Stacker

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='885263' date='Jul 4 2010, 09:54 AM']I've looked all over on mine and can't find a commodity code.[/quote] Well, there you go! Write to them at:- UK Border Agency Coventry International Hub Siskin Parkway West COVENTRY CV3 4HX It must, thoguh, state on the docket exactly what the goods are. Don't give them the code; let them do the work and make sure the code is correct when they write back to you! Ask them to re-asses the charges. If they stonewall you, or don't reply, get your MP involved, like I did. That'll set a fire under their lazy ar*e!!

The tensile strength of the graphite does away with the need for a truss rod. I've had a look at that Steiny and I don't tink ther's much wrong with it. I've never heard of a Steiny with up-bow on the neck, never. That's not to say it could happen.

[quote name='Kohpnyn' post='885208' date='Jul 4 2010, 02:41 AM']I'm considering buying a LM2/3 off the TalkBass forums. I guess I'd have to pay the 17.5% VAT and that's it? Or would it be more because it's electronics?[/quote] You will pay import duty on the value then VAT on top of that. Then, if not sent via DHL, etc, Parcelforce will charge their pound of flesh in the form of a £13.50 'handling fee', which stinks! To save yourself any grief, get the seller to put the commodity code onto the shipping docket!

[quote name='BottomEndian' post='884597' date='Jul 3 2010, 09:55 AM']Not for another six months. Unless they're doing things differently up there.[/quote] Sorry. SHows how much I'm paying attention, eh? Cheers.

It's the fact that they don't do their job right, is what I'm whingeing about. Check post #15 and think about the number of people they've ripped off because of laziness and incompetence. And our VAT is now at 20%.

I'd hazard a guess that UKBA/HMRC would say 'tough cheese!' But hold on a minute: they themselves would be on you like a dog on a rabbit if you set down any inconsistencies on [i]any[/i] paperwork you served them, so it should wok both ways! It might be a lengthy process but it would probably involve your guy at the other end acquiring admissible evidence of the actual value. I'd be tempted to go for it but, knowing what government departments are like, I'm sure there would be a lot of stonewalling.

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='883535' date='Jul 1 2010, 11:18 PM']A quick googling brings this alternate version of the tale... "How the frets actually came to be removed is not as clear however, with Jaco himself giving varying accounts. Although he generally claimed that he removed the frets himself with a butter knife, he gave a different and more detailed version of the bass's evolution to writer Bill Milkowski in 1984 for Guitar Player magazine. "When I got the bass," explained Jaco, "the cat who had it had taken the frets out himself, and he did a really bad job of it-- left all kinds of nicks and chunks taken out of the fretboard. So I really had to fix it up. I filled in the chunks with Plastic Wood." He told Milkowski that he used Petite's Poly-Poxy, a boat epoxy, on the fretboard. "You can find it in any boating supply store in Florida," remarked Jaco. "I used about six coats on my fretless, and it took about a day for each coat to dry."" [url="http://www.ricksuchow.com/press-group-234.html"]http://www.ricksuchow.com/press-group-234.html[/url] Jaco was a great player at times but he was also a junkie with a damaged ego. He was well known for being quite liberal with reality when talking about himself.[/quote] I've heard that as well. But then that makes out Charlie Brent to be a fibber, which I doubt. But the Milkowski book mentions another, contemporary Jazz bass. So which one is the BOD?

It's not the BOD as we know it, anyway. That maple cap must make a bit of difference to the sound

[quote name='wateroftyne' post='882949' date='Jul 1 2010, 01:22 PM'][url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=93250"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=93250[/url] [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=89752"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=89752[/url][/quote] Jeez, what a carry-on that was! I've had my fill of the BOD now and am off to tickle the box. Xbox, that is!!

Is this the one that Kaufman refinished? Re the defretting: Pastorius was known to exaggerate or to give false info from time to time but in Bill Milkowski's book, Charlie Brent from the C.C. Riders testifies to seeing Jaco rip the frets out of his Jazz bass. I seem to recall there was another Jazz that he borrowed off someone and didn't return.

[quote name='obbm' post='881629' date='Jun 30 2010, 09:18 AM']All the information I have managed to obtain points to the original stack-knob pots being 250K/250K which you can't buy any more.[/quote] Thank you for alerting me to this for you are indeed correct.

[quote name='XB26354' post='881355' date='Jun 29 2010, 09:00 PM']I used to work in shipping, and the Intrastat Book with all the harmonised commodity codes is freely available from the HMRC website. I happen to know that the HMRC are well aware of the commodity codes for electric guitars and basses and as there is a specific code for them (that they have searchable online access to), its pure incompetence. Mind you, I imported a Chapman Stick into the UK once and they actually rang me up because they didn't know if it was an instrument or an ornament - turned out it was the latter [/quote] That's very, very interesting. BiChrist I'll be on their case if it happens again. Which, of course, I will let them do then bawl them out for it.

Lizzie!! That's my old stacker!! Considering John's not doing an awful lot these days, I'd go £2.3K+. Remember to have it down as a 'specific item' on your home insurance, too, and make sure it's covered for gigs, though I doubt your home insurer would entertain that aspect. Hope you're still enjoying her. Donny

[quote name='obbm' post='881746' date='Jun 30 2010, 11:24 AM']I found it on the web somewhere a couple of years ago which is why I did it. Maybe even Talkbass. It doesn't worry me whether it's original or not, I'm afraid I don't get hung up on things like that. It just works very well which is good enough for me[/quote] I'm glad to hear it. Me, I'm just curious as to why Fender would make something that's not period accurate, especially electronically, though I do forgive them for sacking the bakelite bridge sections of the '51 P-bass when it came to re-issuing it.

[quote name='obbm' post='881629' date='Jun 30 2010, 09:18 AM']All the information I have managed to obtain points to the original stack-knob pots being 250K/250K which you can't buy any more.[/quote] With respect, where did you get this information from? I can't find anything on(or even knew of) the second 250K pot in a the original stack circuit. And just to clarify: the detented washer [u][b]was[/b][/u] used in the 1960 model.

[quote name='wesfinn' post='881351' date='Jun 29 2010, 08:58 PM']yeah he is AMAZING. Hes a lovely guy too though he keeps some of the smaller details close to his chest. I don;t blame him though! He has been a big help for me in terms of finding out the real niggly details of things. He doesn't use the notch washers on his stack knob circuits either, this is another thing that has led me to believe they werent on the originals because he does EVERYTHING as it was done originally. Have you seen his new 59 les paul replicas he is doing? they are absolutely mindblowingly accurate![/quote] Why would Fender create a reissue and introduce something that is not period accurate? I don't understand that. Time for a bit of reasearch. Ok, after a bit of nosing around I have found that the indented washers [u][b]were[/b][/u] used on the 1960 model but were gone by 1961 !!

[quote name='Etienne' post='881321' date='Jun 29 2010, 08:30 PM']Would be interesting to find out what the original spec was! I've got a pair of the CTS stack repros from Allparts installed in mine- they have a 250K pot for volume and a 500K pot for tone...[/quote] That's correct, AFAIK.

[quote name='wesfinn' post='881243' date='Jun 29 2010, 07:00 PM']If you are changing to this circuit I recomend that you get the sweeping pots rather than notched pots that fender put on the RI's. these are not vintage correct and generally break pretty quickly.[/quote] Are you 100% sure about that because my early '90s Custom Shop stacker has the notched knobs. These 'notches' are actually caused by a seperate indented washer that sits below the tone pot and is clearly visible. I can't see why Fender would do the opposite, though my old Bravewood stacker had the 'sweep' ones.

[quote name='dan670844' post='880975' date='Jun 29 2010, 02:12 PM']I agree with stacker it sounds like a great idea but in reality how it is wired up its pretty pointless as the pickups bleed into each other so what you get is one tone but two knobs to adjust, its pointless. I think there is a mod where you can stick a capacitor in somewhere to give true tone control over each pickup, but I am not sure on this. The other problem is the concentric pots are a bit unreliable ................... it looks cool though!![/quote] Which circuit are you referring to?

[quote name='Rumple' post='880730' date='Jun 29 2010, 10:34 AM']It does seem like a more flexible opion tone wise then the usual 3 know version, does anyone know why Fender dropped the idea in the mid 60's?[/quote] Cos it wasn't popular, believe it or not! I have heard that Fender did initially release the Jazz briefly with the 3-pot circuit, convert to the stack circuit and then sack it in favour of the 3-pot when the latter proved unpopular. Not sure about the veracity of those events but wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.

[quote name='ahpook' post='880698' date='Jun 29 2010, 10:08 AM']iirc customs regard it as the consignee's responsibiltiy to obtain the correct commodity code[/quote] In all my years of importing, this information has never been imparted to me by neither the supplier, Parcelforce nor HMRC. But I know it now and will be wary of this ever happening again.

For those of us who occasionally import from abroad, we all know that we're going to get stung by Import Duty and VAT and we just get on with it and accept what we see on the sticker on the side of the shipping carton and pay it. However, earlier this year I imported two basses from Ishibashi and was amazed at the amount I had to pay HMRC. I had a gut feeling there was something wrong with these figures so I pursued it with HMRC. After a lengthy, heated discussion with a stroppy civil servant I found out there should be a [u][b]commodity code[/b][/u] visible on the sticker applied by the hub at Coventry. This code is ascertained by the description of the item on the shipping/customs form filled out at point of origin. No such code usually appears on the red lettered sticker, so how does Coventry decide what your charges are? Now knowing what the 'commodity code' for electric guitars actually is ([b]9207901000[/b]), I wrote to them and, after getting my MP involved, finally got a response from the UK Border Agency at Coventry, who are responsible for determining charges. Surprise, surprise - they had got it WRONG!!! Their final letter set out the revised charges and I am to receive some £30 back in duty and VAT on one bass; the other case I have yet to hear back on. All that said, I guess few of us will be importing gear after the recent VAT hike but for those of us who will, please make sure that you ask for a breakdown of charges [i]first[/i], [i]then[/i] ask what code they used. The idea is to catch UKBA out and to [i][b]make sure they have applied the charges correctly![/b][/i] Remember: at the end of the day, it's better that the money is in your pocket than theirs! Stacker.

[quote name='SignsOfDelirium_bassist' post='874305' date='Jun 22 2010, 11:47 AM']cool, I've not had a chance to even try a bass with that circuit on it, it just looks like a brilliant idea to me...Forgive my ignorance, but what do you mean by 'load' the pickups? I'm going to have the SD 1/4 pounder or the wizard hammers, I'm not completely sure yet, probably the 1/4 pounders, cos I've tried basses with them installed, never tried the hammers before.[/quote] Loading is seen as impedance.