I dunno Ken... I prefer the first over the second, but- I think the first would look better with the "waist" a little higher, to balance out the bottom. Does that make any sense?!?

I am not sure I know how to explain it. Maybe I will try to draw on a photo later.

But in general- I think the first is better defined.

IMHO
Brian

I like the first one best. What kind of f-holes are you favoring?

Shape..
 

Be careful with the center bout. If it is too wide, the Bow may not clear the 'wood'. On mine, the Bridge is quite high (7") but it seems to clear just fine. Also, is this an Orchestra only Bass, Solo only or Orchestra/Solo as far as its intended use? Smaller upper bouts from what I have seen seems to make the Bass sound thin on top while wider upper bouts usually have a sweet midrange like a 'wet' or moist kind of sound.

What will your Rib depth be? Mine just barely reached 7 3/4" at the widest point but is mostly 7 5/8" around the bottom portion. My Dodd was only 7 1/2" at the widest point as was the loudest Bass to date I have played.

Harmony in all the dimensions and with the wood chosen is not really a science. I think the Cornerless Bass may have a new revival on the horizon.

Thanks David, I am leaning towards the first also now and I think the proportions are good that way.

It will have a narrow enough UB to help reach around yet be wide enough to get some vibrations happening there. It could get really hard to get good arching with the real narrow UB as seen on the Lemer bass. But I am working that out now.

Ken, thanks. It is planned as a solo/orchestra bass with a real thunderous low end yet a good amount of "buzz" in the the higher positions, but who knows???. The bridge in the plan is about 6 1/2 inch but will depend on the final arching of course. As for the ribs, they are going to be 9 1/2 inches at the tail block and taper to less than 6 at the neck ( exact number to follow when I can measure it).

Not sure yet, I am thinking something original but Italian looking. Certainly not a copy of any of those shown.

Thanks Brian, I think after the plate goes on it will be easier to decide. These things never translate from paper to wood as one would think.

FFs, Bridge and Rib depth..
 

On the Ribs, if you make them that deep, it may slow down the response and punch. My two Best Basses to date had LESS than 8" ribs. That being my Dodd at 7 1/2" and my Cornerless at 7 5/8" mainly. The taper is needed but mainly in the upper bout and at the Neck. That's the right idea. If you can, make two rib shells and fit the same Top and Back to both. Then see which sounds better.

On the FFs, make them spaced far enough at the upper eyes for the Bridge feet so that the bridge width matches the Bass size re:3/4, 7/8, 4/4, 5/4 .. etc. If spaced too close like on my Bass, you will need a 5/8 to 3/4 sized bridge for a 4/4 Bass. Mine has been damaged with the Top pushed down on the G-string side from being too wide with a 170mm wide bridge instead of a 150mm or smaller size which the FFs dictate be used in order to sit properly over the Bass bar.

Ken (McKay)-

I played with the shape. It isn't exact, but you get the idea. I also think this would help with the bow clearance issue.

I agree with Ken (Smith) about the rib depth. My bass isn't particularly deep, but has a very deep fundamental. I think very deep basses have a lot of "spread" but not too much core. However, if you are going to 5.5" or 6" taper at the block then having her "fat on the bottom" wouldn't be such a bad idea.


Brian

Fat and width..
 

First off, fat on the bottom should not mean it needs deep ribs at all. Deep ribs are often used on smaller Bass to add air space. Too much space on the bottom and it may be slow moving the air out of the Bass.

Second, if the width is too narrow, the FF's eyes at the top will be very close causing it to need a very narrow bridge. You don't want a 1/4 sized Bridge on a 3/4-7/8's Bass. That will kill the whole Idea having the Bass bar so close to the sound post with wide lower bouts.

Guitar shape or not, the upper and lower bouts should have harmony with the center curved as needed. Ask Arnold and Jeff about this. Also, take a regular Bass you know and like the sound of and convert the shape to cornerless by just shaving off the corners and maybe with some slight modifications to get the desired look artistically. Less is more when altering shapes and designs from a proven model. Also, note on that proven model how deep the Ribs actually are. The deeper the Ribs, the more room for them to flex or maybe crack. Since the Cornerless Bass can flex more than one with corners, I would only assume that slightly 'less' Rib depth would be better.

Maybe my "terminology" was a little off. I meant "deep at the bottom". I would figure that if the bass is tapering off to 6" at the neck, then you would need a deeper rib depth at the bottom to add the air space that you are losing at the neck. (That is if he planned on a certain airspace that he was shooting for...)

I didn't suggest that the width be too narrow. Maybe the bottom and top would have to expand to make the shape I was suggesting. Ken McKay is the engineer on this project, so I will let him work out the details. I was just suggesting what was visually more appealing to me. I am sure Ken McKay would take into account all of those aspects as this isn't his first bass.

IMHO,
Brian

Brian, I get your point clearly. It does look rather harmoneous with the drawn in lines. I am playing with the plan and looking at the important points that Ken Smith brought up about the bass bar and bridge positions. I am leaning towards an ff like the Lemar bass as that is closer to my shape and it may fit better. Thanks again.

KS, I am thinking about narrowing the ribs and how to go about it at this point. Good help on the bass bar and bridge stuff also. I am going to get out the Weisshaar book tonight and study it a bit as he goes over bass bar placement.

Aarnold, thanks for the help on the rib bracing from the other thread.

Progress?
 

Ken, any progress to report? You know, we just love pictures....

...not much for photos but there are some updates starting here http://www.upnorthstrings.com/cornerlessbasspage4.html
I did two things:
1. Narrowed the waste just a bit by removing the linings and bending the side in just a half inch above the narrowest part of the middle bout.
2. Planed the ribs for less depth by tapering them from tail block to neck. This will leave the ribs about 9 1/2 at the end block but narrowing to 8/12 at the area where the back bends in, then tapering in to 6 1/2 for better reach-around.

Oh yea and I jointed, joined and started planing the top. Nice old seasoned spruce wood.

Looking Good Ken!

Can't wait to see her put together- she has curves!
Brian

Brian and all,

Click on the link above and have a look at my new shape, although subtle, I think it did make a considerable difference. I think it is very close to the Testore bass which unfortunately I only have the small photo.

Yes! that is definitely sweet looking. It kind of has the proportion of one of those Alexandria basses, without the corners. I think Pollmann makes them. I always liked the big difference in the upper and lower bouts. Testore would approve!

Bouts..
 

Testore or not, small upper bouts make for a smaller sound. It would be good if you came here and played and then measured my Bass. Sue Lipkins mentioned that David Wiebe was very impressed with the Riccardi Bass and soon after made a copy of it.

The bottom end of my Bass is like I have never in my life heard, never. You know some of the Basses I have played and owned and nothing has ever matched this Bass. Take a closer look at the measurements if you can. There is something to learn from this Bass.

Ken,

I really like the shape. I say go ahead and make this one. Then, when you make #2, you can pattern it after KS's Bass.

I understand the need to "experiment" with the shape and have your own pattern. Go for it!

Brian

Ken, thanks for the invite to measure the Reccardi bass I may take you up on that someday. I also do want to play and hear it!

We are going to have to see how this one turns out and it will be a lesson to us all I think. Keep in mind that my lower bout is very wide at 28+ inches making the upper bout look small. It will be 18 inches, which is still smaller than the Storioni by about 2 inches, but not as much as the Lemur bass which is 15 1/2 (anyone know how that one sounds?) and the Bass attributed to Ruggeri (Sciachia's), is also 18.

The way I arch and graduate the stiffness of the top, along with the bridge height (downward pressure) is going to have a big effect. I also think that your string length (mensure) goes a long way in defining the huge sound! I have heard this from other experts.

So keep the comments coming, every morsel is gold and a learning experience for me.