itu

Yes, I do, his Brown Bass is 30.75". But have you ever tried similar? It feels surprisingly long, as the strap is attached to the end of the fretboard (to the other side, though). If that had a 35" scale, even Stan the Man might have problems reaching the half position.

The wood itself is pretty cheap. It is a bit harder to find quality wood, that is dried for instrument building. Try Mad Inter and similar companies. Individual parts do not cost that much, but when you put everything together, the total cost may surprise you.

What is the issue with the Lakland? NTMB is there and coil tap is probably just a DPDT switch. The diagram also tells us that that the middle switch is done by adding a capacitors to the brown wire of the M pot via a switch (my guess: another DPDT). NTMB-L could be NTMB-Lakland, couldn't it?

I will. There is this Yahaya Allan Holdsworth unit that may be able to produce several delays, but the unit is rare and costs a fortune. Let's see...

The big (!) issue here is to produce delays that are short enough. As sound travels 340 m/s, and the dimensions of the double bass are quite small, the delay times have to be minute. These are very rough approximations: 1 ms = 1 ft 1.1 ms = 1.1 ft BBDs (bucket brigade delays) are able to go down to around 20 - 30 ms, and digital systems have certain latency. Latency can be "fixed" indirectly by cutting the direct signal. But: very long latency is not easy for the player if the direct signal is cut (and one signal is also lost). Has anyone played with a MIDI system which tries to detect the lowest notes through a pickup? It is really hard, like playing a pipe organ which has long latency. If the long latency is a problem - and it is with BBDs - a digital system may work better. If the latency is well under 10 ms, it is far easier to play through the effects system with the direct signal. Another problem is the amount of delays. One delay equals only one dimension. Double bass has many: thickness, length, width... With three delays it is possible to try to imitate only the first three reverberations of the main three dimensions. But this is a start...

Take a look at the Alembic Stanley Clarke signature model. If your hands are on a length-challenged side and you are shorter than 6 foot 10, the lowest notes are slightly hard to reach. I think that that "strap button @ 12th fret" is pretty common for a reason. I do agree that there is no singlecut that I like. It seems to be possible to make a singlecut, but I would love to see one that will stand time. Someone could do a serious project and refine the shape to something similar like how double bass looks like today.

https://bartolini.net/wiring-diagrams/

I am trying to imitate the first reverberations of a double bass, if this clarfies the amount of delays.

@All-X: which pots do you use, did you change them, too? VOL-VOL or VOL-blend? Which numbers you have there? Do you drive the amp with the same gain? Levels may differ quite some.

His work raised some debate when Bass Player put him to the cover of that magazine. Some people thought he can not be there, because he is not a pure or real (?) bassist. Some others thought that he happens to be a multi instrumentalist and his work is very good. I think many of his songs are fantastic. Bass playing is just one part of the whole picture. There were some bitter discussions about how he chose the members of the band, but that is long gone.

At least three is OK. There seem to be some limitations. Phone is certainly not the best interface to configure the unit, maybe small tweaks is doable. Have to learn more.

Tuners were packed well and they are in perfect order. Trusted seller.

I like @Doddy 's basics. There is one exception that I want to point out: If your first pedal is dependent on the (bass') signal impedance, try it as the first one. I have heard this myself many times with OD/dist/fuzz as well as with some compressors. I do admit that the compressors are not the first units in my boards. Compressor can flatten out the dynamics of the signal. You can drive the effects with a steady signal, when the comp is in the front. But you should try to listen to the effects when the comp is later in the chain. Your playing (signal peaks) affect the behaviour of the pedals. This may be good or bad depending on the effect (envelope, OD) and sometimes tracking (octaver, synth). As there are opinions about the signal level of the FX loop, it is one place to do trials. Some effects like the possibly higher levels, some don't. Go ahead, you shouldn't be able to break anything. If you love distortion, try a tiny bit of reverb after it.

3"? You can play and paddle with the same end result.

Can you use a tiny neodymium magnet to anchor the rattler to one place?

One BOSS pedal weighs around 1 lbs. 40 lbs is quite a lot! Your board will be good for heavy weight champions.

Can you describe this a bit more. Is this about amp or pedals or the bass? I do not understand the issue, yet. When you fit the level of the signal, the receiving unit, be it a desk or amp, there are adjustments that you can tweak freely. Some basses have weaker output and some amps not so sensitive input. It is OK to turn the input gain until the channel is "full". What the pot position is, is not important. Same applies with effects. Sure you know this. Do you see overwound pickups a possibility if you are after high output? Lindy Fralin or similar could be your choice. Also adjusting pickups as high as possible gives bigger signal.

EMG has a P pickups in soapbar casings. Just check their pages. I do agree with @Skybone that it might be feasible to check the eq. A HPF might also be in order to clear the sound and give more boost to the limited lower end. Weak output is easily fixed with a simple booster. They are not limited to g-word players.

Standing in the shadows of Motown.

Have you been considering making the bridge from the same body wood? Testing the material would be pretty easy, and the part wouldn't have to be too precise. The main point was simply to test the difference, wasn't it. Actually most of the bridges do perform very well and in a similar way. There are features (top loading, colours, size...) and exotic designs, but the main idea is to anchor the strings firmly to the other end of the body. But if the weight differs from another, it means that the body-bridge system has a different tuning. Try with a metal tube or plate and attach magnets one by one to the other end. Feels and sounds different, doesn't it?

This "character" is exactly about the stiffness and uniformity of the wood. The shape plays a role because as I wrote earlier, the shape has a "character", too. This is one lovely video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLNFrxgMJ6E The "character" of the sound is directly related to the vibrations affected by the material. Shape of the neck is another. The connection (placement, tightness etc.) between that body and the neck is again one more thing that affects the tuning of the whole system. There are details that usually do not affect the complete picture, but they can ruin the overall sound, too. Just think about a loose bridge saddle. I do want to remind you all, that as the body is pretty thick and heavy (and hopefully stiff, too), it tends to play smaller role than that thin rod named as neck.

Again, back to basics: If the string was bolted to a rock (not vibrating base), you should be able to transfer the string's vibrations to a pickup in its nakedness. The rock won't move at all. There is also the possibility to check how the magnets affect the strings. Now if the string is put to a massive plate (piano, anyone), the plate's mass is tuned very low. It should not affect the vibration very much, but ONLY IF the plate is stiff (not like dough). Let's reduce the instrument weight from 500 lbs to under 10 lbs. Now the neck shape (every shape has its own frequency, if the stiffness enables it) and weight (including frets, tuners etc.) may turn to a vibrating element just like the body. The difference to the piano (heavy) example is that the frequency has risen substantially and may be in the audible area = resonance = dead notes.

You can start from any acoustics book available from the libraries. The maths behind some basic shapes is nearly easy. But, when you start to analyze some more complicated shapes made of wood, which is not uniform, you may have a very strange set of calculations. Chladni patterns (see YT) may interest you. The science of sound is one very basic book made by Tom Rossing.

(Background: 2 x 12" is my favorite construction at the moment...) Cabinets have several possible issues that are not overly simple. I would be surprised if the Hellborg version would be somewhat limited in construction or quality. If possible, test drive it with your favourite amp and feel the quality. Be open to new settings of the amp to find the sounds and the nature of the cab.

Ned Steinberger tried to reduce dead spots in the late 70's or early 80's. He started to remove material from the tuner end, so the headstock. The more he took away, the higher the dead spots rose. "Now here I have this black instrument..." From materials point of view the existing ones are just fine. Some shapes have an effect on the response. CF is a nice material because it is light and so stiff. Some notes: - the instrument has to have some mass to fight against the movement of the string - the instrument has to be stiff so that it does not lose the vibrations to the body and neck deformations - there are resonances in the instrument that can be harmful against the amount of vibration (in other words, there is some dampening because of the shapes) What else...