Andyjr1515

I see where your original question comes from @Reggaebass . The link that @PlungerModerno includes above say that pre-1984 Rics need the neck to be physically bent and then the truss rod nut tightened to hold it in that bend. In reality, the rod will be doing exactly the same thing but simply will not be physically capable of actually moving the neck by itself, but nevertheless is strong enough to hold it there once the bend has been induced. For completeness, I'll see if I can find a few photos that illustrate the two truss rod types. And while all that is going on, hopefully @Geddys nose 's neck is gradually assuming its original shape

I've never worked on a Ric but I know their trussrods are a bit unusual (I think the lefty loosy, righty tighty is reversed?). But of the two physical principles used: - one is where the rod independently curves one way or the other based on the nut adjustment (typical of a modern two-way rod) and the neck simply follows the curve of the rod - the other is where the rod is clamped either end to the internals of the neck and shortening the rod 'pulls' the headstock towards the back of the heel (typical of a traditional one-way rod) - in both cases, the strings are trying to 'pull' the headstock towards the bridge

If you envisage the strings at the top of the neck pulling the neck in a bow shape as tightening the tuners make them shorter, the single action truss rod is doing the same at the back of the neck as the nut is tightened, making the trussrod shorter. I'll try to get a moment to draw a picture tomorrow.

Do you mean in normal use or to solve @Geddys nose's problem?

No - not quite. The strings pull the neck into a bow and arrow kind of bow - and the trussrod's job is to counteract that by trying to pull it into a backbow. If the two tensions balance, then the neck ends up straight. So if the truss rod has been left in its tightened state, but the strings are left slack, then the neck will indeed take on a back bow. Left too long like that and the back bow sort of sets into the wood. So if @Geddys nose does the opposite - leaving the trussrod loose but tightening the strings, then the strings will pull the neck into a bow and arrow forward bow. The plan is, if he leaves it like that for a while, then the back bow set into the wood will be corrected and the neck will be straightish when neither the truss rod nor the strings are tightened. That's the hope, anyway

OK I've just had a quick look at Ben's videos using the same products and it is very similar to the stain/tru-oil processes that a number of us use. The thing I am certain about is that you won't want to sand it right now in its dry stained form - you will sand down to bare wood or lighter wood far too quickly. My method starts in much the same place as Ben's but might be different after the first couple of coats of oil. So I suggest that you follow Ben's method, which is now to go straight to the finishing oil. If you get to where you want to be with just that method, then that would be brilliant - and let us all know . If you get to where you are happy with the basic finish and colour but find the surface a bit rough then I can give you some suggestions of the options to retain the finish but make it smoother to the touch if that is any help

What I meant was what final finishing coating are you putting on it?

Yes - it sounds like either the truss rod has been overtightened in the past, or maybe tightened properly but then the strings left slack or removed for a longish time and the wood has eventually taken on some of that shape. There are more dramatic ways of sorting this, but often the same process is reversible by broadly doing what you are doing...but it will take time. So, if you have the time, I would go for thicker strings as @Supernaut says, and tuning up two semitones as @PlungerModerno says with the truss rod completely slack and leave it for at least a week then see if it gets you where you want it, because flat is very, very close to where it needs to end up and so it won't take a lot to give just that smidgen of relief...

I wouldn't buff it with sandpaper. The depth that stains go to is VERY low and so any sanding will quickly expose the wood again. But there are ways to get you where you want to get. I have a method I can recommend for certain finishes - what finish are you planning?

Don't judge the colour by how it looks when it's dry - particularly reds. The colour it will end up once the final finish is on it will be roughly the same as it looks when it is damp - so quite a bit darker than the 'dry stained' look. You should find that the pinkiness goes away too. Looks good! What stain have you used?

That would look very good

That looks very nice

Wow! (again)

Ah - OK. Mind you, you could always inset an ebony triangle... Anyway - it's going to look fab whatever

Lovely! Weird, though...no doors or table-tops yet as far as I can see. Presumably next time MrsJabba_the_gut goes out for her 30minute exercise walk you'll get the kitchen door off and planed down before she gets back?

Hmmm...not sure I understand that. The fanned frets don't affect the string spacing and so, as long as the Nova clamp is square to the strings rather than to the zero fret/nut (like on the string retainer on your original drawing below), then it should work fine... Incidentally, we did something similar on @TheGreek 's Psilos bass - just because it has a headless tuner system doesn't mean that it needs to be headless

A very good move

Wow. Magical.

With all three switched on, I reckon you will pretty much answer your original question with this

I've spent the last couple of days sorting out the oak, cutting the maple neck splices and getting all of the mating surfaces flat and straight: And on order from David Dyke are the two walnut splices, a purpleheart splice for the middle, some more purpleheart to use as the back/top demarcation and a 5-string AAA ebony fretboard blank

Remarkable!

It's beautiful, isn't it.

ACG's are the bass builders basses... Alan picks magnificent woods and transforms them into something that defies the 'form or function' clash to produce something that optimises both. It will be lovely.

Yup - count me in too

@Hellzero is quite right. As long as the neck heel is fitted to be properly against the back of the pocket it's the 'lift' you need to bolt against. Do you remember this one - I fitted a neck to one of @eude 's schooldays (?) projects. It was the shortest pocket I ever did (by necessity) - and it was a 6 string bass! The pocket was even shorter than @benh 's present one: For that, because I had no idea really what extra pull forces might be on a sixer, and the floor of the pocket itself wasn't all that thick, I went belt and braces and fitted an unglued dry biscuit joint into the front join area: It held fine and, to be honest, I think it would have been OK with just the bolts: So, @benh - best to extend the fretboard a touch in any case, as much for the 24th fret security as anything, and the resulting neck pocket should be perfectly adequate