vintage_ben

Well progress is being made, albeit rather more slowly than anticipated. In the mass of ordering bits and piece for this project I forgot to buy any primer. Anyway, an order was placed and we're back on track. The body is now primed. The first coat revealed a few imperfections which had been camouflaged by the grain of the wood. A spot of filler, a bit of gentle sanding and a some more primer to blend it in and the job was done. Next step... colour. Which one I hear you ask (well maybe not)? My next post will reveal all.

[quote name='BassBod' timestamp='1445694410' post='2893493'] Cut out a section to sit under the end of the plate, then glue all the bits in place on top. [/quote] I currently have it glued down to the shielding plate which is found under the guards from this period. It's ok, but there's no much structural integrity there with he holes and bits missing. Note the holes drilled by a previous over to try and address the problem, which unfortunately have only made things worse by going straight into the cavity. [quote name='discreet' timestamp='1445699922' post='2893565'] a 'new' relic guard from Spitfire would look amazing. He can do them with the early thin black pinstripe too, so very authentic... but best to keep the original item if at all possible. [/quote] Yes it would. Original is always desirable, but given the refin I'm a little less precious about this bass than others I own [quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1445694999' post='2893508'] This is an interesting build, that's for sure. Good luck. It's a bit late now, as you've done the filler, but for future reference, you normally get dings out by "sweating" the wood. Have you thought about how to clean the bridge? Seeing all the rust I think I'd try Coca-Cola or "Daddies Sauce"' if you can still get it. That would eat the rust. [/quote] Yes you're absolutely right. Instead of ding I should have said deep gouges. No amount of swelling wood was going to hide those! I'm going to stick with a relic look, so I'm going to keep the rusty bridge (and all the other rusty parts).

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1445673191' post='2893216'] Nice project, don't lose the guard, that fort is fab, glue it together while it's off the body with strong bonding adhesive, will be fine, just don't over tighten the jack nut. What's the colour to be? Aged oly white? Good work fella. [/quote] I'm going to keep guard if I can. The combined cracks, drilled holes and missing bits means the area around the jack socket area is in a pretty poor state. Even with a good adhesive I'm concerned a tug on the jack plug will see it disintegrating. It's a dilemma. Still undecided colour wise. Although my other (Sadwosky) P bass is burgundy mist which probably reveals something about my taste in Febder custom colours.

[quote name='Andyjr1515' timestamp='1445668539' post='2893194'] Good progress . I find the trouble with using cellulose thinners is all the pink animals that dart and crawl around the shed . Presume you use a respirator? [/quote] Yes, got one for stripping and spraying. The sealer is also pretty pungent!

So the body has now been stripped and sealed ready for painting. [b]Here's the body prior to starting[/b] [b]Ready to get the old finish off with the cellulose thinners[/b] [u][b]A good chunk of the finish gone. A pretty horrible job![/b][/u] [u][b][/b][/u] Stripping back the refinish revealed the original yellow stain in the pickup, control and neck cavities. The body has then sanded back, dings and scratches filled, sanded again and given a couple of coats of sanding sealer ready for painting..... so far so good.

[quote name='Mykesbass' timestamp='1444511626' post='2883825'] As for the colour, just be glad your daughter isn't on solids yet [/quote] Unfortunately (or not depending on your perspective) she is.

I recently purchased this 1966/67 P Bass. I've owned (and played) a lot of basses over the years, but I must say this is one, if not the best I've ever come across. It feels great to play, sounds great, is nice and light and looks cool too. Now I realise if your want is for ultra modern gear, this might not be your dream bass. But as far as stock P basses go, you'd struggle to find better. But there's always a catch.... Cosmetically the bass is in a bit of state. Now there's nothing wrong with some honest playing wear, and this has certainly had some, but combine this with some dodgy repairs and bad attempts to cover up previous misdoings and we've got a bass that would benefit from some serious TLC. Other than a refinish most of the bass is original. It's got a September 1966 neck (C width), a 1966/67 serial number and '67 pots. So it's a matter of a bit of sympathetic restoration, whilst keeping that well played vibe. So here's the plan [b]Refinish[/b] - The bass has had a pretty awful refinish some time ago. Although at a distance it looks pretty cool, up close it's a funny shade of off-white (not a nice creamy aged white, but something closer to my 7 month old daughter's vomit). It's also clear the body wasn't prepared correctly before the paint job, making things look even worse. This will have to go. I'm undecided on the new colour, but Sonic Blue, Seafoam Green, Olympic White, or Black are in the frame. [b]Neck[/b]- The worn neck has had clear overspray at some point. Not only does it look naff in my view, but there's nothing like the feel of a neck worn down to the wood. So i'll be buffing that away. [b]Replace missing parts[/b] - Some pickguard screws are missing, as are all but one of the strap buttons. So these will need replacing with some aged parts to match those already there. [b]Pickguard[/b] - Unfortunately the pick guard has cracked around the jack socket. These celluloid guards shrink over time and these things happen, so I don't really mind. The real bummer, is that someone has tried a bodge repair by drilling new screw holes to secure the area, but unfortunately have missed the body and drilled through to the control cavity. All this leaves the area in a rather delicate state. So I'm minded to put a repro pickguard on this. I haven't decided on the colour yet, but it would need to go with the colour I choose and also leave scope for the original guard to go back on if I wanted to do that. I've found some nice aged 'mint' guards for sale and although they're not correct for the period (Fender stopped using these in '65 I think), I'm not too bothered as I have the original. So here are some photos of where we're at now. I'll be posting more as I progress. Wish me luck!

PM'd

Good choice. I had a BTC is a Jazz Bass for years (15 years +). It sounded fine but was quite noisy. I've just replaced it with a J retro. Wow what a difference! I think the lesson is, you get what you pay for.

There were various options when I ordered my 4 string wrt nut width and radius. Can't remember what nut width I went with, but went for a 9.5" radius. I dont recall discussing profiles. It's pretty middle of the road, standard p-bass/stringray type feel. Very comfortable.

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1357068311' post='1917122'] but needed a more sensitive mix for me [/quote] Yep, it's that sound Eastern European record companies seems to love. A bit like when Trevor Horn did that Tatu record with those two Russian girls. You couldn't fit anything else in the mix!

I've just finished editing this 'unusual' video from my rather eccentric friend. I also played bass on the track and did the drum programming. It was recorded about 5 years ago as a bit of fun one weekend. If it raises a few smiles it was worth it! [media]http://youtu.be/tuNFpEN05LU[/media]

Three tracks from old(ish) to new, 1998, 2004 and 2012. The first two are tunes by my old band, the last is one of the band's old song which I played on for another artist. https://soundcloud.com/benny_bass/sets/somethingoldandnew The first track I suspect was my old Stringray 5 plugged direct into the desk. The second played on an early 80s '57 reissue P-Bass (maple board) DI and Mic'd through an SWR SM400 and Henry 8x8. The last was a Sadowsky, rosewood board P-bass through a vintage Pultec EQ and into the desk. Enjoy

Someone may have mentioned this before, but it's a long thread! There seems to be a common thread with Warwick, MusicMan and from the six string world, PRS. All these brands initially produced for the upper end of the consumer (not boutique) market and have then introduced more affordable instruments. By introducing budget/affordable ranges or the lowering the entry price point customers who previously not catered for entered the market for all these brands (both new and second hand). In addition the customer who was a marginal participant in the 'new' market at the higher price point might choose to switch to the market for cheaper range instead. Why stretch to pay £1200 when I can comfortably get something almost as good for £800? Now this might work well for the manufactures, they benefit from sales of both range of instruments. However, this isn't much good for the owners of 2nd hand higher end instruments. As some players who previously had no choice to buy a higher end used instrument switch to a cheaper alternative, demand of used hand higher end instruments falls. If supply remains unchanged, price falls. There also appears to be an issue of devaluing the brand by introducing cheaper instruments. This makes things even worse as demand falls further and supply grows as players try and ditch their instruments on the 2nd hand market. Prices crash. PRS and Warwick have certainly suffered from this.

[quote name='lowdowner' timestamp='1344369805' post='1763646'] why do many of the Warwick Thumb bass suggestions (.. all hail the mighty thumb...) talk about 'early' thumbs... mine pair are 2011 models and they are stonkingly burpin' [/quote] I'm not that familiar with the newer models, but particularly like the 80s one's I've played. I prefer the EMGs (compared to MECs) that were on the early ones and the 3D Schaller bridge. I also like the wenge neck, which they seem to have dropped now. I believe newer ones also have a volute which I really dislike. This is all a matter of preference though. I guess I'd recommend playing an 80s one because it was the 'original' version and gives you a feel of what it was that turned people onto Warwick before it was the big name it is today. I'm sure the newer basses are great too.

Nobody's added to this for a while so here goes - 1960 stack knob Jazz Bass 1959 P-bass - maple board 1990s Sadoswky standard 4 1980s Warwick Thumb Bass Tony Zematis snr. built

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1344025615' post='1758986'] The 'engineering' required to develop the SVT cab took perhaps a week. It's a sealed box, how difficult is that? Theile modeling was not being used at that point, having been developed only a few years before and was only known of in Australia until 1971. Drivers using Theile parameters didn't come along until a few years after that. The SVT drivers already existed, guitar drivers BTW, which were also used in some Fender guitar combos. They were chosen based solely on their 32 ohm impedance, allowing a simple parallel wiring harness that the assemblers would be less likely to screw up than a complicated series/parallel scheme. If some 32 ohm twelves had been readily available they likely would have been used instead and quite possibly tens would never have become the standard for electric bass. The SVT driver has changed over the years, but it remains an inexpensive stamped frame unit that costs Ampeg about $30 each. The neo drivers used by Barefaced, for instance, come in at least four times that. [/quote] Interesting thoughts Bill. Thanks. I'm not totally convinced that it was as 'cheap' as it might reasonably appear, although given what you say I don't see why it wasn't. Is '69 an SVT and 2 8x10 cabs was $1,450, so the equivalent of around $9000 in today's money. If you assume the an amp/cab of price ratio as it is today that would make the implcit price of an 8x10 cab around $3,300. Now you might argue that the cab in effect subsidises the more complex heads so that ratio is out of whack, but you're still tallking about a very expensive cab if you alter the numbers within the bounds of realism. So the conclusion I'd draw is Ampeg was either a very profitable company when it came to SVT cabs or they were relatively expensive to develop (given you say they're cheap to build) and they had to claw that back. Still I'm not wildly concerned either way, and you'd never be able to calculate with any accuracy. It's just an interesting thought. And just to nit pick, I did specifiaclly say equivalent (I realise this wasn't original comparison). I.e if an established company decided to develop an SVT style 8x10 in 2012 - so not a Neo superlight thing, clearly quality comes at a price. So I'll stand by that one I think.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1343777795' post='1755248'] Yeah, hence the 8x10 being much cheaper to design, because it was done by 1969. [/quote] I'd be interested to know if this was true. $1 in 1969 is equivalent to about $6 today (and then there the exchange rate if we want to compare it to a UK built BF cab). I also suspect that manufacturers were less efficient so each $ got you less 'design'. My hunch is that the Ampeg 8x10 was much more expensive to develop than a modern day equivalent.

Check out these guys too - I've had many cases from them over the years. http://www.packhorse.co.uk/