#1
|
||||
|
||||
To Cut, or Not to Cut? (TB Save)
On 7/4/06 I authored a Thread on TalkBass titled "To Cut, or Not to Cut. That is the Question". In order to protect the contents of this subject in the event it gets deleted from TB, I would like to basically copy MY posts over to here for viewing and discussion. The Blue "hyper text' above will link you over to the original TB Thread as long as it's there.
This Thread is about the restoration of my Mystery Bass and has been discussed quite a bit as well. I copied over my TB thread about the Bass some time ago but didn't bring this text over. Although it's basically old news to me and many others I think people who haven't read this might enjoy going thru the motions as I have over the last 4 years. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In March of 2004 I made a Thread about a new Bass I had just bought titled "Name That Bass". It was a complete mystery and was dubbed the 'Mystery Bass'. At that time I had two Basses that I used but was looking for a fine Olde Orchestral Bass to settle down with. That was before I started buying other Basses and selling them off after restoration and a few concerts to sample the goods so to speak while I wait for my 'Holy Grail'. Old Thread here: http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=118707 The Mystery Bass is now on its final leg of work before the re-assembly starts. The Top and Back have been off and the Ribs are in 5 sections with the upper Bouts still attached to the Neck Block. All the Blocks are still intact glued to one of the Rib pieces. The Top, Back and most of the Ribs are done as far as all the cracks go. The Bass Bar and Back X-brace will stay as is because it's looks just fine. Now for the question. When I bought this, it was to become my main Bass so playability was a major factor for me. I discussed this with my old friend, fellow Bassist, long time repairman/restorer and mentor, Paul Biase. The String length when I bought the Bass was close to 44" and I was looking for 42" maximum. We discussed either cutting the shoulders/upper bouts of both the Top and Back, re-shaping them and then restoring the Purfling on the Top or maybe cutting the Ribs at the upper Bout/corner block, sliding them down on the corner blocks and trimming the Top and Back around the new lowered shape and then restore the Purfling on the Top as the Back is un-purfled (those lazy English!). This plan has been on the table for over 2 years now but many things have happened since then that is now giving me second thoughts. First, I recieved a large German Bass in trade awhile back that had a similar String length. I brought it to Arnold and he suggested a 'Block cut' as he called it. The Top and Back came off for other repairs so he made a new Neck Block, Set the Neck Lower in the Block and then trimmed the Top & Back in the Block area just slightly as well as giving it some added neck-stand to play over the shoulders. He got the String Length from 43 7/8ths to 42 3/8ths. That's 1 1/2" less without cutting the Bass. Before; http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...relliBass2.htm After; http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...orelliBass.htm I used this Bass for a few concerts and even did Beethoven's 5th fingering all the moving low notes on the extension. It was tiring but rewarding. Arnold was also able to reduce the String length on a full sized Prescott I bought (and since sold) but that was mostly due to the neck graft being a D-neck from an Eb-neck. We also cheated the Bridge a little as well as on the Morelli. One day I was in Arnold's shop and he gave me a huge Italian Bass to try. I played it and got around kinda ok. He said "you just played a 44" String Length". I was surprised but after taking a second look, I saw that the numbers were in my head a little as well, more than in my fingers! The point of this Thread is to Poll opinions with discussion as to (1) Leave the Bass with it's shoulders as-is and do the 'Block Cut', D-neck graft (already planned) and cheat the Bridge up a bit, (2) Cut it as planned or (3) Do nothing and play it as a 44" and possibly cripple myself over time..lol Your thoughts please Ladies, Gentleman, Luthiers and Luthierettes....... http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double..._that_bass.htm |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
new to DB.. (7/06)
Quote:
The main question here is should I go slightly over 42" or even to 43" and let well enough alone? This way I could slightly modify and adjust the length and still hear the full air volume and tone of the Bass. I bought it unplayable so I have no idea what this Bass can do. It's all been speculation up to now. Thank's for your reply. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Look after Cut? (7/06)
Quote:
The shoulders would look almost the same up at the neck but the edges will loose their curve after they would be trimmed to match the shape of the Ribs. The plan was to cut the Ribs about 2" or less from the corner block area of the upper bout and re-attach the Ribs to the upper Corner block. Then re-trim the Top and Back to match so the upper bout would then be shorter making the string length shorter. With the 'Block Cut' the Ribs might be trimmed about 1/2" up at the Neck and a deeper Neck-set into the Block (or new neck block if needed) would be done. The Back Neck Button would get the most trimming with this method. Cheating the Bridge will only help about 1/2" in the String length. I don't remember if the Bass had a D or Eb neck when I estimated the old string length but it will be a D-Neck. I bought a beautiful piece of Maple with matching curl to the Back about 2 years ago. The gears going in the Bass are English made Baker style but on the modern side. On the Back Braces, I don't have any Pics now but I will get some next time I am in NY hopefully before the Top goes on. The original lower crossbars were twin rails about 1cm wide and spaced about 2cms apart. The scars of this early gamba style bracing are still visible. I guess the maker thought this would be stronger and lighter for the over 29" (originally) wide lower bout. The Purfling runs off both the upper and lower bouts showing about 1/2" of trimming the width per side was done at some point. I don't know how tall those rails were but at least as tall as the were wide if not more. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Neck Block.. (7/06)
Quote:
String length is an issue mainly due to playability. The measurement from the Bridge to the Neck is way long. Getting over shoulders is one thing but reaching the end of the fingerboard is another. This Bass will be set-up as a full sized Orchestral Bass and not at all intended for solo work. It's a 'sit back and enjoy the ride' type of Bass in my eyes. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Usage.. (7/06)
Quote:
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Block Cut... (7/06)
Quote:
This is the Morelli before the block-cut, http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...s/fullback.jpg http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...es/pufling.JPG And this is it after the cut, http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...images/693.jpg http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...images/688.jpg http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...images/705.jpg http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...images/692.jpg The Block area would be flatter than before with wide Ebony strips covering the top view of the Block that the Ribs do not cover as seen in the 'after' photos. The Ribs will be cut back just a bit to allow for this lower set block. Currently the Neck just sits up on the Ribs with only a Dovetail going into the shallow block. If I can, I will go into NY soon and take some pics while the Bass is still apart. I wish I had done this before any work was started when it first came apart just for comparison purposes. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Profile Views of the Morelli Block-Cut.. (7/06)
This is the b4 and after from the sides to compare.
Before; http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...ages/Rside.JPG http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...ages/Lside.JPG After; http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...images/700.jpg http://www.kensmithbasses.com/Double...images/707.jpg After the Cut, the upper Ribs are slightly shorter going up into the Neck. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Member Suggestions & Comments... (7/06)
Quote:
Quote:
I have made a few False Nuts myself in the past but this works only on Eb neck stops. When you do this, you are pushing the F#, G etc higher up and harder to reach. I usually go for a D-stop at the heel and go from there. Cheating the Bridge is something done more commonly and works to a degree but if you take a good look at this Bass, the distance from the F notches to the bottom of the neck is about 2" longer than average. The top of this Bass is even longer than my Prescott and that beast is a challenge to reach anything past the heel and have it in tune until you get used to it. This Bass on the other hand has even wider upper bouts as well so making it playable is most important to me. The restoration cost for this Bass is more than the average Bass costs as was the Prescott. The Gilkes restoration is not far behind and I can only imagine what it will run for the Fendt to be put back into service. Playability is a must here. This is a serious Bass and if the Shoulders need to be cut down the road, they will get cut just like all the other old English and Italian Basses that grace todays professional Orchestras. This is one monster of a Bass and my goal here is to get it into top playing condition. Quote:
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Opinions.. (7/06)
Quote:
In my opinion, the only way to make this a playable under 42" SL Bass IS to cut the shoulders and re-bend the Ribs to match the new Top and Back cut/curve. My intention at this point is to do as much as possible to make it playable to a degree so it CAN be Cut in the future if the Bass passes on to someone else. There are some big guys out there and maybe one will knock on my door looking for a Bass like this at the time I decide it's too much for me to handle. That person will appreciate that fact that I didn't cut the Bass. As I stated earlier, it was my only old Orchestral sized bass when I first bought it and I wanted it to be right for me and my hands. Since then I have bought some other Basses that I like better as-is for all around playing. This would become my big Plush Orchestral Bass for when I don't need to play up high and don't need a low C extension either. Just a big fat plush sounding Orchestral bass to play and have fun with. I can manage a SL over 42" for those occassions but prefer not to for my everyday use. I recently when thru 3 other biggies while this one has been in restoration. The Dodd was big to play but the SL was only 41.5". The Morelli was close to 42.5" and the Prescott just under 42". All three had their challenges to play them. The Morelli was long and slightly big at the shoulders. The Dodd was shaped like a Violin and getting over the shoulders was not so easy for me. the Prescott is just HUGE all around. If I didn't have this Bass, I would probably keep the Prescott but there is only room for one Biggie in my rack. With 2 of the 3 gone, the Prescott will go up to Arnolds shortly and look for a new home to be welcomed in. The Mystery Bass, now believed to be Olde English, will take its place as my 'Big Gun' when the Buffalo come to town so to speak. I want to make it somewhat playable now and preserve it for those times a big Bass is needed or wanted. Now that my Gilkes is near completion and the Fendt in the wings, I no longer need to cut this bass down to a smaller bass and do the Dragonetti on it. If I can reach the D or and play Ottello or Lt. Kije on it, I will be happy. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Preserve.. (7/06)
Quote:
Being it is a Mystery Bass to all that have seen it, please help me out with the History on it if you know something. I am trying to make it playable again. I don't know anyone who would use it as it was. It was laying in a basement for most of the 20th century because it was unplayable. It fell apart, ribs peeling off the blocks, coal dust filling the cracks... etc.. No one I know will or can play a Bass this size in a modern Orchestra with a 46" Top (up to the neck only, 47" to the tip) and upper bouts almost 22" with high shoulders and a 44" string length. these measurements ARE the reason why it was not played much in the last 100 years. I plan on changing that. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
(7/06)
Quote:
I had an offer 2 years ago for the Bass as-is and again recently from the same person who likes 'em big. This is however a 200 year old English Bass and tonally will rank easily with my Gilkes, Fendt and recently owned Dodd. The offer for this as-is with almost 10k of work into it was slightly less than half of what I was willing to let it go for. The potential value of this Bass fully restored is quite high so selling as-is will be at about 75% of it's value. If you are serious about this, PM me but in advance I will tell you that you can buy a new car for the price of this Bass as-is so check out your wheels and let me know. To play this Bass at it's current size in the Orchestra would be punishment. It's bigger than my Prescott which is also classified as a 4/4 and it was cut about 160 years ago from even a bigger size. This English Bass however has an advantage to the player and that is weight. It is not that heavy as compared to it's size. This is due to the lighter Sycamore Back and Ribs instead of regular European Maple or in case of the Prescott, instead of its heavy Curly New England Sugar Maple. So I can see your cause now being 'Save that Bass' from 'Cut that Bass'. I wanna save a Player and get the Bass back into permanent use in an Orchestra or at the least as planned from the start, 'My Orchestral Bass'. Selling it was never my intention when I bought this Bass. Biase took on this Job as a personal favor to me and not as a business venture. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Long diatribe ahead.. Member Comment (7/06)
Quote:
The main difference between the Guitars you work on and the Orchestral Basses is really the music. Most guitars with some exception is playing the same music and technique now as it did when they were made. Old Basses on the other hand took over 300 years to evolve to what we play now. I have seen a Strad Guitar and a Panormo as well, 300 and 200 years old. They of course were different than any Martin. If repaired they are most likely ONLY a Museum piece. Old Basses on the other hand have had all sorts of modifications to be kept in use as some were not even Basses but Violones with wider necks and extra strings. There is no replacement today for old wood and ancient Varnish. New and 'newer' Basses can be nice but they just don't have the experience and almost any good player can feel and hear that difference. This Bass in question may or may not be a piece of history as it's just old with a few speculative origins attached to it. One thing for sure is that they didn't make this Bass to fit todays musical requirements of a Classical Bassist. I doubt that they played up to the octave on this Bass much less the harmonics over the fingerboard like in the Dragonetti. Market-wise, a young player going for a Symphony job may not want a Bass like this as he'll have trouble playing a solo piece on it. My Dodd had high shoulders but the String length was 2 1/2" less (41 1/2") than this Bass. Personally, I think the best thing for this Bass is to respect its large Orchestral size but make it playable as an Orchestral Bass or all around Bass for a larger person. It MUST be modified once again to become playable in todays Orchestras. It has had many modifications in the past as well but never the size. Now we must make it playable but as a large Bass and get it back in circulation. The Block cut is the best idea yet which I learned from Arnold when he restored my Morelli. I don't expect a short string length but 44" is just not going to work. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
hga hgaaaa, hga hgaaaa... (7/06)
Quote:
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
The History.. (7/06)
Quote:
This Bass was originally a 3-string but the 4 Gears that were on the Bass when I got it date from Germany about 1800-1850 or so and were exactly like these but without the Plates; These are just some of the parts of its past history. This Bass is no 'Virgin' by any means. Making it work in a respectful manner for todays playing is just another step in preserving the makers intentions. A playable workable Bass for a deserving player. I want to point out one other thing here. I have bought 4 English Basses in the last 3 years. One is gone but I will still refer to it. Three of them have tight flamed Sycamore Backs and ribs of local English growth. Three of the Tops are medium-fine grained Spruce BUT one of them has grain I have never seen except in sections here and there. This Top has some special wood. Grain tighter than the naked eye can count the growth rings. The Bass also shows signs or trimming the bouts about 1/4 -1/2" all around as the Purfling on the Top runs off the Bass but is evident in the corners, c-bouts and upper and lower portions of the Bass. It looks as if the Bouts was more of a squarer shape originally and maybe trimmed when the highly figured ribs first shrunk OR the Top was made first and the Back wasn't wide enough so it was trimmed after it was Purfled and then assembled. A composite was once considered but the C-bouts line up perfectly and they are unusual as it is and the Varnish matches from Top to Back as well. So, the Mystery of this Bass is more than just the Maker or Origin. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Decision... (7/06)
Ok, after all this chatter about if or how to do this Bass, I finally spoke with Biase who was out of town for these rounds and totally unaware of the public forum and polled opinion on this project.
A Block cut it will be. Some trim around the upper edges, a new Block lowered down slightly and the Bridge cheated about 1/2" or so. this should get me close to 42" and be able to reach the F# which is a goal in all set-ups. Thanks to all that threw in their $.02 and more. Please feel free to continue on the topic if so desired. This thread remains open for this subject as long as TB stays around. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Block expanded.. (9/07)
I know this Thread stopped suddenly a few days after its start over a year ago but if anyone is interested, I have a slight update. The current Neck Block will remain in the Bass. Biase added a piece to the bottom of the Block to make it deeper in the the upper Bouts. This way, when he cuts the upper Block area, there will be a big enough Block to set the new Neck in.
He will cut about 1" off the Top of the Bass and leave the Block area wider around the Neck and trim the side platforms with Ebony. As you can see from these two pictures, when the Top area is cut, the platform area wont be all the wide. As far as that raised plate goes on the Back Button, we have already made a new one as well as a matching plate to go across the bottom of the Back. A graft repair was done on the inside as the lower Block area of the Back was messed up. Both plates have a strip running down the center, with the plates book matched to match up with the Back as it has a half inlaid center strip as well. So, as far as 'The Cut' goes, we have gone with option #3, the Block area only. Originally, we were thinking of cutting the Shoulders and re-shaping them with some slope added. Next, Biase mentioned we should only cut about 2" off the upper Ribs at the Corner Block, lower the upper Rib assembly to the Corner Blocks and then just trim the Top and Back to conform to the Ribs with just a slight lip. Only the Top is purfled so restoring the Purfling is not as much as would be if both plates were purfled. With the Block cut, mainly only the Tips of the Top and a small area below the current neck-set will be removed. The original Purfling will just end at the Block platform. Setting the New neck into the modified Block about an inch deep and with a lower heel will help get the String length reduced to 42" or less. The Shoulders although broad (22" upper bout width), they do have a gentle slope with only 5 3/4" Rib depth at the Neck. After the Block-cut it will be closer to 6 or 6 1/2 wide, still fairly narrow and accessible. I refer to 'we' only because I have selected some matching wood for the plates, cut them and sent them to Biase. I have also worked closely with him for over 3 years on all the planning of this restoration. However, he is the actual Restorer and not me. It's not business, it's just personal. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Thread Copy..
If you follow the Link to the original TB Thread you will see that I kept this slightly shorter with a few quotes and answers. I cut over 2 pages off of the TB Cut Thread but gave you all the basic 'Meat' of the Topic.
Another thing I did was to leave out the names of the other TB Members posting in response that I quoted just in case they don't want to be mentioned here. I can't imagine why they wouldn't but just to be on the safe side. Being that this is the internet, I am not sure of the 'copyright' laws either. I know what I write is mine so that's no problem copying over my Text. I cut out quite a bit of back and forth from one particular Dealer because it looked a bit to commercial on his part how he posted. I did mention the Names of two people quoted mainly because I know them and they post here regularly. The bottom line here on the 'Cut' topic was that on a phone conversation I had with Biase in the Spring it looked as if he didn't need to Cut the Block area as he explained to me how he could avoid it with the Neck-Set, Bridge 'Cheat' and Overstand. Around that time I had sent him pictures of how the Block area was to be Cut to achieve the String length along with the other changes that were being made. When I went there in July I saw that he DID actually Cut the Inch off that I had drawn up and even saved the Pieces. One side on the Rib touching the Block had some serious repairs to it. By cutting that inch away, the prior damage in that area was half gone. Again, he did save the two pieces in case I change my mind but the Bass actually looks better now in the Block area than it did before. I am talking with vision here as it was not yet all done up with the Neck in and the Ebony shoulder caps on the Block. When it IS finally done, it will be a beautiful and subtle modification. The String length with the Bridge 'Cheat' will be under 42". That is what I call a success story. When the Restoration is all done, I will update the Webpage for this Bass with its modifications along with a Link to the 'before' Page and Pics. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
To Clarify..
For those of you still with some confusion about what a Block-Cut actually is, let me try and explain this here with no other topics in this post.
The Neck must be set deeper into the Block, so in order to do that another piece of wood was 'added' to the existing Neck Block so the Block would have more depth in which to set the Neck deeper down into Block. Also, the current Block was cut with a 'dove-tail' instead of a standard 'mortise' joint (partial pic shown). With a dovetail, the Neck sits ON the top of the Block and Not IN the Block as it should. The Block in this Bass is not the Original as we have found a small 'left over' Tab still glued to the upper Back from an older Blockless Neck. The English made all grades and styles of String instruments from the simplest construction to the most elaborate as they copied makers from the Tirol and German Schools as well as the great Italians like Amati, Maggini and later Strad and Guarnieri. Ok, so have a look at this Pic below and I will explain. Sorry for the full Scale Bass as we need only to look at the Block area. What was did here was to Cut about 1" (one inch) off of the Ribs measuring from where the Ribs meet the Top up at the Block and measuring 1" downwards. The width of the Rib/Block piece Cut looks more than 1" because it is gradually curving away from the Neck and not straight down. This will look visually like it has a 'platform' around the Neck Heel rather than the Ribs curving up to and meeting the Neck directly like it does now similar to the pictures posted below; The Block that was originally a dovetail has been converted to a Mortise joint similar to the partial Block pic shown below from my Gilkes (look to the far right of the pic). Now, looking at the Block of the Gilkes above imagine the bottom of it being squared off which was more like the Mystery Bass than the rounded bottom and edges of the Gilkes. Another piece of similar wood was added and glued to the bottom of the squared off Block in order to allow for both the Mortise to be cut into the already lowered-Cut dovetail block and also to deepen the Neck-set to help with the string length alteration. To compensate for the 'stop-note' of about a D-Neck at the Heel, the Bridge will be moved up one inch as well. The combined Block-Cut and Bridge-cheat shortens the String length by 2" (two inches). The new Neck Graft along with the slightly deeper Neck-set gives us a tad more deduction as well on the length. Being that the Neck-stand is also moved out quite a bit along with the wide (22") but slightly sloped Shoulders and the extreme (8 1/2"-5 3/4") but gradual Back Bend towards the Neck makes this 'biggie' one easy playing monster to be.. I hope this single synopsis helps to put this whole 'Cut' subject in a better light. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Ken, You mentioned a neck graft in the above post. Could you explain how was it done? and how it changed the bass?
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Neck Graft..
Quote:
The Neck that was in this Bass was Spliced in two pieces length-wise with some cabinet makers joint in the middle of the Neck. This coupled with the Length being slightly long made for one ugly, poorly repaired and planned out Neck to begin with. There was no way this Neck would ever see a String on it in my lifetime! The first thing I did was to pull off the already thin fingerboard and Cut the neck in half so that I could work on the Scroll separately and plug all the old Gear, Screw and Extension holes. There were 72 holes. Yes, count 'em, 'seventy two'! Then, I made the raised Maple Plates and added them to the already thin 'swiss cheese' Scroll Cheeks. Now, we have a Scroll & Peg Box to work with! How did or rather how WILL (I haven't played a note yet on this Bass) the neck Graft change the Bass? Well, at least for once it will be a good Neck and not some pile of mismatched pieces glues together in various ways masquerading around as a Double Bass Neck. It will be the first correct Neck this bass has had since it became a 4-string some 100+ years ago. Here are some pics of a Neck Graft in-progress from my Prescott of a few years ago.. When does a Bass need a Graft? Well, you will know it for sure when it needs one but sometimes it pays to modify a bass with a new Graft for optimum condition or mensur as done with the Martini and Candi recently for the reasons just stated. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|