't been deformed and is still in the right place for holding the bush. This isn't the way a skilled builder or repairer would do it, but as long as it's going to do the job - for my own guitar and not a clients - I would be looking to fix the issue but without the risk of making it worse. ...and I do like that design. It's going to look great when it's finished!

I love seeing your finishes develop, Scott. It looks superb.

Progress looks excellent For a freshly cut fretboard, I prefer hammering rather than pressing because - with the hammer left, hammer right, hammer middle - you get the barbs to insert vertically and then slide across horizontally, locking them in. But what I do nowadays for a belt-and-braces approach is: run a tiny bead of Titebond along the tang; then hammer; then just clamp a radius block onto the hammered frets while I'm preparing the next one. By the time the next one is ready for hammering in, the glue in the one I've just done has already grabbed so I then hammer that one in, move the block up one fret and repeat. I'm sure the learned folk around here have even better ways that they will hopefully share

Still looking pretty good to me

This is looking great! Great progress and multiple skills on show.

I really like the neck heel carve....very smooth transition

Can't wait to see the finished build The veneer in the neck pocket won't show at all.

They are undoubtedly very nice....but the price is eye-watering. Mind you, the price of a single I suppose isn't too bad if you say it quickly enough....

What I forgot to mention was that this project had a bit of a deadline ('bit of a' actually meaning 'very tight'!) Mick was anxious to get his hands on the refinished bass but was also organising one of the regional UK meets for the Basschat forum. Would it be at all possible for the bass, assuming it didn't fall to pieces in the meantime, to be finished in time for that? At the time Mick asked me that, there was no certainty that it would be ready in time, but I upped the time spent on it considerably. The deal we agreed was that I come to the meet (a couple of hours drive away) and would bring it anyway to either hand it over, or to show Mick and the others the progress and then take it back with me. The advantage was that, if it was finished, it would negate the need to have it couriered! Cutting an already long story short, with a few nice-to-have's left out, I got it finished. This is a very happy Mick on seeing it for the first time: What I didn't know was that at the bash also was a demo of the Sims Super Quad pickups by one of Sims dealers, Nick Smith. What I also didn't know was that, for the demo, Mick had asked him if he would demo his new bass! So, 35 secs in you see Mick putting the bass into the rack, at 4.10 mins Nick picks it out (it hadn't even been tuned!) and at the end of the demo you even see the old git Andyjr1515 himself answering a question! (in fact you see him standing at the back here with a crazed grin on his face): Mick was delighted with it and put in a very flattering review into the forum. He also named the bass - after the dicussions we'd had about taking a sow's ear.....he has christened it The Silk Bass Great project with a happy ending - and along the way, taking me into interesting and unexplored territory....again

Hi, Scott Yes - this is where the thought of using dye with the walnut came from. I wanted to use walnut for the infills rather than yet another wood, but didn't want it to look (even more) like a Neapolitan cake. I thought that adding orange to the walnut would tone them down a little - which, as you say, it seems to have. That's when I went a bit crazy and decided to dye the back too

I don't think I've ever seen 19 ply... I have to say, I'm starting to use 'marine' ply more and more (although the stuff I've been using is much more modest than this) - it is such a great advantage to have something that is SO dimensionally stable and yet relatively easy to cut and drill. I like the use of a ply jig for this kind of assembly because it's normally a bit hit and miss when I try to add wings...

I used a blend of orange and amber inks to stain the top panels. Mick wanted it to look 'of its age', but not relic'd, and wanted a satin finish. The best satin finish generally I've ever achieved is using the tru-oil slurry technique but I've always steered clear of stained finishes because of the fear of slurrying away the stain. For the look that Mick was after, though, this would be the best way so I pondered on the issue and tried something new. My logic went something like this: Use the Birchwood Casey Sealer/Filler first. A couple to three decent coats and let fully harden Then apply the tru-oil with a gentle slurry - not to slurry the wood (as usual with this technique) but to slurry the tru-oil! For the 'dirtying' I would add some spirit wood dye (deep mahogany) to a coat of tru oil - applying it scattershot at the high wear points. Then a final slurry and buff to soften the dirtying effect and achieve the final satin feel It may not be to everyone's taste, but for what I was trying to achieve it worked surprisingly well. What is encouraging for future reference is that you really can get the tru-oil satin / silky effect on stained wood... This was the result: That looks a bit better than when it started, doesn't it?

Great progress, Scott. And fantastic results!

Personally, I don't do it mechanically like that because there are so many other variables (I don't tend to do repeat builds), so I tend to calculate the angle for each build. However, the effect is basically as you say...when I check with a straight edge, it is riding on the fretboard for a fretless and on top of the frets for a fretted so, all other things being equal, I guess a fretless neck will sit a fret's depth higher than the exactly equivalent fretted neck...

Mick sent me an orangey colour that he wanted me to match for the top. He wanted the top to contrast but coordinate with the mahogany splices of the neck. However, he didn't want it looking pristine...more like that it had always looked like that. I got a few ink samples in (I'm happy to risk any colour fade on this one. I don't actually think it will be overly susceptible but, if it did fade it would merely add to the 'always looked like this' ) and started experimenting. One thing was bothering me. Not the front - the back. Walnut is lovely; this walnut is lovely; walnut is brown-brown; but brown-brown does not coordinate with orange... Never tried it before - but how abouts staining the walnut with orange ink? Talk about a revelation.... That'll do for the back.... ....now just got to get the front right.

That's the set....

I know what you mean, @Prostheta It certainly would have been very little extra work.... These fancy pickups. Despite my warnings that putting pickups that were at least 3X the cost of the most expensive pickups I've ever bought into a bass that could fall to pieces and might, anyway, be a complete dog of a player, Mick wanted them fitted. We had discussions about silk purses and sow's ears... Also he had a request to bring the neck pickup further back than the original and 'fill the hole with...well, something...' Here were the critical components laid out on the un-routed body: This gave me a clue of how many voids and old screw holes were going to be needed to hidden The pickups are SimS Super Quads. Retailing at over £425 (over $600...yes - quite) they are passive with 4 coils - 2 side by side front, 2 side by side rear. You can see the 4 coils here: The switching - indicated by very bright red, green and blue LEDs on the p/up covers - allows full humbucker (all 4 coils; 'single' coil (ie one row of 2 sided by side coils) and a P-bass split arrangement (offset 1 coil front left, 1 coil rear right). Time to get the forstners and router out: ...and a couple of walnut infills from offcuts off the back panels: Which, then themselves needed routing: I know what you're all thinking......

To the request for tune-o-matic and medium strings. I talked through with Mick of the issues with both. Tune-o-matics are high and usually require a neck angle to be built in. This bass was originally built with a low height bridge and had no neck angle. The only way that a t-o-m would work would be to recess it into the body - and that would mean recessing the stop-tail too. Not so crazy...Warwick basses do that as standard...and there would be enough depth of body, but would it look, well, odd? The medium length strings potentially compounded this issue. Because the string length would be shorter than normal for a 34" bass (usually requiring 'long' not 'medium') - compounded because the stoptail system requires more string length than a fixed bridge, the stoptail would have to be VERY carefully positioned. It would also need to be much closer to the bridge than normal. On these kinds of things I always consider the experience and knowledge of the owner. If the owner is inexperienced - either on the instrument or of construction techniques and principles - I take the firm approach of only agreeing to approaches and options that do not compromise the integrity of the instrument. With someone who is an experienced player - just as with Tom and his African Bass - my approach is usually different. I talk it through, point out the risks and compromises, put forward options that would avoid those issues but, if they really want that feature and FULLY understand the risks and impact then I will get as close to that as I can if I think there is a reasonable chance that is can be done. Mick is very experienced as a player and has many basses, including some very high spec ones and some very heavily modified. He knows what he wants. He understands the risks. He understands the compromises and consequences. Tune-o-matic and medium length strings, then Oh....and could I fit some stunningly expensive pickups...and hide as many of the old holes and chambers as possible... and colour the top orange...

The frets were all lifted on at least one side, had been filed almost flat and were a curious upside down 'U' shape. The truss rod felt OK in its tightening and loosening but didn't seem to do anything to the fairly fixed bow in the neck. Again, proper luthiers look away! In discussion with Mick the new owner, my judgement was that: the fretboard had basically held the neck together during the various self-disassembly stages of the bass's life removal of the fretboard was high risk, but the only way of replacing the trussrod would be its removal when tested with string tension, the neck was basically stable my recommendation was that that I would remove the frets, flatten and re-profile the fretboard, re-fret and Mick would live with the fact that the neck relief might not be adjustable and the action may therefore be slightly compromised So that's what I did. The frets came out ridiculously easily but leaving quite wide slots and quite a few chips in the ebony which I had to fill with ebony dust and epoxy. Once I had sanded it flat and re-profiled it, the slots needed deepening: Re-fretting was straightforward, other than they needed to have a bead of glue and be clamped with a shaped caul until set rather than just relying on hammering in. This was looking a bit better, though...

It's entirely possible that once installed it will be fine. The pressure on the bent bar will put force onto the welded nut, which will increase the friction on the turning thread. Clearly, you don't want to risk it without knowing, so why not route a slot in some scrap wood, pop it in and glue (or just clamp) a cap on it and try it,. If you wrap some plumbers PTFE tape around it, you should be able to just slide it out when you've tested it rather than having to cut it out again.