Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Finished! A Bridge Too Far?


Andyjr1515
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote name='TheGreek' timestamp='1490708420' post='3267233']
Am I being too demanding by asking for something like this??? :gas: :gas: :gas:



Or has Andy 's previous work left me believing he can do anything....

Maybe he should have titled this thread "Great Expectations".. :D :D
[/quote]

Do you know...what I love about the full-custom builds, as well as the sheer adrenaline rush of spending months on something that might end up as barbecue wood, is this kind of thing.

Generally my approach is practical. That is, it [i]has[/i] to work and it [i]has [/i]to be workable.

On the other hand - a bit like my wife when we are trying to sort a new kitchen layout - often the people I'm building for are completely unshackled by such trivia :lol: Just like my wife might say - "well I want a large wide passageway THERE!" - pointing to the one wall that absolutely holds the whole of the rest of the house up. And then a strange process happens. Once I've exhausted myself with all the reasons why the bloody passageway CAN'T be wide and CAN'T be there, I let just a chink of the impracticality to creep into my thinking and, often come up with a solution that DOES have a wide passageway, and it IS there, but, now I come to think about it, doing it this way and adding this and changing that will actually make the building stronger and the whole kitchen job easier. :rolleyes:

The result is often MUCH better than it would have been without being faced with the wholly impossible :D

Which a very long way of saying that, actually, Mick's idea above is a pretty good one.

I am going to use the steinberger-style tuner block that Mick sent me, and below you can see it can be secured. But the string angles are a bit compromised, which I always try to avoid:


But I can't tilt the tuner mechanism and more because the (retaining wall) bass body is in the way. So what if I knock the (retaining wall) body out of the way? Like this:


You know....that might just work..... ;)

Edited by Andyjr1515
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should also have a look at the Pagelli Golden Bass, which is one of the very first basses that I saw which had the full-length fingerboard (and tuners at the back of the body IIRC). There aren't any images on the Pagelli site right now, but a quick Google should reveal some...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1490803442' post='3268203']
You should also have a look at the Pagelli Golden Bass, which is one of the very first basses that I saw which had the full-length fingerboard (and tuners at the back of the body IIRC). There aren't any images on the Pagelli site right now, but a quick Google should reveal some...
[/quote]
Will do - thanks :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Andyjr1515' timestamp='1490791836' post='3268007']


[/quote]

Could you not alternatively fix the bridge to the neck side of the cavity (by flipping upside down from the above orientation)?
I would imagine this would make it stronger...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BassApprentice' timestamp='1490859787' post='3268499']
[url="http://www.pagelli.com/e-guitars-innovations.html"]http://www.pagelli.c...nnovations.html[/url]

Third from the bottom :) Very classy looking bass that Golden Fretless
[/quote]
Yes indeed - it was one of the photos Mick sent to me when he was describing the full-length fretboard concept. It's something else isn't it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='samhay' timestamp='1490863679' post='3268553']
Could you not alternatively fix the bridge to the neck side of the cavity (by flipping upside down from the above orientation)?
I would imagine this would make it stronger...
[/quote]
Yes you could, but that would make accessing the screw holes to fix it in very tricky without either having a line of access holes in the back part of the fretboard or having the string exit slot much wider. Attaching the ball ends to the tuner pullers would also be a bit more awkward as you would be doing it blind.

I'm actually happy that the fixing will be as strong as any standard bridge fixing. I am presently working on tweaking the angle so that the strings have a straight pull on the tuners, though, and trying to get that bridge position back a bit. That means either exposing the tuners from the front view a touch, or increasing the angle the tuners are coming out of the back.

As I said earlier, a bass is basically a set of compromises held together by determination and hope! :lol:

Edited by Andyjr1515
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Andyjr1515' timestamp='1490863758' post='3268555']
Yes indeed - it was one of the photos Mick sent to me when he was describing the full-length fretboard concept. It's something else isn't it!
[/quote]

I was going to order one, but unfortunately when I enquired, Pagelli had just licensed the design to Marleaux, who never bothered to get in touch with me, so I ended up commissioning a Sei Flamboyant instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1490881234' post='3268753']


I was going to order one, but unfortunately when I enquired, Pagelli had just licensed the design to Marleaux, who never bothered to get in touch with me, so I ended up commissioning a Sei Flamboyant instead.
[/quote]
Nice alternative! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been fiddling about with angles and distances. My conclusion is that the optimum in terms of angle and bridge position is here:



That means that the tuners at the tail just show from the front of the bass where the body sweeps forwards:




Above, I've shown the string exit from the back as a wide chamber as in Mick's earlier example.
It could just as easily be individual ferrules in the extended fingerboard as with the Golden Bass below:


We don't have to decide until much later because the underlying body and neck build will be the same in both cases

Edited by Andyjr1515
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1490944059' post='3269165']
Love the concept!
This is going to be a fascinating build
[/quote]

Thanks, Kert :)

I think at the moment I favour ferrules rather than a slot or open chamber (as drawn) for the string exit, but I'm sure it will work just fine either way. I've just ordered the wood for the neck and also for the fretboard - it's a bit narrower than the drawing, so the flare will a touch less than shown, but should be compatible colour-wise.

Still LOTS of stuff to work out, but at least fixing the strings in place is sorted...quite an important bit of the jigsaw puzzle! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neck wood is on order (5 piece - maple/ebony/maple/ebony/maple) as is what I hope to be a nice piece of maple for the extended fretboard.


For completeness and comparison, this includes the width of the actual fretboard and also I've put ferrules for the string exit rather than an open chamber (final decision won't be needed until the bass is pretty well carved):


The final thing I have to get my head around before I start cutting any wood is the electrics.

The ideal is:[list]
[*]Undersaddle piezo
[*]Hidden magnetic
[*]Some form of blend
[*]Hidden controls
[/list]
I've got a number of thoughts about the controls, but blending the piezo and magnetic is still a bit of an unknown and my thoughts on hiding the magnetic pickup is, as yet, unproven...

What I am pretty sure is that, whatever, I will need to incorporate a piezo pre-amp. The chamber can be very large area-wise, but it will be very, very slim....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those thinking of a headless system using single ball strings look at these:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/400934036270?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT




Uses rollers. Strings go into the brass rollers, ball end goes into the nut end. I have one in another bass, complete unit is heavy - reduce the weight by cutting the body off just in front of the tuner, throw the rest away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question - what is the main objection to using double ball end strings? I find them to be perfectly ok, as is the Steinberger double ball end bridge. Is it simply the lack of choice of strings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Paul S' timestamp='1491200602' post='3271080']
Question - what is the main objection to using double ball end strings? I find them to be perfectly ok, as is the Steinberger double ball end bridge. Is it simply the lack of choice of strings?
[/quote]

Hi, Paul :)

I think Mick does have particular preferences for strings but from my point of view it's all about practicality. I may be feeding the strings though small ferrules on the extended fretboard from the back, and I definitely will be feeding them through small ferrules at the headstock - the clamping will be at the back of a headstock rather than the blunt-ended 'conventional' headless arrangement. The plan (if it works out! :lol: ) is to keep the front view as clean and minimalist as possible - no tuners, no knobs - just wood and strings.

On the knobs front, I've got a great solution I'm just about to bounce off Mick :D . I'll post a drawing if he's happy with it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thumbs up from Mick on the controls thoughts. It's a spin-off from Nic's Mouradian style where we were trying to hide the Smoothound Tx from the front-view:




So what I've got in mind is this:


Bearing in mind that the body starts at 1.5" and slims down to nothing, I've got the bulky stuff closer to the neck (pots and battery) and the slim stuff closer to the edge (jack socket and preamp/mixer) with simple blend, master tone and jack socket. Might just work! And if space is still tight, some of the better-makes small pots would also be fine :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will have noticed that there have been plenty of drawings and not much sawdust yet :D

You will know that many of my builds are in the 'make it up as I go along' ilk, but frankly this one can't be. Stuff that normally would be 'near enough is good enough' is going to need to be sub-mm accurate. Later today, I will be drawing detailed full-size cross-sections of the body.

It's a bit chicken and egg - the actual shape will depend on the hardware and configuration.

This is the basic conceptual cross-section:


The dark-blue rectangle is the neck wood. The body wood is only 1.5" to start with - and I'm going to scoop a significant amount out of the back!

Ideally, I want to scoop 0.5" out, leaving a [i]starting [/i]body depth of only 1" (I think a typical Gibson / Fender is 1.75"?) And then I want to slim it down!!! :rolleyes:

The practical constraints become, therefore, the depth of the pickup and the depth of the pots and battery. Basically, dimensions A and B in the pick above have got to include the: pots/battery size + top thickness + control chamber cover thickness.

So basically I have to work backwards - ie, work out the minimum dimensions A and B can possibly be and then I can work out the maximum depth the scoop can be.

And then I need to cut wood to the same accuracy.

I can almost smell that sycamore-rich barbecue already :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...