Andyjr1515

[quote name='rubis' timestamp='1385155251' post='2285232'] Nice, like that little unstained stripe around the edge [/quote] Thanks - it worked quite well. Just masked a thin strip with a car self-stick 'go-faster-stripe' from Halfords when I was inking the top.

This is my latest build. It's a thru-neck SG built for our old-gits-band's bassist, Pete. Mahogany back, Burl Maple top, Mahogany/Walnut/Mahogany neck, Ebony fingerboard and Ebony headstock plate with mother of pearl inlay. The colour is red calligraphy ink. P/Ups are Tonerider Classic IV's. Passed it across to Pete a couple of weeks ago - he's well chuffed with it. Thanks for looking:

[quote name='redbandit599' timestamp='1384333394' post='2275261'] My guitarist mate has just told me he's got a tele on the way. Doesn't look any smaller to me! But then as long as he's happy. Seems to be a few others that are interested in this thread so thanks for contributing ideas (some even made me fancy a skinny stringer.) Jason [/quote] Well that was a bit of a surprise!!!! , Just how big we're the other ones he was looking at?? Were they guitars or double basses? :-)

Incidentally, this is what it looked like stripped down at the back. Decent bit of wood for a sub-£200 bass that was intended to be covered up with paint...

[quote name='Rubbersoul' timestamp='1380830942' post='2231366'] Is it worth it and if so what would you recommend? [/quote] Hi Yes - definitely. The GSR200 is a great bass and should do you nicely for many a gig. The thing about good manufacturers who sell under their own brand from entry level to professional, is that they can't afford to sell a dud...the danger of that tainting the reputation of their more expensive models is too great. Therefore often the entry models are simply down-spec'd but with the same quality of build as the better models. As such, you can often get to mid range performance just by upping the harware, p/ups, etc.. The wood they use is sometimes lighter than their upper range (I used to feel the slight vibration of the strings through the body on my GSR200) but again, good quality. This is what I did to mine... As it happens, this time I left all the hardware and p/ups as stock. Eventually, I sold it to a Nepalese Buddhist who played bass in a Heavy Metal band...it has to be said that's a bit of a niche market Andy

This is looking great. Splendid choice of neck...

[quote name='walbassist' timestamp='1380312690' post='2223806'] Yep, that sounds way too high to me. How low is the nut cut? Fretless basses can have the strings actually touching the 'board at the nut.... it's all about the relief! [/quote] Yes - and +1 to this

Have a look at the Warwick 'Just a Nut' It's cheap and micro-adjustable. For the Jack Bruce Special tribute I built, I set the strings [b]just[/b] touching the fretboard.

[quote name='Billy Apple' timestamp='1380224462' post='2222618'] What I was thinking was when I do get moved and settled I might indeed get another neck.. and do a new build entirely! I've got an idea to go completely in the opposite direction from the La Cab, and do one with loads of bling! Consider my re-profiling not proceeding, but if anyone has had it done, do tell? [/quote] I've re-profiled necks a number of times, especially my own. If the neck doesn't feel right, it niggles me and I find I have to do something about it. Saying that, all the disasters you talked about at the beginning can happen but, done properly, most rarely do. The main reason for this is that usually, it is more subtle changes that make the difference. The biggest challenge is matching the finish colour...pretty near impossible unless you get an experienced builder involved and, as the others say, it would then be as cheap to buy a new neck. However, it is the back of the neck that gets altered and does it really matter if there is a slight shade difference? The breakthrough problem is only going to happen if you REALLY slim the neck down...and by then it would be also unstable. Bear in mind that the truss rod, etc, is going to be in exactly the same place for whatever profile the supplier supplies - so as long as you are not going outside the dimensions already offered, then it is exceptionally unlikely to happen. The easiest fix to get rid of the 'chunky' feel is to take some material off either side rather than the actual depth, turning it into a soft 'V' profile. This will, in my personal experience, do almost nothing to impact adversely two of the issues you quote - breakthough, instability. It is, incidentally, a great profile shape that has moved out of fashion for totally inexplicable reasons. However, having said all the above, if you want the neck to look as pristine and even-coloured as when first received in the post, like the others say, probably easiest to buy a new neck and flog this one. Hope this helps

The body looks great. Bodes well for a corker :-) Andy

Looks really, really good :-)

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1377211064' post='2184975'] Nearly down to all the wood. Just got the top face to do. Will i have to sand it with a fine sandpaper before i spray a primer? Just ordered this bridge for it. [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/schaller_3d5_b.htm"]http://www.thomann.de/gb/schaller_3d5_b.htm[/url] [/quote] Yes - I sand it first with coarse (c 80 grit) then wet it with a squeezed out cloth - this reveals the scrapes and dings. Repeat until all the scrapes and dings are gone, then sand progressively down to around 400 grit. It should then prime well and flaw-free.

This is looking really smart. These kind of refurbish are a lot of work but often produce very nice results. Andy

[quote name='neepheid' timestamp='1375914531' post='2167510'] Sorry, it completely slipped my mind. The switch I linked has 4 terminals, 3 in a row and one on the edge of the case. I've labelled them like so: 1 = neck pickup hot 2 = output from switch (goes to volume pot) 3 = bridge pickup ground 4 = neck pickup ground AND bridge pickup hot Hope that helps, and sorry for not doing this when I said I would. [/quote] I don't know this switch, but I think the normal config would have the bridge hot at 3 and bridge ground at 4. This should avoid the bridge signal cancelling out the neck signal in the middle switch position.

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1374168860' post='2146100'] I was just wondering. Does it matter how far behind the saddle the pins are? [/quote] Hi Myke It makes a difference to the bridge 'break angle' - the angle between the horizontal string in front of the saddle and the string end behind it. This in turn affects the down force on the saddle and therefore affects directly the transmission of vibrations to the soundboard. The general rule is that the pins are close to the saddle, but this means filing relief slots in front of the pins to prevent kinking the string ends. Do a google or YouTube search on acoustic bridges and you will find loads of photos and articles on this. Andy

By the way, ref good woods for bending, etc, I can recommend walnut, I am told mahogany is also good but I understand that rosewood can be a pig. There's some decent summaries here: [url="http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm"]http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm[/url] Andy

I tend to agree with Henry on this one, Myke. You might end up buying another couple of extra sides, but solid wood behaves so differently to ply, I think you are best starting as you mean to continue...that is, with real wood. I think you've seen this but the attached [url="http://www.ajrguitarmods.co.uk/swift%20iv%20acoustic.htm"]http://www.ajrguitarmods.co.uk/swift%20iv%20acoustic.htm[/url] was my very first attempt at an acoustic anything and it worked out just fine. It just needs some careful thought before each action, lots of looking at YouTube clips and not being afraid to ask the clever folks here for guidance This is a great forum for the latter Andy

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373315426' post='2136135'] Well I'm glad you think so! Unfortunately it seems to be a slow starter as I can't find any plywood thin enough and I don't have a planing machine (not sure you can plane plywood, as it's made of layers) the thinnest available near me is 3.6mm. I may be able to get 1.5mm, if they can order it in, but that may still be too thick? [/quote] Hi, Myke Never made a bass uke but I doubt that you want to be thinner than 1.5mm... Most Ukes seem to be between 1.6mm and 2.5mm so I am sure a bass would be no thinner (and probably the upper end of that range). An acoustic guitar comes out at around 2.4mm and (I gather from the attached link) that a bass uke is similar or same scale length as a 3/4 size classical. I'm sure you can get some 2mm ply from the internet but why not go for the real thing - mahogany? It usually comes thicker so you have to plane / sand / scrape it down, or the attached idea is no bad approach - start with a second hand 3/4 classical: [url="http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-Bass-Uke/"]http://www.instructa...d/DIY-Bass-Uke/[/url] 3/4 classical guitars are usually bought for younger musicians who either abandon or grow out of them - very cheap good ones can often be seen on ebay or gumtree. The advantage is that the wood will already be the correct thickness, there or thereabouts Andy

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373312093' post='2136068'] I probably will to be honest. Well it's not that interesting. I have a ukulele at home which I am always using the two high strings (E and A) to jam on. So since I can't afford a Kala U-Bass I decided to build one. At the moment I'm trying to find a bit of thin plywood to build a prototype on and I'm not sure what woods to use yet. So essentially a U-Bass. [/quote] Sounds pretty interesting to me, Myke! I think any acoustic, uke or otherwise, requires such a steep learning curve and the results can be hugely impressive and satisfying Andy

[quote name='KingBollock' timestamp='1373058269' post='2133407'] Yeah, I spotted that after I pressed post. I know all too well about intonating a bass right now. I have been making new saddles for my bridge and I have spent a lot of time messing about getting it just right. The stupid bridge is designed in such a way that once you've got the intonation right you have to remove the string to get at the grub screw that clamps the saddle in place. Making the saddles is a damned fiddly job, too. They're 12mm x 6mm x 4mm yet each one is taking over an hour to make! Tapping M3 holes is a pain in the bum and I've already broken one tap, another and I'll have to buy a new set. And the saddles are so small that I can't wear my gloves when making them, so until I've nearly done and can file and sand the sharp little edges off them they're bloomin' painful to work with. Fortunately I am a pick player because otherwise I wouldn't be able to play with my right hand right now because the tips are shredded. [/quote] I think you are very brave making your own saddles in the first place! Hope your fingers recover soon...

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373058911' post='2133414'] So compensating it is just filing it down to get the innotation bang on? [/quote] Yes - exactly. On a standard electric or bass bridge, you can move the saddles forwards or backwards until it's just right. On a fixed bridge, it has to be pretty much in the right place to start with and then the only extra is filing so the 'peak' of the saddle is further forward or backwards for that particular string. With a bass, the basic position and then the angle (top G string shorter, bottom E string longer) is very important if you are using a fixed bridge but the extra tweaking around the width of the bone saddle would be pretty much imperceptible to our ears

[quote name='Greggo' timestamp='1372968554' post='2132335'] Is the string tension generally a bit higher on a straighter neck? [/quote] No - a bit like a stratocaster floating bridge, the bend on the neck is balanced against the string tension so is in equilibrium at a certain pitch. However. the distance you have to press the string is different depending on the straightness of the neck and that affects both the probability of fret buzzes and also the feel of the bass.

[quote name='KingBollock' timestamp='1373056102' post='2133369'] It might just be the light, but that second (straight) bridge looks compensated. Like the second one here: I have one similar to the third one on my Spanish style acoustic guitar. It might be worth considering. [/quote] Actually, if you look closely, the top picture in the original post is also compensated (2nd string filed so the string is at the back of the saddle, etc) The trouble is, the saddle only gives you 1-1.5mm difference, and you need at least 3mm basic difference (just look at the saddle positions on a well-intonated standard bass or 6 string and put a rule along the mean) and then each string is a little bit forward or back from that - so generally the better acoustics have an angled saddle AND a compensated bridge. I know it defies logic, but when did our guitars do anything different

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1373051334' post='2133309'] That's amazing thank you! [/quote] No probs. I've just had a peep at the calculator - for bass it just gives one measurement for the bridge because it assumes the saddles are adjustable. Have a peep at the acoustic (6 string) option - it gives the top E position and the bottom E position and you can see the difference, hence the angle - this will be much the same for a bass and the calculator will work for any scale length

Hi Yes - you need an angle one way or another (an angled bridge or angle the bridge) or you really won't be in tune on the upper notes. Also, the bridge is set a few mm back from the scale length (yes, I know - it's weird). On the Stewmac website there's a calculator which you put in the scale length, etc, and it will tell you EXACTLY how many mm from the nut the bridge needs to be each side of the fretboard, including therefore the extra mm on the bass side to get the required angle. Hope this helps Andy