Show your Extensions!

[Robert Anzellotti]

Originally Posted by Arnold Schnitzer

OK, I'll join the fray. Rob, I think your capos are a good second choice for making an extension chromatic. If they were the best thing out there, you'd see Robertson's, Mario Lamarre, Dan Hachez, Jeff Bollbach, Robbie McIntosh and me using them exclusively. I do use your capos on occasion when retro-fitting an existing extension or when a player needs to economize. But I prefer ebony for its aesthetics and feel. If you made brackets that looked as pretty as your current ones, that worked with standard 1/4 x 20 hardware, and they stood off a bit more, I would buy them. I believe there is a place for both pre-made capos and custom ones. Ken has an opinion that you don't like, but the world is full of people who disagree yet get along.

Well, Geez! why didn't you say so before? I'd be happy to make some mounts to fit your needs. I agree that there are advantages to wood fingers. They can be shaped artistically to fit a particular bass, and even a special wood or finish chosen. There are those like Ken who simply prefer a larger surface for finger contact, and some people want a tail so they can have thumb operation. I designed my fingers to be simple, compact, unobtrusive, and universal. It's impractical for me to offer too many options, and I can keep my price low by offering only the single design in two lengths.

Many bassists and luthiers are happy with my finger design (otherwise I wouldn't be in business!) but I realize that this doesn't fit everyone's needs. For them, I encourage the use of wood fingers, which can be easily mated with my mounting hardware. I am happy to sell the brackets by themselves, so the luthier can go wild making the fingers, and not have to worry about machining.

One final note. I use the slightly larger stud because it is not only more stable, but allows for my "internal brake" which eliminates the need for a locknut for resistance adjustment. Also, the threaded approach makes for simpler height adjustment. This makes the assembly simpler (fewer parts), lighter, more reliable, and easier to install than with the traditional approach. I think that these innovations are a step forward on the design side, but I conceed that it also makes later resistance adjustments more difficult. I am no fundamentalist. Arnold, if you want a bracket with a 1/4" thru hole and appropriate races for washers, I'd be happy to accommodate you! Let's talk.

[Arnold Schnitzer]

Originally Posted by Robert Anzellotti

Well, Geez! why didn't you say so before? I'd be happy to make some mounts to fit your needs. I agree that there are advantages to wood fingers. They can be shaped artistically to fit a particular bass, and even a special wood or finish chosen. There are those like Ken who simply prefer a larger surface for finger contact, and some people want a tail so they can have thumb operation. I designed my fingers to be simple, compact, unobtrusive, and universal. It's impractical for me to offer too many options, and I can keep my price low by offering only the single design in two lengths.

Many bassists and luthiers are happy with my finger design (otherwise I wouldn't be in business!) but I realize that this doesn't fit everyone's needs. For them, I encourage the use of wood fingers, which can be easily mated with my mounting hardware. I am happy to sell the brackets by themselves, so the luthier can go wild making the fingers, and not have to worry about machining.

One final note. I use the slightly larger stud because it is not only more stable, but allows for my "internal brake" which eliminates the need for a locknut for resistance adjustment. Also, the threaded approach makes for simpler height adjustment. This makes the assembly simpler (fewer parts), lighter, more reliable, and easier to install than with the traditional approach. I think that these innovations are a step forward on the design side, but I conceed that it also makes later resistance adjustments more difficult. I am no fundamentalist. Arnold, if you want a bracket with a 1/4" thru hole and appropriate races for washers, I'd be happy to accommodate you! Let's talk.

Good stuff, Rob. I agree with you that the bracket should be threaded. One other thing I've been doing is using small machine screws to mount the brackets. It's a pain in the butt drilling and tapping all those holes in the ebony, but the excellent hold makes it worthwhile.

[Vince Jesse]

The manufacturing industry in the United States is dying. If someone in the U.S. has an idea for any musical instrument related product I suggest that we keep all aspects of production right here in the USA. And have it made locally.

When I designed my "capos" it was about five years ago, before I had even looked at Mr. Anzellotti's. None of these designs are a novel concept, just a proven style of adjustable bracket found on all types of assemblies for hundreds or thousands of years. I was asked to come up with something to install on extensions with poorly functioning stops. It seems like mine ended up being a similar concept but easier and cheaper to make. If you have files, a few drills, taps and a drill press you could make them. Also, the standoff distance or bracket width is adjustable - simply disassemble the two brass parts, belt sand until you have the dimension that works then re polish.

I like the idea of an adjustable, easy to mount bracket. It just makes sense in many ways. With that said I think ebony fingers are much more comfortable and allow an individual, artistic touch. Kind of like decorating a bridge.

Arguing about who's capos are most attractive is pretty dumb. I'd say a more important question is do you want to be at the mercy of someone else's product or design? No, you don't.

[Arnold Schnitzer]

Originally Posted by Vince Jesse

The manufacturing industry in the United States is dying.

If that were completely true, this forum would not exist. But the gist of your sentence is on the money. I want to know who were the "geniuses" who decided that America could have a vibrant economy without anyone making much of anything? Did they really think we could all just swap information and loans and that this would somehow lead us down a positive economic path? (Sorry for the thread derail.)

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Arnold Schnitzer

If that were completely true, this forum would not exist. But the gist of your sentence is on the money. I want to know who were the "geniuses" who decided that America could have a vibrant economy without anyone making much of anything? Did they really think we could all just swap information and loans and that this would somehow lead us down a positive economic path? (Sorry for the thread derail.)

Arnold, it's the physical labor that keeps it afloat. 'Paper pushing'!

No, let's talk about 'FINE' tuning the extension Capos. Rob mentioned his full turn measurement (1/24th of an inch) which is just a tad over .040" (1 div. by 24). That is nearly a 'G' string in height. WAY, way too crude for my taste. I can adjust my Capos with the top screw and back nut just a tweak as the leather settles or if I change gauges of strings. If I use an Original Flatchrome at almost .110, or a Flex Stark at .106 or a regular Flex 92 e/c at .102 I can tweak the tension just right. That would be 1/10th the need adjustment from .106" to .102" which is .004", not .040". HUGE difference. Turning a screw 10x what you need is NOT a fine adjustment in my book. Not even close. Sorry!

Some people just get used to what they have. Once you have seen the other side of the road, you may not go back.

[Ken Smith]

The Manuf. in USA Rants are to be discussed in the Bull Pit. I moved one post here to the 'Pit.

If it's not about 'Show Your Extensions', then post it where it belongs.

[Vince Jesse]

Hi guys. I installed another C extension and would like to show it around here. This time I benefited from earlier experimentation and I'd like to think this one is a bit more refined. No need for the bottom of the extension to be flat and straight for the thumb because the side rail takes care of that duty.

Thoughts?

[Ken Smith]

Side rail? Interesting. I wouldn't screw someing like that into my Scrolls but I can see the sharp gear edges can get painful. Practice Beethoven 6th's storm movement on the Extension, the individual 16ths and you will see with each bass what needs to be done. You can even buff the edges of the gears to get the sharp edges softened. One old bass gears, many of them are worn and smooth by now. My Tarr is very smooth now.

Speaking of the Tarr, the page isn't up yet but I have some pics. They are dark and I will probably re-take them or lighten them up for the page but here's a look at the Extension Arnold made for it;



The fit of the Extension and String on and around the Scroll was a challenge on this being that the face of the head is so thin. Arnold made it work both artistically and structurally as well.

[Vince Jesse]

The rail was there before I got there but the owner of the bass makes great use of it.

As I finished this one up I was thinking about how much work these are. Very challenging. - they have to function well and be beautiful to look at.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Vince Jesse

The rail was there before I got there but the owner of the bass makes great use of it.

As I finished this one up I was thinking about how much work these are. Very challenging. - they have to function well and be beautiful to look at.

Yes, she has to have looks and brains..

[Scott Pope]

And now for something completely different: I understand that C extensions have to be what they are when converting a standard bass.

BUT -- they do seem unwieldy. Now, regarding new construction, or in the event a bass has had its pegbox and/or scroll mangled to the point of having to be rebuilt anyway, and there is no historical reason to simply copy what was there, has anybody designed or executed 1+3 pegbox with the extension and stops integrated into the overall design and scroll, and not just as an add-on?

[Eric Hochberg]

^^^ http://www.lamario.ca/extension.php?lang=english