PlungerModerno

Are you sure that's not a mirror finish?

Will it be a bass with 3 strings per course (like a 12 string with a low B course) or will it be a bass with 5 strings per course, kinda like this: but with 5 string courses (maybe a ADG tuning, with 1 bass string per course, then 2 guitar strings tuned an octave up per course, then 2 more much lighter guitar strings tuned 2 octaves up per course)? Either way it sounds wonderful, and a beast to play!

From https://www.east-uk.com/product/j-tone/ "In passive mode, the original jazz style bass is fully maintained since the signal path is a replica of those in the original Jazz." If it has the original signal path then it shouldn't buffer anything in passive mode, allowing for the normal VVT pickup loading if you choose that option. I'd send him an email if you're curious.

I think for a lot of players you're right, but I think having a very tiny extra bit of height is needed for some players, if they want the lowest overall action and hate any kind of buzz, I think a tiny bit is a good idea.

Now that is about as 80's as anything!

There's as many opinions on zero fret height as nut height. Unlike a nut where if you go too low and can break out the superglue and some bone dust or baking powder, adding height to a zero fret is not really practical. This is the advice I'd follow to dial it in gradually: Edit for clarity: I capo or hold the string against the 3rd fret, then gently fret the first fret to judge nut action. You can also use a couple of thin layers of paper or a feeler gauge to check/measure it. It helps to get it consistent across the strings.

I'd say give it a full setup, setting neck relief, string height and testing for high frets. Odds are you will need a shim or will have very high or worse very low saddle height screws poking yer hand. You can make or improvise all the tools you need to check except the hex keys. An old credit card can easily make a fret rocker and folded paper, thin guitar picks, and coins (you can easily find their thicknesses online) can stand in for feeler gauges.

+1 for not trying it as a first or even second project, a lot might go wrong. If you have a backup bass and can afford to lose the candidate neck or whole bass, I'd say experiment away if it's not a valuable bass to you.

A real understated look - I think this is a different custom, probably a BC Rich judging by the headstock.

Looks groovy, getting ASAT vibes with a real ACG twist in almost every way. Looks fresh and clean, subtle too with the grain peeking through.

Cool bass. It'd be a real shame to have to replace that neck or upset the fit & finish of that fingerboard to replace the truss rod. Did you establish it was a dual action rod? Hopefully it'll be stable enough and only need very occasional tweaks with a custom tool. If it does fully round and won't take any tools, you can try what @kodiakblair suggested, epoxying in an inner bolt with a hex head, the threading idea sounds like a good way to get a much stronger bond between the blot and the existing nut, but either way it sounds like any leakage or spillage of epoxy might create a seized truss rod A more temperamental and probably weaker solution but one that won't have the risk of seizing the truss rod with epoxy squeeze-out could be to get in there with a dremel tool or other grinder and carve one or more channels inside the existing nut for a key or keys, then drop in a bolt with a stout hex head that has similar keys loose or epoxied to the bolt, and just locktite it in place so it won't fall out. There are a lot of ways you could do this, the simplest I can think of is round channels and keys, so the bolt and nut look a bit like: Obviously on a smaller scale, you could use a panel pin or a piece of wire as a key, just has to be enough to resist the shearing forces when you try to adjust the rod. EDIT: Just saw the "TUNGSTEN" printed on the tap & die visual reference I posted. I wouldn't dream of trying to machine tungsten, even a little bolt, it'll eat everything but the hardest materials (carbides, diamonds etc.) for breakfast!

I count 7 strings! I think it's somebody's idea of a harp guitar.

I doubt it lol, I'm just throwing ideas out there. If you had good results with that pickup winder I'd say go back, as long as the prices aren't insane! I'd say don't be afraid to play around with the strings, you might find you prefer the tonestyler+flats.

Sounds grand. You can always make the pickup route bigger and fit a MM or other bigger humbucker later, or install a smaller form factor humbucker or humbuckers. I know Rickenbacker 4000 series basses have drop in Seymour Duncan replacement humbuckers, I think the '51 style pickups tend to be split coil or stacked coil style hum-cancelling pickups mostly. You would probably struggle to get it to sound close to an MM pickup if that was what you were after.

I never even thought of how to wire it, I just pictured flexible wires with a bit of slack! I was thinking of how to avoid the big hole in the top giving the "homemade" look of this: But like the man himself said, Guy Pratt, check out his lockdown licks thread here: It's kinda charming in it's own way.

Looks cool, definately not number 2 in the negative sense! The subtle grain on that maple cap is already nice, I imagine it'll look great with a clear or tinted finish. I am getting Ric "Mapleglo" vibes already. Personally, rather than a bridge pickup, I'd go for a grabber type sliding pair of '51 style single coils, but they'd both be split coils... or maybe take a leaf out of the Alembic book of tricks and wire in a dummy coil reverse wound to both singles... Now that I think of it, there's no way to easily adapt the grabber sliding "pickguard within a pickguard" to have two independently sliding pickups without leaving big gaps in the top.

Looks a bit rough to me!

Oh indeed. If that's Primus they're waking up from surgery or something. Primus are always fun to mock, they embrace it and let the innovative masterful musicianship make it's own case! Oh what joy! Sounds nothing like the record, but that's never what they're about, each show is a series of experiments on the theme of the record more than a miming or straightforward playing it verbatim.

I doubt you're on yer own even here, I think it can be awful when it's done badly or clashes in an arrangement. P.S. Primus sucks!

I know for the dual truss rod Rickenbackers, especially the older ones like the 4001's, many of those experienced with them advise something like that for general adjustments: http://www.rickenbacker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2752 http://www.rickresource.com/rrp/basstrussrods.html Using the truss rod to hold the neck in it's shape, rather than to adjust it's curvature.

Maybe it was set up years ago for high tension strings (e.g. James Jamerson Cables), then somebody switched out for lighter tension flats or rounds and didn't adjust it enough (or at all!) to back off all that unnecessary truss rod tension and quickly it developed a semi-permanent back bow. They may have increased the string height to permit some sort of playing at the first few frets. Might also have been used with alternate tunings with high tension, then switched back to concert pitch without proper setup. When the truss rod is way too tight or just loose, often the saddle height and other details have been neglected or messed with so it's anyones guess what happened & when.

Is the "convex bow" matching the upper neck in this diagram? I interpret what you're looking for in the strings is something to add more tension and add more relief/bow to the neck since it's a single action truss rod and can't be turned to force forward/concave/relief into the neck. I'd try tuning up beyond concert pitch a whole step or maybe more, depending on what happens and how confident I was in the hardware. It might not budge as much as you like with even very high tension strings.

Parallel is almost as loud as series in the upper frequencies, but much less thick in the middle and noticeably thinner in the lows to my ears. Both can sound great, just don't expect to be able to switch between them without tweaking EQ or volume and get the same level, unless the SIMS volume adjusting circuitry or something similar is employed: https://www.sims.guitars/pickups/super-quad

I'm curious as to how it would sound. Just to cover from the bridge to where the 24th fret would be on a long scale (34") bass would mean having a really wide pickup - 8" or 20⅓ cm. I think the SIMS design, especially if it's a pair (or triplets! 😎 ) or has been mounted on a sliding arrangement, grabber style or rail style, covers more options than most of us could shake a great variety of sticks and stick like objects at. I see the unusual and neat Atlansia Pegasus design, but on closer inspection it appears to just be a triple P, with a single string on each split instead of the usual pair ("just" I know lol). I think you'd need tiny mini pickups in an array like an LED array: Maybe internally constructed like a Wal pickup? To allow you to only use some of the coils. If it was like the above you'd have to just use the whole coil or nothing lol. I vote for a sliding pickup instead, save the wire and use smaller magnets or fewer magnets. It might be a neat experiment but it sounds like a massive waste of materials to me!