Would you change a Smith?

[Tim Bishop]

Desmund, Steve, and Bob. Thanks for your input!

Keep it comming guys!

[Roy Diza]

How 'bout a KS spin on the single cut design, and wood covered PU?

[Tim Bishop]

Originally Posted by Roy Diza

How 'bout a KS spin on the single cut design, and wood covered PU?

Hmmm, I'm guessing Ken will respond with a resounding 'Not gonna happen' and maybe refer you to someone like Alembic for this one. LOL! No way he's going to endorese this.

[Bob Faulkner]

Originally Posted by Roy Diza

How 'bout a KS spin on the single cut design, and wood covered PU?

I never understood why people like single cut designs. I think they would be clunky, heavy, and unnecessarily impede my ability to play in the upper registers.

Wood covered pickups look ok, but I just don't see the need. I'm not sure if it would interfere with the magnetic field around the pickups or not. If it does it's dead out of the gates for me. At no point do I ever want to sacrifice anything in tone for pure looks. If it has no effect then I don't see a real problem with them other than maybe durability.

Can't wait to see Ken's responses.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Bob Faulkner

I never understood why people like single cut designs. I think they would be clunky, heavy, and unnecessarily impede my ability to play in the upper registers.

Wood covered pickups look ok, but I just don't see the need. I'm not sure if it would interfere with the magnetic field around the pickups or not. If it does it's dead out of the gates for me. At no point do I ever want to sacrifice anything in tone for pure looks. If it has no effect then I don't see a real problem with them other than maybe durability.

Can't wait to see Ken's responses.

Ok, here I am. We made Wooden cases for the PUs in the beginning (1979-1983) BUT, moved away from that. The reason is that it moves the magnetic field further from the strings and you loose volume. If made thin, the top of the cover might break or split.. Been there, done that.. no thank you.. have moved on.. NEXT!!

Single Cut? WHY? Structurally, I think it's a 'stupid' idea. With all the concern about even neck Bow and adjustability you are going to LOCK it down on the low sting side while the treble strings pull and twist it from the other side? Is this to create tension in the neck to produce sounds the builder couldn't get by just making a good structural sonic Bass?

I don't know who's idea this was actually but one time when I was fishing on a boat and all the other boats rushed to this splash in the water a few hundred yards away I asked my older friend, "Should we go over there and fish?" His reply was (in a wisdomish way) "One fool draws many!"

If someone can't make a Bass with good neck structure, stability and tonal response, try this? Not in my book!

[Tim Bishop]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Ok, here I am. We made Wooden cases for the PUs in the beginning (1979-1983) BUT, moved away from that. The reason is that it moves the magnetic field further from the strings and you loose volume. If made thin, the top of the cover might break or split.. Been there, done that.. no thank you.. have moved on.. NEXT!!

Single Cut? WHY? Structurally, I think it's a 'stupid' idea. With all the concern about even neck Bow and adjustability you are going to LOCK it down on the low sting side while the treble strings pull and twist it from the other side? Is this to create tension in the neck to produce sounds the builder couldn't get by just making a good structural sonic Bass?

I don't know who's idea this was actually but one time when I was fishing on a boat and all the other boats rushed to this splash in the water a few hundred yards away I asked my older friend, "Should we go over there and fish?" His reply was (in a wisdomish way) "One fool draws many!"

If someone can't make a Bass with good neck structure, stability and tonal response, try this? Not in my book!

And there you have it. It just doesn't get any clearer than that! Ken, you never disappoint. I wish I could have written that response.

[Bob Faulkner]

Well, he pretty much backed up every concern I had about wood covers on the pickups, and added a structural argument to backup my issues with the ergonomic and playability issues I had with single cut.

Works for me.

[Ronson Hall]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Ok, here I am. We made Wooden cases for the PUs in the beginning (1979-1983) BUT, moved away from that. The reason is that it moves the magnetic field further from the strings and you loose volume. If made thin, the top of the cover might break or split.. Been there, done that.. no thank you.. have moved on.. NEXT!!

Single Cut? WHY? Structurally, I think it's a 'stupid' idea. With all the concern about even neck Bow and adjustability you are going to LOCK it down on the low sting side while the treble strings pull and twist it from the other side? Is this to create tension in the neck to produce sounds the builder couldn't get by just making a good structural sonic Bass?

I don't know who's idea this was actually but one time when I was fishing on a boat and all the other boats rushed to this splash in the water a few hundred yards away I asked my older friend, "Should we go over there and fish?" His reply was (in a wisdomish way) "One fool draws many!"

If someone can't make a Bass with good neck structure, stability and tonal response, try this? Not in my book!

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I LOVE Ken Smith already! After examining many basses and custom bass web sites, words cannot express how glad I am that this gentleman is building my bass.

I plan on getting him to build me at least a couple more before I check out of here, Lord willing!

[Tim Bishop]

Originally Posted by Ronson Hall

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I LOVE Ken Smith already! After examining many basses and custom bass web sites, words cannot express how glad I am that this gentleman is building my bass.

I plan on getting him to build me at least a couple more before I check out of here, Lord willing!

Well now Albert, looks like Ronson has us covered. Bless his heart! One for me, one for you, and one for Ronson to take with him! Now everyone is happy!

[Ronson Hall]

Originally Posted by Tim Bishop

Well now Albert, looks like Ronson has us covered. Bless his heart! One for me, one for you, and one for Ronson to take with him! Now everyone is happy!

LOL!!! Tim, you are good, and quick on the draw! I should've known you'd put that deal together!

Well, seeing that turnabout is fair play, I see Our buddy Al has three, and you have waaaaaaaaaay more than three, so...we're all covered, huh?

[Roy Diza]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Ok, here I am. We made Wooden cases for the PUs in the beginning (1979-1983) BUT, moved away from that. The reason is that it moves the magnetic field further from the strings and you loose volume. If made thin, the top of the cover might break or split.. Been there, done that.. no thank you.. have moved on.. NEXT!!

Single Cut? WHY? Structurally, I think it's a 'stupid' idea. With all the concern about even neck Bow and adjustability you are going to LOCK it down on the low sting side while the treble strings pull and twist it from the other side? Is this to create tension in the neck to produce sounds the builder couldn't get by just making a good structural sonic Bass?

I don't know who's idea this was actually but one time when I was fishing on a boat and all the other boats rushed to this splash in the water a few hundred yards away I asked my older friend, "Should we go over there and fish?" His reply was (in a wisdomish way) "One fool draws many!"

If someone can't make a Bass with good neck structure, stability and tonal response, try this? Not in my book!

No BS, and to the point. Since you shot down the SC & wood PUPS ideas, I'm curious as to what's in the horizon for new designs. It's been almost ten years since the BSR was introduced, and I'm such a big fan of your basses, so it would be nice to see what's in store for us. So what in store for us ?

[Tim Bishop]

Originally Posted by Roy Diza

No BS, and to the point. Since you shot down the SC & wood PUPS ideas, I'm curious as to what's in the horizon for new designs. It's been almost ten years since the BSR was introduced, and I'm such a big fan of your basses, so it would be nice to see what's in store for us. So what in store for us ?

For me: I'm hopin more of the same! Why fix or change something that's not broken? I'm playing a BT5G from 1992. I can't think of a bass on the market today that compares, except perhaps the latest Smith Fusion Elite 25th. Anniversary model. For me it's all about the feel, quality craftsmanship and sound.

Great question though! I'm looking forward to Ken's response. I'm sure I won't be surprised or disappointed.

[Roy Diza]

Originally Posted by Tim Bishop

For me: I'm hopin more of the same! Why fix or change something that's not broken? I'm playing a BT5G from 1992. I can't think of a bass on the market today that compares, except perhaps the latest Smith Fusion Elite 25th. Anniversary model. For me it's all about the feel, quality craftsmanship and sound.

Great question though! I'm looking forward to Ken's response. I'm sure I won't be surprised or disappointed.

I totally agree. His basses are true classics and timeless. Since he made so many innovations in the past, I'm curious to see what coming up. I've had 3 Ken Smith basses in the past, and all of them were great.