| Author |
Message |
flaxattack
Senior Member
Username: flaxattack
Post Number: 438
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 05, 2005 - 5:03 pm: |  |
and you said you werent gonna make changes????
lmao
you may not last through this week@@@@@
serenity now!!!
:-)
get the wood backplates or i will torture you throughout eternity!!!!...haha
youre gonna find the money...and then it will be tooo late.... |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 847
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 05, 2005 - 7:35 pm: | |
Production hasn't begun yet, Jeff. Once we're signed off to start the build, all changes cease unless they ask my opinion on something in the design. Then I sit back for a few months with the occasional photo fix until it's ready for delivery. The biggest delay I will have is gold plating the hardware. Other than that, there's no series electronics or custom inlays that would add complexity.
-Bob |
jacko
Intermediate Member
Username: jacko
Post Number: 149
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 06, 2005 - 3:52 am: | |
Bob. I've just re-read (and understood ) your comments about the side mounted jack. I'd go for this option. The jacksocket on my rogue is absolutely flush with the bodywork - no socket plate or nuts to catch on- and as you'd expect, the craftmanship in this area is spot on. On the Epic, i have the front mounted jack and always feel the cable detracts somewhat from the look of the bass. i use straight jacks though so the cable does stick out a fair bit. Again just my thoughts.
graeme |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 858
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 9:35 am: | |
Nothing to say - just a test post checking the behavior of this new threading model... |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 888
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 2:12 pm: | |
Hey there Bass fans....
Just got off the phone with Valentino and nailed the final details. There were no meaningful changes to spec, just clarifications. That is to say, I backed off on the continuous wood backplates and will stick with the gold-plated brass.
Also, 3774 was recommended as a back wood with the bookmatch reversed from the wood bank photo such that the ring contours follow the body.
The question of LED switch positioning was resolved by looking at the position of jacks on a bass with Series electronics. The output jack on my bass will go where the 5-pin is on a series instrument and the LED toggle will go where the 1/4" jack is usually located.
The neck dimensions should hopefully be more like 1.5" at the nut with a string spacing at 2.15" at the bridge. That works out to about 18mm spacing, wide enough to slap and narrow enough for speed. I definitely am not a fan of 19mm (2.25") spacing. Also, neck laminate width is standardized, so there was no room for tweaking there.
The pickup positions will mirror what would be found on a Series bass, absent the dummy.
The headstock is confirmed to be a K Crown, very dark wood and symmetrical. The headstock sandwich will be whatever they give me...
The bridge block will be present.
The question of insert-mounted straplocks remains open. Valentino is investigating.
There remains a miniscule possibility that there will be a custom inlay. We will see....
That's all for now... |
mica
Moderator
Username: mica
Post Number: 2402
Registered: 6-2000
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 1:36 pm: | |
Running the nut width and bridge center to center spacing you supplied through my handy dandy calculator, here's what I get:
(dimensions are all in inches 18mm=.708in)
##################################################
id = bsee
scale length = 30.75
string dia. 1=.045 2=.065 3=.080 4=.105
at nut end:
fingerboard width = 1.5
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.375
string center 2 to 3 = 0.375
string center 3 to 4 = 0.375
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.32
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.3025
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.2825
at bridge end:
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = .708
string center 2 to 3 = .708
string center 3 to 4 = .708
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.653
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.6355
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.6155
string edge to edge = 2.199
(projected) fingerboard width at bridge = 2.499
fingerboard width at nut = 1.5
fingerboard width at 24th fret = 2.24925
fingerboard width at 25th fret = 2.26326739040775
fingerboard length = 23.4939662212595
##################################################
(Edge allowance is the distance from the outside edge of the string to the outside of the fingerboard. I used our standard .15 since there wasn't anything different specified.)
I just want to bring to your attention that the fingerboard will be 1.5x2.25
Just for reference, here's the numbers with 19mm(.748in) center to center bridge spacing:
##################################################
id = bsee19
scale length = 30.75
string dia. 1=.045 2=.065 3=.080 4=.105
at nut end:
fingerboard width = 1.5
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.375
string center 2 to 3 = 0.375
string center 3 to 4 = 0.375
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.32
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.3025
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.2825
at bridge end:
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = .748
string center 2 to 3 = .748
string center 3 to 4 = .748
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.693
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.6755
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.6555
string edge to edge = 2.319
(projected) fingerboard width at bridge = 2.619
fingerboard width at nut = 1.5
fingerboard width at 24th fret = 2.33925
fingerboard width at 25th fret = 2.3549511610273
fingerboard length = 23.4939662212595 |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 890
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 2:20 pm: | |
hmmm....
Initially, this looked like information overload, but it made me think. I am looking at the '82 Spoiler I am playing today and the bridge spacing seems even narrower than what we discussed. The rough measurement is about 2" center to center across the bridge. That works out to what, about 17mm spacing? I am pretty sure I don't want anything much wider spaced than this, but am I likely to really notice the difference? Even then, will the narrower nut even it all out in the area where it matters, around the neck pickup where most of the plucking is happening?
The battery in my digital caliper is dead, so I will get a replacement and provide precise measurements tomorrow. Can we delay this until I get a measurement and confirm?
I promise a definitive answer by the time you all arrive for work on Monday, and that will be my proverbial "final answer"...
Thanks! |
mica
Moderator
Username: mica
Post Number: 2403
Registered: 6-2000
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:18 pm: | |
It's likely the Spoiler you have is set up with side-to side spacing at the bridge unless it was special ordered or altered.
Our typical setup is with center to center spacing at the nut for aiming at the center of the string while fretting and side to side at the bridge, for aiming at the edge of the string for finger or pick. We've found that people that slap alot prefer center to center at the bridge too, since they are aiming for the center of the string with their slapping hand. Sometimes, a player starts with a bass that's center to center, and just gets accustomed to it.
I mention this because we like to make sure you will really be happy with center to center spacing at the bridge.
As far as noticing the difference, this is highly dependent on you. Since you previously expressed a preference for 18mm over 19mm, I would guess you would be as sensitive for a similar size shift down. I'm probably not as sensitive on a bass, but I can't play anything other than a standard size piano key, so I understand how one can become dependent on spacing.
Just for reference, here's the numbers for a typical Spoiler:
##################################################
id = SMB4 Side to Side @ bridge (standard)
scale length = 32
string dia. 1=.045 2=.065 3=.080 4=.105
at nut end:
fingerboard width = 1.75
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.458333333333333
string center 2 to 3 = 0.458333333333333
string center 3 to 4 = 0.458333333333333
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.403333333333333
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.385833333333333
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.365833333333333
at bridge end:
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.655
string center 2 to 3 = 0.6725
string center 3 to 4 = 0.6925
spacing between 1 and 2 = .6
spacing between 2 and 3 = .6
spacing between 3 and 4 = .6
string edge to edge = 2.095
(projected) fingerboard width at bridge = 2.395
fingerboard width at nut = 1.75
fingerboard width at 24th fret = 2.2422045
fingerboard width at 25th fret = 2.2595008
fingerboard length = 24.4490054985465
.6in=15.2mm
I also ran the figures if the Spoiler fingerboard dimensions were set up with center to center at the bridge:
##################################################
id = SMB4 Center to Center @ bridge
scale length = 32
string dia. 1=.045 2=.065 3=.080 4=.105
at nut end:
fingerboard width = 1.75
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.458333333333333
string center 2 to 3 = 0.458333333333333
string center 3 to 4 = 0.458333333333333
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.403333333333333
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.385833333333333
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.365833333333333
at bridge end:
treble edge allowance = .15
bass edge allowance = .15
string center 1 to 2 = .685
string center 2 to 3 = .685
string center 3 to 4 = .685
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.63
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.6125
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.5925
string edge to edge = 2.13
(projected) fingerboard width at bridge = 2.43
fingerboard width at nut = 1.75
fingerboard width at 24th fret = 2.26
fingerboard width at 25th fret = 2.26954136684411
fingerboard length = 24.4490054985465
.685in=17.3mm
Yeah, it's even more information overload, but it may help you with your "final answer." The work on the neck won't be started until we get this important decision completed. |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 891
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 4:40 pm: | |
Mica-
This is great info to put the other data in perspective. I suspect the Spoiler is done side-to-side. A rough measure makes it appear to be about 16mm between the centers of the G and D, and more like 17mm between the E and A, maybe a hair more.
I have a few other basses that I used to find a bit more comfortable to play than the Spoiler when I played non-Alembics. I play the Spoiler for tone more than feel...
I think another reason for slappers to prefer center-to-center spacing would be that it provides extra space in the areas where a finger would be inserted to pop. Space is less critical between the low strings unless you're pulling off advanced moves like double-thumbing. At least, with my limited slap skills, this would be true...
Thanks again, and have a great weekend! |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 893
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 9:27 am: | |
Mica-
Okay, I have played several instruments and measured them. Here are some numbers I came out with:
1. On a 34" Spector fretless, the nut is 1.7 and the bridge is at 17.9 center-to-center. I really like the feel in the picking area on this one.
2. On a custom-built 1983 Dean with 34" scale, the nut is 1.5" and the bridge spacing is about .685" side to side. The picking area is a bit wide-spaced on this one.
3. The '82 Spoiler at 32" scale appears to have an uneven bridge spacing. That is probably because it was set up side to side and now has a different guage string set on it. It was probably set up as standard .6" spacing and it is maybe the slightest bit too tight for slap play.
I tested on a few others as well, but there was nothing particularly enlightening. Well, maybe that it is nearly impossible (for me) to slap on a standard-spaced Alembic five. I think it measured at about .5" at the bridge.
My main focus is string spacing in the primary picking/slapping area. I'd like it as narrow as possible to speed picking (finger or pick styles) while wide enough to slap comfortably. I believe that the narrower nut spacing will have a small impact on this as compared to the regular spacing. If my math is correct, the strings should be about .02" closer together at the 24th fret with a 1.5" nut as opposed to the 1.75" nut.
My final answer is this:
1. I definitely want the strings spaced center to center rather than side to side.
2. The 1.5" nut should be great.
3. Bridge spacing anywhere between 17.5 and 18mm should work for me. I think the standard spacing set up for center to center, as you posted above, is maybe a hair too narrow with the 1.5" nut. Since it appears you like to work in inches, I think an even .7" center to center should be perfect.
I also paid some attention to neck thickness and found that the Spoiler feels great. As such, I am hoping that it is a standard neck depth that doesn't need to be specified. I know that the neck on the Epic 5 I played recently felt chunky to me. The few necks that I measured were between .82" and .9" thick near the nut and between .88" and .95" thick around the 12th fret. The Spector was the thin end of the range and the Spoiler was the thick end. The Dean was a bit thicker and felt it, probably because it's one piece of maple and needs the strength. Even then, the Dean was very playable, so I think the dimension would have to be extreme to be an issue.
Mica, I will send you some other information via email and you can take that into consideration as well.
Thanks
-Bob |
jacko
Intermediate Member
Username: jacko
Post Number: 179
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 2:17 am: | |
Bob
My rogue has a 'standard' neck and is much slimmer than my old epic. The satin finish makes it much faster than the epic's gloss finish aswell.
just my tuppence worth
graeme |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 909
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 - 10:43 pm: | |
Well, the other info I sent to Mica last week was that I made a deal to buy a bass very similar in spec to my custom order. It turns out that the neck on it is even narrower than anticipated.
It is 1.5" nut width, but the spacing at the bridge is 1.75" center-to-center from E to G. The individual strings are spaced at about .53" side-to-side. This bass is very playable, and it will adjust my thinking to be narrower at the bridge. Right now, I am thinking .65" (16.5mm) center-to-center for a total bridge width of 1.95 E to G.
There's really no substitute for playing the instrument set up as you want it. I would never have guessed from the other basses I played that I could go this narrow and be comfortable.
For the neck depth, this instrument is thicker as it moves up the neck than the Spoiler. The basses are about the same .82" at the first fret, but this bass gets much closer to a full inch by the 12th fret. I would rather it were just a little thinner up the neck, like .93-.95. As for the profile, I think this bass would be great if you just took the exisiting neck and flattened it out a little by shaving some of what is there in the middle for more of an oval result. It's great the way it is, but a little flatter would make it perfect.
Does this all make sense?
-Bob |
davehouck
Moderator
Username: davehouck
Post Number: 1699
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2005 - 5:31 am: | |
You might want to take a break (like overnight) and then pick the Spoiler back up and play for a few hours. Then go back to the new bass. Make sure there aren't things you like to do on the Spoiler that you can't do as well on the new bass. When I first got my Spoiler, I was impressed with how the Classic taper felt compared to the Comfort taper of my Essence; but after a while I realized that there were things I could do on my Essence that were not as comfortable on the Spoiler (certain slap techniques for example). However, I've been without my Essence for a while, and my technique has evolved over time, and I've grown very comfortable with the Classic taper on my S1. All of this is to say that, for me, I was so initially impressed with the advantages of the narrower taper that it took me a while to recognize what I was giving up. |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 912
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2005 - 9:33 am: | |
Agreed there, Dave. Note that this bass doesn't have the Comfort taper. It's more like a narrower version of the Classic taper in that it doesn't get wide at the bridge. I definitely like the relatively straight string paths of the Classic taper. One thing I can do on this bass more easily is to play an octave pair and add a 5th above.
The fact is, there are a whole lot of possible neck dimensions that would be great. The stock settings are a bit too wide for me, but I once played a medium scale Distillate that was just 1/8" narrower at nut and bridge. That felt great, too. I don't think I'd notice the difference between 1.5 and 1.6 at the nut, but I definitely can feel 1.75 as too wide. I certainly expect that I would notice the difference between 15.5mm and 17mm at the bridge, but I could adapt to it and either would work. There just comes a time when you have to pick a number and go with it, or you'll be going back and forth for a year. Maybe there is one perfect set of dimensions out there, but until they have a machine like the optometrist uses, it won't be found. Or maybe it will, I just won't be able to prove it.
On closer inspection, the nut on this bass is more like 1.53 than 1.5, for what that's worth. |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 914
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 13, 2005 - 9:41 pm: | |
Well, Dave, you're pretty smart there. The strings are seeming awfully close together the more I play this guy. I think it may be just a little too extreme for me. The tones, though, are to die for. What a monster!!!
I am not sure if anyone has been paying attention here the past few days to take action. If not, then maybe we should chat a bit more before the cutting starts.
How about 1.6 x 1.95 ctr-to-ctr?
-Bob |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 933
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 1:44 pm: | |
Well, it's been almost two months since an update here, though there was some email traffic between Mica and me. There was a recent spurt of FTC activity and I feel left out, so I thought I would post.
Last status was that I was waiting for:
1. Confirmation of neck dimensions. It appeared that the neck was at least rough cut before this discussion, so there was some room for variation. My position was that if the nut were already cut for 1.5", that it would be fine, but that I would like the bridge narrowed either way.
2. Are slightly lighter strings available in this scale? If 40-60-80-100 is available for short scale, I would perfer that.
3. Has any examination of the photos I sent in for a possible custom inlay ocurred? If so, are there any ideas for materials, best location or cost?
-Bob
(Message edited by bsee on July 11, 2005) |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 944
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 3:25 pm: | |
Apparently, this project has been stalled a few months based on lost communications. I just heard that Alembic is waiting for the final neck specs that I emailed to them at the end of May. I guess there's still no substitute for picking up a telephone from time to time, but I didn't want to be more of a pest than I had to. On the plus side, my woods have had a little more time to season and settle in....
Rather than trying email again, I am posting the specs here where I know they won't get lost. Here's a copy of those neck specs in what I believe to be Mica's preferred format:
id =
scale length = 30.75
string dia. 1=.040 2=.060 3=.080 4=.100
at nut end:
fingerboard width = 1.6
treble edge allowance = 0.15
bass edge allowance = 0.15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.410
string center 2 to 3 = 0.410
string center 3 to 4 = 0.410
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.360
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.340
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.320
at bridge end:
treble edge allowance = 0.15
bass edge allowance = 0.15
string center 1 to 2 = 0.650
string center 2 to 3 = 0.650
string center 3 to 4 = 0.650
spacing between 1 and 2 = 0.600
spacing between 2 and 3 = 0.580
spacing between 3 and 4 = 0.560
string edge to edge = 2.020
(projected) fingerboard width at bridge = 2.320
fingerboard width at nut = 1.6
fingerboard width at 24th fret = ??
fingerboard width at 25th fret = ??
fingerboard length = 23.4939662212595
Note two things:
1. The original nut spec was 1.5". If the neck that was started has already been trimmed narrower than 1.6" at the nut, I will gladly accept the narrower spacing at that end. I don't want anything to be wasted or need rebuilding because of this spec.
2. The spacing assumes the narrower 40-60-80-100 strings are available for this scale.
Mica/Valentino, you have my cell phone number if we need to talk about any of this.
Thanks!
-Bob |
valvil
Moderator
Username: valvil
Post Number: 741
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 8:16 pm: | |
Hello Bob,
that's great, we can get going again now.
Valentino |
bsee
Senior Member
Username: bsee
Post Number: 993
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 08, 2006 - 12:30 pm: | |
Well, I am told the bass is just about done. I am currently awaiting word about cost/design for the custom inlay. |
mica
Moderator
Username: mica
Post Number: 3175
Registered: 6-2000
| | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 2:14 pm: | |
Here's the line art for the bumblebee:
And here I've superimposed it on the embroidered patch so you can see where the lines came from:
Let me know if this has got the look you were after as far as extracting the lines from the threads, and I'll make a mock up with materials. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page