Older instruments sound better, ate this true and why

Ken, my apologies for dropping the "F" bomb in one of my previous posts on this thread I was just using those basses as an example. Smith basses are the best in the world in my opinion & I would never downplay them in any way. Aside from all, I respect the fact that you want to keep this section smith bass specific, my bad...I was just chatting bass & hadn't thought about that discussing other brands on this forum might not be prudent (being a bassist, you know how it is).

Best regards

Joshua phelps

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Joshua phelps

Ken, my apologies for dropping the "F" bomb in one of my previous posts on this thread I was just using those basses as an example. Smith basses are the best in the world in my opinion & I would never downplay them in any way. Aside from all, I respect the fact that you want to keep this section smith bass specific, my bad...I was just chatting bass & hadn't thought about that discussing other brands on this forum might not be prudent (being a bassist, you know how it is).

Best regards

Joshua phelps

No problem. Now that I have slightly amended the Thread, do you still have questions or comments?

[Ronen Tat]

Hi Ken,
To your opinion, for the sound to be changed over time, is there a need for strings to be vibrating on a bass?
Taking into account the time your neck and body blanks sit aside, waiting for their time, I would expect that by the time a bass is built the woods has already stabilized.
How significant would be the change in sound (over time, on a bass) with such woods?
Do certain woods tend to change in sound more than others?...

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Ronen Tat

Hi Ken,
1)To your opinion, for the sound to be changed over time, is there a need for strings to be vibrating on a bass?

2)Taking into account the time your neck and body blanks sit aside, waiting for their time, I would expect that by the time a bass is built the woods has already stabilized.

3)How significant would be the change in sound (over time, on a bass) with such woods?

4)Do certain woods tend to change in sound more than others?...

1, yes/no

2, yes but only as single pieces, not as a bass.

3, such woods? which woods?

4, maybe, not sure. Everything changes. Many things to consider.

[Ronen Tat]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

1, yes/no


3, such woods? which woods?

I meant your woods which has been sitting for a while, already cut and glued more or less to their final size (necks & bodies/wings), waiting to be assembled.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Ronen Tat

I meant your woods which has been sitting for a while, already cut and glued more or less to their final size (necks & bodies/wings), waiting to be assembled.

Most of the wood here is not glued yet. We do have quite a bot of wood glued up in neck and body parts and some of them do sit a long time but, sitting un-glued is aging as a piece of wood close to size. Glued up, the pieces get to adjust to each other. So, I think wood should age in Lumber, then cut parts and then in billets. Neck woods are much more crucial than body woods as far as stability goes. For tone, the longer the better I feel in all stages.

Here is a new factory Tour photo array done by my friend Lou who visited this past weekend; http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...8027828&type=1

There is a 1980 k. smith #13 on eBay for 7k if anyone wants to try a vintage smith & let us know how it's aged

What type of glue do you guys use on smith basses? Is it similar to the 192 gram hide glue used on double basses?