The bass I bought

[Eric Swanson]

It seems as if the largest difference between the sizing and proportions of the two basses is the depth of the ribs as they move up the bass and the bend location. The Hart's ribs seem to be closer to a consistent width, until they hit the "bend," my bass seems to taper more aggressively, starting at the bottom.

The Hart's bend looks higher up on the bass; just by eye, it would seem to have greater internal volume than my bass.

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

I think your measurements are that of an English Maggini type bass. Very similar to my Hart-Maggini in many areas measured.

Hungarian;---------------------------------------Hart;
Upper bouts are 20 ¾” wide.......................20 3/4"
Ribs are 8 1/4" at the bottom.....................7 7/8"
7 1/4" at the bend...................................tapering
5 3/8" at the neck heel.............................5 1/4"
Body length (to bottom of heel) is 44".........44 3/8" (Top to the tips)
Bottom bout is 26" wide............................26 1/8"
String length is 41 5/8".............................41 3/4"

The Hungarian and Romanians like most all others copied the Italians. In this case, the English made several Maggini/d'Salo copies in the latter 18th and early-mid 19th centuries. My Hart is most likely a forgery of a Maggini or antiqued to look old for marketing when it was new. Your bass is a copy of the copies or something Italian that came from Maggini as well.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Eric Swanson

It seems as if the largest difference between the sizing and proportions of the two basses is the depth of the ribs as they move up the bass and the bend location. The Hart's ribs seem to be closer to a consistent width, until they hit the "bend," my bass seems to taper more aggressively, starting at the bottom.

The Hart's bend looks higher up on the bass; just by eye, it would seem to have greater internal volume than my bass.

The Dragonetti d'Salo is like that as well, bent high up. Most basses are bent further down with a shallower angle. There is nothing shy about this bend. Dragonetti being in London at this period with his bass I am sure was an influence. The few Maggini and d'Salo basses I have seen look similar with the bend quite high. It keeps the upper bout as full as possible and then just below the block, it angles in to the neck. I like it.

[Eric Swanson]

I know a tiny bit about some of the restorations that Ken has sponsored and made happen, and the many basses he has brought back to life. I certainly don't know all of the stories; I know he has given a lot of work to several luthiers and made a lot of basses sing better than ever before.

Ken currently has an expose thread going about the cheesy, illegal, and unscrupulous things that a few luthiers have done. Its good information to have out there, to be sure.

Does anybody have positive, successful, major rebuild stories about their basses to share? With either a modest bass (like mine) or some of the less modest instruments that many of you have?

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Eric Swanson

I know a tiny bit about some of the restorations that Ken has sponsored and made happen, and the many basses he has brought back to life. I certainly don't know all of the stories; I know he has given a lot of work to several luthiers and made a lot of basses sing better than ever before.

Ken currently has an expose thread going about the cheesy, illegal, and unscrupulous things that a few luthiers have done. Its good information to have out there, to be sure.

Does anybody have positive, successful, major rebuild stories about their basses to share? With either a modest bass (like mine) or some of the less modest instruments that many of you have?

I think this would be a good topic for a new Thread in the Luthier section.

Not all work is bad. Most is usually good. It's the bad that people often don't notice until it's too late. A Thread on the positive with more common basses would be a welcome addition for sure.

[Eric Swanson]

Interesting couple weeks of end pin experimentation.

I needed a large diameter endpin because of my height and pin extension, and I like the positive locking of the New Harmony endpin mechanism, but the carbon fiber pin killed the punch and bloom in the low end.

In the past week, I experimented with .5 inch steel rod and pipe, then the steel pipe filled with various filler rods (steel, brass, etc., wrapped with tape in three places, so that they didn't rattle), to experiment with different masses.

Lots of A/B/C'ing...

My strongest preference, right now, is the solid .5 inch steel rod. The room-filling bottom is back. On the other hand, every option has its characteristic sound and feel. I find myself using different pins for different playing situations. Was playing duets with sax the other night and the hollow tube worked best. The sax player and I were both messing around between sets; him with his reeds, me with my endpin...

Interesting process and experiment. It confirms a post I read by Arnold Schnitzer, saying he had experienced the same thing when he removed the steel pin on another bass. When he replaced the steel, the sound returned.

It is also interesting to note that in the Chuck Traeger book, he is adamant about always using a wood or carbon fiber pin. I found the opposite to be true, in this case. The light pins caused the sound to dissipate and have no "center" or punch; the steel makes my bass louder, punchier, and fuller.

[Greg Clinkingbeard]

Interesting stuff.
When I bought my bass a year ago, it had a heavy steel end pin and I had it switched out for a carbon fiber. I also had them change the strings and a different tailpiece so I dunno what effect the lighter end pin made. Mainly, I wanted to lighten the load.
The bass sounds great with a big, resonant tone but it does lack that really centered powerful low end. That is, until I remove the rubber tip and stick the point in the floor. It's like the E string grows some cajones. I suppose I could try a 14mm steel rod but that would add a bit of weight.
Prolly should just learn that new tune for tomorrow's gig.

[Eric Swanson]

Continuing the endpin experimentation. Probably going to try stainlesss steel rod and brass rod first, maybe titanium rod, and probably some home-brewed, multi-layer brass tube + carbon fiber or stainless or titanium core.

I have clearly lost my mind, but then, who would notice? I am truly amazed at how differently the bass responds and sounds with various materials. I think that it is a further testament to the work Jed did that the bass itself is so transparent and responsive that the endpin makes such a difference.

Interesting website with (somewhat cryptic graphics) but interesting endpin notes and options (mostly for cello, but some bass). I have emailed some with the owner Mike Oishi, who has been great in his endpin-related thoughtfulness. He gave me info on a place that would custom make me a .5" pin, of any metal combination I wanted, but he encouraged me to experiment on my own, as a less costly option. Far down, on the endpin descriptions, he mentions Gary Karr currently using a brass and carbon fiber combo rod on his Ham bass:

http://frenchcellobow.com/products/endpin.html

(bass endpins are at the bottom of the page)

Plus here is a nice, easy, online metals source I just found, through my work (for rod and seamless tubing):

www.onlinemetals.com

[Paul Warburton]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

The Dragonetti d'Salo is like that as well, bent high up. Most basses are bent further down with a shallower angle. There is nothing shy about this bend. Dragonetti being in London at this period with his bass I am sure was an influence. The few Maggini and d'Salo basses I have seen look similar with the bend quite high. It keeps the upper bout as full as possible and then just below the block, it angles in to the neck. I like it.

Me too.
(Hey, Kenny).

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

Me too.
(Hey, Kenny).

(Hey, Paul).