itu

I have read the whole story. My background in some research shouts me: we need absolute numbers instead of relative talk. So @Basso what thickness is thick, what is thin, where are the limits, and what is optimal? Or had Leo it right in the first place with his bass playing friends? Shall we move to scale lengths soon? So sorry, I forgot string spacing, gauge and material, # of strings, neck profiles et al. I think this discussion will last some time.

My hands are different than yours, my reach is different than yours. I still may - or not - like your bass' neck. You are lying. I have two abyssinians.

There's a certain mindset out there that makes people think that learning your tools will destroy all creativity, but I think, no, I know that it opens lots of new territories. Go further, or stay home.

T sells Göldö single bridges, and I think they allow tight spacing.

There are X-overs in pedal format, too, like Schalltechnik, KMA (Tyler), and Iron Ether (Divaricator). I think their use case is to put certain fx to a frequency limited loop. Your rack units are functional in line level signals. I think you could find something smaller meant for car stereos. They may be cheap as chips, but powering can be slightly complicated (12 volts). About the X-over frequency: the best way to find the right f is to do trials. I like 400 Hz with my fx board (chorus, flanger, fuzz...), but your amps may like something completely different.

Quality Alps pots, the system resembles bartolini, but this is just a hunch. bartolini preamps have had their name printed in the black box.

The rigid tear drop case has a V inside. Easy to recognize.

Specialites TA, but I got your joke...

Has your bass a preamp or is it only vol + tone? If there's a preamp, is it enough, or what do you need from the tone shaping? An example: you can have parametric one channel Artec, which is dirt cheap and then use practically any DI after it.

This is the material, I got a small piece from a friend of mine. He bought it from the manufacturer years ago: https://www.uddeholm.com/uk/en/products/alumec-89/ I only have a small machine and hand tools in my one car garage (no, there's no space): https://www.bernardo.at/en/metall/metallbearbeitung/bohr-und-frasmaschinen/bohr-und-frasmaschinen/kf-20-super.html If I need to do anything complicated or big, my friend has an Aciera (F3, maybe?). His three car workshop includes two CNCs and two 3D units among others. The string holder is attached to the neck with two 2" wood screws. They seemed to be sturdy enough. The crazy luthier wants to have some age old bone saddle, and I am interested in zero fret... you may get the idea of changing specs, do you... this will be solved during next week, I hope.

String holder is nearly ready. Some more shaping is still required. Alumec is one good material: threads are a breeze to make. Next big problem is the bridge, because the body is curved.

Alembic has the noise killing 3rd "pickup" in the middle. It does not produce any sound, but combined with either singlecoil acts like humbucker.

Take a look at Lesh's Ritter, too. At least I think that The eye of Horus had something to do with him: https://ritter-instruments.com/models.php

You can build your own step attenuators. You need rotary switches that are make-before-break, otherwise you'll have nasty clicks in your signal. Use metal foil resistors instead of noisy carbon ones. I may still have the equations somewhere. This probably has 6 dB steps.

Try Gus.

It was only you that answered my question in the first page, thanks a lot.

If you are sensitive to the material, a slight help may be the change to stainless steel (which also contains nickel, by the way). If you like light, try 40-95.

Exactly, and the mass means here a lot from physical point of view. Every shape has its resonance and nodes, and by changing the bridge you are tuning it with mass. You can make a simple test with a rod. Hit it and find its nodes. Put any mass anywhere to it and the situation changes. We did this in acoustic lectures, and I have analyzed some baseball bats in my work something like 15 years ago. Neck acts a bit like a rod, because it has (only) one end connected to a big mass (the bass body), but is far different from a string which is connected from both ends. Edit: I forgot to mention, that if the saddles move from side to side, your system is not stiff, and you will certainly loose something from the response. I have a Hipshot (?) bridge in my Genesis. Its really loose, and I had to insert metal sheets to stop the wobbling. I actually felt it in my fingers, and because of that found the issue.

I think you are referring to stiffness of the contact. If it's loose, you'll lose the string vibration to deformations. If your screws are tight, there's no difference between the bridges. But another thing is the mass. As the plate is light and the individual bridges are heavier, the tuning of the body changes, and you may hear the slight difference. Or not. Tuning of the body or the neck changes when the shape or the weight changes. The nodes may be in the same place (uniformal mass change), or move (some end of the shape changes). This means that a different neck may sound quite different. Don't get fooled by other changes you hear after the modification. New strings and clean instrument always sounds better...

Someone please, we need good news. Any news would be good, but hoping for the best.

Bourns makes MN-type blend in 250k and 500k. I have no info whether this is available with a switch. Could you use a tone with a switch? They are far more common.

That PanAm blue colour gives a hint... how about a simple Flight?

Many times. If you can open the cover, you can try to turn/bend the turning part and clean the track, but the easiest way is to change the pot to a new one.

(I didn't want to be exact and use degrees, just giving easy piano examples with simple numbers. But an excellent correction you have there.)