Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken McKay
KS I see you did a lot of work putting up the side views.
I captured these basses earlier and put a straight line from the back up to the scroll to illustrate the angle differences, then I added the front line to create a "box" where the nut sits inside.
I did this last night but didn't post it so here it is. Pretty much the same as yours but with the lines. You obviously don't need the line, you can just look, but it does help define how far the fingerboard is out from the left hand.
Question: Is the distance from the imaginary line up the back in relation to the nut (just where the strings exit the fingerboard, a variable to control? When designing or restoring a bass where the neck will be reset the overstand can be varied by adding some wood to the heel (or removing). A bigger overstand will allow the nut to move more away from the imaginary back line and visa versa.
This reminds me of the old Sesame Street game "One of these things doesn't belong".
|
Well, it was not much work for me because they were just from the page shots we took awhile ago. Nothing more than copy and paste for me here.
So, as far as you can see, which basses have the least pitch, most pitch or most comfortable 'looking' pitch in your mind for what you can see.
As far as what can be controlled, often in restoring an old bass, the string length is something we try and control in the planning. Making it longer, shorter of keeping it the same. Sometimes they are re-pitched slightly and sometimes not. Some times they are set lower into the block and sometimes just moved out.
All of these steps are possible to do but what ever is practical for each bass to achieve the desired results is what will be done. The optimum achievement can only be done with a blank check so to speak. You cannot do this 'on the cheap'. The bass needs what it needs to get it as good as IT can be for today's playing styles. Sometimes it's very little and sometimes it's everything.
Here is a list (from what I can remember) of the things that have been done to a few of my basses. Some had one or two steps done and some everything;
Scroll/neck Graft, new fingerboard, c-extension, block cut, block expanded, new block, underside heel shim/pitch, re-pitch, fingerboard shim, fingerboard shim/pitch, neck lengthened with graft, neck shortened with graft, bridge moved forward to adjust note stop, heel recarved deeper/smaller, neck recarved shallower, etc.. In other words, what ever it takes to make a particular bass the best that it can be for you. The 'for you' part is a big one. Not everyone wants the same neck or feel.
I can't tell you how many basses with D-necks with 'healthy heels' that I wanted cut down into Eb-necks for my personal taste and was talked out of the idea by Arnold because these were basses for sale in my stock. The modern players are trained to play the d-neck classically but for me playing jazz and classical etc., I prefer the Eb for all around playing. Playing the f/1 and g/4 on the A-string are important for me as well as the c/1 and d/1 on the E-string, and not just playing up the bass on the G and D string. I like my reach over the neck and heel from fingered to thumb positions to be as little a transition as possible. This is what I mean by liking the Eb better personally. Others trained on a d-neck may have difficulty playing in tune in that transitional area regardless of comfort in the long run.