Ou7shined

You could try a shim at the top of the heel (instead of the normal place at the bottom) to tilt the neck forward and allow more t/r adjustment. I use maple veneer but a piece of cardboard would work for you as a tester right now.

[quote name='billyapple' timestamp='1323671555' post='1465553'] The truss-rod provides an opposing tension to prevent the tension on the strings pulling the neck forward (forward bow). [b]If you remove the strings, over time the neck will have nothing to pull against and develop a back bow. Loosen off the nut, counting the turns anti clock-wise just until the nut turns freely. When putting the neck back on, turn the nut clock-wise the same number of turns when you took it off.[/b] [/quote] Sorry bud. This is a misconception. What is there to force a back bow? Without the strings the wood is simply relaxed into it's natural position. That's not to say it can't happen (caused say by humidity etc) but 99% of the time it won't. As for counting the turns - every set up, height adjustment or new set of string etc requires a different t/r setting, slackening it off then putting it back to where it was will only give you a ballpark setting and even then it might be way off.

[quote name='LawrenceH' timestamp='1323649533' post='1465512'] Surely a Squier factory finish is going to be 2-part polyester or something equally inert? A new finish might even be more likely to react with any filler than the poly coat. I'd suggest keying a small bit of the original and spraying just that to check for good adherence and compatibility - stripping the whole lot off and getting a new flat black undercoat is a lot of work only to get you back to where it started. [/quote] Horses for courses. I prefer to do the job right so I have no hesitation in taking it down to the grain filler (which is the subdermal level so there's no point going any deeper - unless you actually want to change the shape of the body.. even by a few mil). It's not so hard and after you've done it a few times you get your technique down. Test for compatibility by all mean but be prepared to wait months for conclusive results and/or wait to be disappointed as your new finish refuses to permanently bond with the factory finish.

[quote name='99mustang' timestamp='1323605131' post='1464840'] ...Just out of interest, would I be best stripping the body to bare wood or just prep the current black to accept new paint. The paint i'm looking at suggests a black undercoat so it would save a lot of time plus money by painting over current finish. ..[/quote] It all depends on what you are painting it with and how compatible with the original finish it is. Personally I'd take back down to the grain filler level just to avoid any misshapes.

[quote name='KiOgon' timestamp='1323543158' post='1464480'] It's not likely to make any difference IMO, I'd leave it as is, it's gonna need a real good setup when you've done - whatever. [/quote] Seconded.

[quote name='solo4652' timestamp='1323521199' post='1464150'] Aaah, right. It's not sounding too promising, is it. Just seen this, you see: [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fretless-Bass-made-Satellite-through-neck-construction-precision-pickup-/270871168697?pt=UK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV&hash=item3f112e06b9"]http://www.ebay.co.u...=item3f112e06b9[/url] [/quote] My brother had one back in our punk days.. it was f*cking atrocious in every possible way. This one doesn't look to be of the same rubbish ilk and is probably very upgradeable should you not like what it has to offer.

[quote name='Bloodaxe' timestamp='1323456484' post='1463671'] Why? Fender never used to: [url="http://www.curtisnovak.com/vintage/JazzBass59/"]http://www.curtisnov...age/JazzBass59/[/url] If the existing finish is sound, all it needs is a light sand to key the surface, a thorough degrease & then go straight over with the new colour. Black will obliterate any underlying colour very quickly - possibly in one pass. Pete. [/quote] That's all well and good if the existing finish and the proposed new finish are guaranteed to be compatible.

[quote name='Kye' timestamp='1323271870' post='1461369'] Haha love the description on this one! [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/180719370724"]http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/180719370724[/url]. [/quote] [quote] THIS PRODUCT HAS BEEN TRIED & TESTED BY MYSELF WITH VERY SATISFYING RESULTS [/quote] I hope he's washed it since then.

You might be ok but you really should check with Status first, you never know what they've got going on under there.

Must have had the r/w fretboard changed for a maple one at some point.

The cheeky answer is that it will fit all of them... provided you're willing to put in a bit of remedial work... ie sanding. The answer I'm sure you really want though is which body will it fit without doing anything to it. From what I've read Jim Deacon and SX basses are in fact one and the same. I have an SX P neck on a '78 Fender body and the fit is good. I can't offer any guarantees but I'd say the chances are good for the Jim Deacon.

I was guessing with the time of the year and all that this is a present for someone. If that's the case then second hand may not be desirable. I think we need a bit more info before we get bogged down with a gazillion confusingly different ideas... like, does this beginner have any musical or playing experience at all (might explain the overly high budget)?

For 1500 smackers you are looking at buying a bass and amplification well in excess of the needs of any beginner. Look for a top end Squier and a Roland bass cube practice amp and they'll be more than adequately catered for... should come to about £500.

Finding original parts is going to be a nightmare as EBMM do not sell spares meaning most MM basses tend to remain original. But you might find some cheapie bits and bobs [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=musicman+5&_sacat=0&_odkw=musicman&_osacat=0&_trksid=p3286.c0.m270.l1313"]here[/url].

That's badass!

These are kinda old dude.

I've tried Barts, SD's and Delanos MM pups in other basses with the Delanos coming out on tops. (not tried Nordys yet but I suspect they will be good) But the only other pup I put in my 'ray is another genuine MM pup.... a SUB pup. It's wired in series rather than parallel and offers a bit more balls (better than other brands in series I've tried - could be the magnets but I'm loathed to enter that particular discussion ). I've left it in so I must prefer it to the original (which is wrapped up safe and sound )

Good that you've got it working. About the buzz, could you have worn out the E slot in your nut? If you have there's not much you can do apart from replace it (there are bodges with superglue but I don't recommend them). You could try placing a very thin (< 0.5mm) bit of veneer under it but it may just open a whole new can of worms for you. Anyway, put a little Vaseline (or pencil lead dust - graphite) in the slot to help lubricate it and prevent any further wear.

[quote name='walbassist' timestamp='1323081777' post='1458905'] ....My choices, buying new, under £800, look like being: Standard P bass - £413 (with current rebate offer) Roger Waters P Bass - £583 50s P bass - £601 Deluxe Active P Bass Special - £647 American Special - £793 Any thoughts? ...[/quote] Does it have to say Fender on the head?