| Author | Message | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 268 Registered: 9-2005 |
It recently occured to me that the Omega cutout must affect the "reach" of the lower notes... the 1st and 2cnd fret, in particular, y'know... Now, I'm totally sold on the aesthetics and functionality of the Balance K body in general, and of the Omega cutout variant in particular. But... part of the concept of THIS bass is to contrast "8 Strings of Power" by being a smaller, lighter, and easier-to-play bass. I don't want to have to reach farther than I do on my 8-String for the low notes. My 8-string Europa is a 35 inch scale instrument, as you know; and the tailpiece is close to the edge of the instrument; now since this 6-String will be a 34 inch scale, that should "give" me an inch less reach; but then the Omega cutout would seem to make it "longer"... to stretch the 1st fret even farther away from me. Is this so? Or am I missing something? I'm wondering if maybe I should switch to the point (which I'd probably either have shaved down or altogether off). I REALLY love the Omega on the Balance K... it's a large part of what's sold me on the shape/bodystyle. Without the Omega, I'm not sure if I like the Balance K Point any better than the Europa -which I love. (But I definitely love it a little more WITH the Omega.) I want this bass to be about function more than form; if it comes down to an either/or, I'll go with function and sacrifice the Omega... or maybe go with a Europa body if that would still be an option. What are your thoughts on this? I'll defer to your expertise... but so you Alembic Doctors can give the best diagnosis, again, my concern is that I want the 1st fret to be easier to reach/play than it is on my 8-String Europa. What should I do? Would the 34 inch Balance K Omegas' 1st fret be harder/the same/easier to reach/play as my 1st fret on the Europa. My intuition is that the Point variation would require less "reach", as the tailpiece would presumably be mounted right near the edge of the bass (whereas this is not possible on the Omega variation -due to the absence of wood/Omega cutout displacing the tailpiece and pushing the fingerboard/lower frets further "out"). What's the scoop, Doc(s)? | ||
| mica
Moderator Username: mica Post Number: 3894 Registered: 6-2000 |
Normal placement for the upper horn reach is between 14-15th fret on the Europa and between 13-14th fret on the Balance K, so they are very similar. While a bass with a point can have the tailpiece mounted closer to the bottom of the bass, it usually isn't because it would interfere with upper fret access without modifications to the lower body half. Here's an example of a Balance K with a point carving, so you can see where the tailpiece falls. Eliminating the point will reduce the weight some. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 273 Registered: 9-2005 |
So (forgive me if I'm dense/slow) the Point and Omega variants BOTH have the same bridge/tailpiece placement? It seems that is what you're saying, and the picture you provided -as well as the "Dragonfly" bass in FTC- make it look like it IS in the same position. So, then, how would the "reach" required to access the 1st fret of my 34 inch Balance K Omega compare to the "reach" required to reach the 1st fret of a standard long scale 34 inch Europa? Would it require MORE reach, about the SAME, or LESS REACH? As long as the "reach" required to access the 1st fret is equal or less to that of a standard 34 inch scale Europa (which would logically be less than my 35 inch scale Europa) then I want to stick with the plan... with the Balance K Omega variation I've spec'd. If for some reason, the "reach" is greater, than I might want to talk to you about switching to a Point or Europa and/or "burying the fingerboard" as clubmember Tom mentioned you did for his "ET" bass. Please clarify at your convenience whether the "reach" required to access the 1st fret on a 34 inch Balance K Omega is more or the same or less than that of a 34 inch Europa. If it's equal or less, then I can just forget about it and kick back. If it's more than I need to get your input to figure a way to make it equal or less, be it switching to a Europa, or to a Point, and adjusting the tailpiece placement! | ||
| mica
Moderator Username: mica Post Number: 3901 Registered: 6-2000 |
The carving variation of point, smooth, or omega on Standard, Balance K, Balance Point, 3/4, or Scorpion body shapes does not affect the position of the tailpiece. I think the two body shapes, Europa and Balance K would be very similar in the amount of reach to the first fret since the place where the strap connects on the horn is very similar to eachother - they are separated by one fret or less. Think of it this way - imagine the upper horn extended to the fifth fret. The reach to the first fret would be decreased. Now image the upper horn extends only to the 20th fret, the reach to the first fret would be increased. Does this help you visualize? | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 284 Registered: 9-2005 |
Ummm... well, I already got THAT. Bassed on our previous discussions. I get that the horn has slightly more reach. But it also seems like the body must be "longer", and this must factor into the equation. For example, if we'd put an omega in my 8-String Europa, it's obvious this would require pushing the tailpiece and bridge in (and therefore pushing the fingerboard out, and increasing the "reach" necessary to reach the first fret). But then again, maybe I'm wrong, and the Balance K body isn't longer... maybe it's shorter... I don't know! Anyway, I don't want to be a pain... but I was hoping for a little more than your statement that the reach is "very similar". I'm switching down from the 35 inch scale to the 34 inch scale so I'll have (a little) less reach. So, of course... I want to have (a little) less reach. So I just want to confirm. It would REALLY be a drag if I got this bass, and the reach required for 1st fret access was equal or (even worse) GREATER than (with) my 8-String. I'm hoping you can give me a definitive answer on this. Hopefully/maybe -if no one already just knows and can say- y'all have a 34 inch Europa and a 34 inch Balance K that a person or two could play real quick, to compare. But if not, I could ask club members, or maybe Beaver. Surely there are a couple club members who have both a Balance K and a Europa. Bottom line: I really want to stick with the Balance K Omega... BUT this is based on the assumption that the "reach" needed to access the 1st fret would be at least a little less than what I have now on/for my 35 inch Europa. It either is, or it isn't... and I don't know, so I'm hoping you do. So long as the reach is less than my Europa's, than I'm 100% for the Balance K Omega; on the other hand, if the reach required to access the 1st fret on the Balance K is/would be equal or greater -than that of my 35 inch Europa, then I'd want to either switch to a Europa body or "bury" the fingerboard (move the peghead closer to the bridge) and/by sacrificing the Omega and moving the tailpiece near the end of the body. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 297 Registered: 9-2005 |
I've asked for any clubmembers who know the answer to this question to share their knowledge with me, but thus far I've not got an answer; however, Bsee pointed out that we could extend the horn, if needed. Personally, I'm hoping that the truth/reality is that the 1st fret access of the 34 inch Balance K is equal or less than that of the 34 inch Europa -because then it would logically have to be less than my 35 inch Europa. If the "reach" is equal or less than a same-scale Europa, then everything is simple, and we can just proceed smoothly with the plan and just make a standard Balance K with dual BTC. But if it turns out that reality/truth is that the 34 inch Balance K Omega requires MORE reach, then, in that case, I'd like to discuss options for extending the horn to reduce the reach. I was thinking that, if necessary, you could "bury" the fingerboard, moved it "in" (towards the bridge) like you did for Tom's "ET" bass... but I'd have hated to sacrifice the Omega. I'm hopeful now that the worst case scenario now would simply require a longer horn, which hopefully wouldn't be too difficult/costly. I keep hoping to see a couple members respond and say, "actually Mark, my 34 inch Balance K seems to require equal or less reach than that of my 34 inch Europa!" It would make things so easy if the standard setup just works! So I'm crossing my fingers and toes that I'll hear those who know tell me that reality IS how I want it to be! But if not, then I'll wanna talk horns! Thanks Mica! (Message edited by the 8 string king on January 02, 2007) | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 304 Registered: 9-2005 |
Hi Mica, and happy new year! I started a thread over the weekend asking for any clubmembers who have both a 34 inch scale Europa and a 34 inch scale Balace K to answer the question of reach... but, unfortunately, I haven't got a definitive answer yet. The ONLY thing I've heard so far is that you said they were "very similar", and I think bsee/Bob said they're "about the same". I imagine that there must surely be someone -if not a couple someones- at the shop there who can answer this... what, with all the basses y'all make. So I imagine I'll (hopefully) get an answer soon. Ideally, the truth/answer is that the Balance K requires equal or less "reach" than a Europa of the same (34 inch) scale... in which case y'all can just plow ahead, since then it would by definition have to require less reach than my 35 inch scale Europa. Then we can just stick with the plan, which I'd prefer, and I know that it's also preferable for Alembic to stick with specs rather than changing them. But again, if there IS a reach issue, then I need your help/expertise/guidance to work out a solution. A longer horn seems like the 1st option to consider -assuming there IS an issue (which then requires a solution). It also hit me that I/we could reconsider the scale length, maybe change it back to the original 33 inch scale I'd first considered. But again, at this point, I'd prefer to stick with the specified length of 34 -UNLESS we need to consider options to deal with the "reach" issue -assuming there is one. I was initially very interested in this scale length, but conversations with Valention convinced me to switch the spec to 34 inch scale. This was because I'd have to choose between using/finding medium scale strings... OR using long scale strings at (slightly) REDUCED TENSION (which seems really iffy/sketchy/dangerous to me), and I know Alembic only carries/stocks Alembic long scale sets (by the way, I wonder why that is... I'd figure since y'll have Alembic strings, you'd carry and sell long, medium, and short-scale sets). So I just choose to scrap the 33 and go with the 34, to keep things simple. As long as the reach required to get to the 1st fret is at least an inch less than on my 35 inch Europa, it will be satisfactory. "But is it" is the question. Anyway, at your convenience, please establish and convey to me whether the 34 inch Balance K requires MORE reach than a 34 inch Europa. So long as is doesn't, then all is good, and can proceed according to plan. On the other hand, if there is a reach issue, then I'd like to hear your thoughts/recommendations/options for extending the horn length, adjusting the scale, and/or any other ways of addressing the problem, if there is a problem (which hopefully there isn't!) I'm certain that you're both busy, and as on top of this as your time and many responsibilites allow, so I'm going to abstain from calling you this week unless you indicate that there IS a problem/issue/concern regarding the "reach". (In which case, it would be much better for me to communicate verbally.) (In lieu of that) I'll just rely on this FTC medium for communication. I'm hoping you'll have the time to at least get me an answer on whether or not there is actually even an issue/concern in the first place -this week. I'll cross my fingers and toes! Thanks again for everything! Mark P.S. I'm still very interested in the neck width of the inner core, and reminder, I'm interested in the "chambered"/hollow... whatever you call it... construction. I'm pretty sure I've already said it, but, just to make sure it's on-record, I do want that feature! A large part of why I ended up going with the "Mark King Deluxe" package -with Coco Bolo on front and back- was based on your raves about "Andy's Custom Europa", with the Coco Bolo front and back, sandwiching a hollow mahogany body! | ||
| mica
Moderator Username: mica Post Number: 3930 Registered: 6-2000 |
Hi Mark, I'm pretty sure that you won't be able to get a definitive answer from anyone, including me. This is beacuse there are many variables, not the least of which is how you hold your bass. As I've stated, I think that both the Balance K and Europa have very similar reaches. On Friday, I asked Valentino to model an Orion 5 (same body shape as Europa as far as straplocks are concerned) and a Balance K 5. Here's the photos with his reach to the first fret:   Now, these photos are not exactly taken from the same angle, but you can probably tell the reach is similar. Valentino noted that comparing these two particular basses, the first fret reach was a little closer on the Balance K to him. I hope this visualization is helpful to you in making your decision. | ||
| byoung
Senior Member Username: byoung Post Number: 466 Registered: 12-2004 |
Valentino-- always mugging for the camera. Hah! | ||
| lidon2001
Advanced Member Username: lidon2001 Post Number: 273 Registered: 4-2005 |
He looks a bit more inspired on the BalK. Must be the Ebony in the neck. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 316 Registered: 9-2005 |
Mica & Val, thanks for taking the pictures. Mica, I don't understand why, but accept that you feel no one's gonna provide me a definitive answer. The question assumed "all other things being equal." Presumably the same person using the same strap holding each instrument the same way would find each model to require more or equal or less reach. At any rate, I'm a little reassured that there are now 3 people (you, Bob, and Val) saying they're "similar", and no voices saying (thus far) that the Balance K requires more reach. Vals comment that the Balance K seemed to require less reach was the most encouraging comment. Still, at this point, I'd like to formally ask about options & pricing for possibly slightly extending the horn. Please ask Val or Susan about the "pistol grip" horn on "Raging Bass." How much extra is this, and how much longer is it? Can you offer a simpler, less expensive longer-horn option? (The pistol-grip looks a little fancy/pricy... I'm mainly interested in function... something to add just a little length... maybe an inch or so.) I'm really torn on this; I was hoping for a definitive answer, but if such can not be provided, then it basically leaves me with one of 3 choices: 1. Extend the horn length a little -if it entails little to no additional labor/cost; 2. Just go with the standard Balance K and hope that it will be "similar" to a 34 inch Europa -and require less reach than my 35 inch Europa. 3. Switch to a 34 inch Europa body-which would be a guarenteed way of making sure it would require less reach than my 35 inch Europa. Option 3 seems like the surest way to eliminate the reach concern; however, as much as I'd like to have another Europa, I'd still prefer the Balance K. So I need to find out about extended horn options and prices, and I guess I'll have to then think about it a little. Thanks again for everything! Mark By the way, that Balance K is unbelieveably stunning! Burl Redwood? | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 317 Registered: 9-2005 |
And option 4: pay extra for pistol-grip or another extension, depending on how much! | ||
| mica
Moderator Username: mica Post Number: 3938 Registered: 6-2000 |
That's the thing, all other things aren't equal. The most important thing is how you hold the bass. It's not a given that you will hold two basses of different shapes the same way that let's say Valentino holds the same two basses. The best answer to the question is an educated guess, and that is they are very similar. I'm certain the pistol grip will be less expensive than a new custom body shape. Making the horn bigger means new plans. When Valentino is answering your other princing questions, he'll address the pistol grip as well, and that should help you decide on which of your 4 options to choose. He's usually here around 11:00 or so, so he'll be contacting you around 12:00 I suppose. And, yes, that Balance K is Burl Redwood. It's going to Will Gunn Guitars very soon. I agree, it's gorgeous. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 319 Registered: 9-2005 |
I've been going over and over all the pictures, postings, and testimonials regarding the Balance K, and other things, to come to a decision ASAP -but the right decision. Just to let you know, I'll be at work/out until probably after 6 pm today. Didn't see any emails yet, but I'm becoming increasingly un-interested in altering the horn of going for the pistol grip. But I'd still like the price for the extended grip/horn. Thanks, Mark. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 320 Registered: 9-2005 |
Well, I know what I want. For sure –or at least as sure as I can be. I’ve spent nearly every waking hour for the past several days dwelling on it, and looking over and over every post I could find on the site about the Balance K in Showcase, FTC, and the Custom Archives. I’ve looked carefully through the comments and testimonials; I’ve also looked at Europas, and I’ve contemplated. I’ve carefully considered numerous alternatives; I’ve considered pros & cons, and tradeoffs and risks; I’ve evaluated what I want detailwise, and how individual specific things fit into a hierarchy. And I’ve figured it out. I figured it out by process of elimination. As much as I love the Europa shape –and that’s quite a bit- I want something different from it. I simply love the Balance K, and the only thing affecting that is the concern over reach. I very seriously considered asking for a Rogue body; the Rogue was designed for a 35 inch scale, and has that extra long horn which I’ve been told gives it the best “reach” of any Alembic body, so a 34 should definitely have to require significantly less reach than my 35 inch Europa. But as I looked at Rogue after Rogue, I just concluded that the shape is not for me aesthetically. The only reason I’d choose one is for function; and while I do appreciate the beauty and function of the form, it’s just doesn’t do it for me appearancewise, and I like it FAR less than the Balance K. So I go back to the Balance K. Now I think again about switching to the original 33 inch scale again; but the string tension is an issue. Now, per Val’s recommendation, I attempted AGAIN to just… find information about Thomastik bass strings, ‘cause supposedly the have great medium scale strings, so I thought, “okay, despite the disadvantage of having to rely on very expensive & more complicated to get strings, if they’re reliable, it could just solve the problem. Anyway, I spent WAY too much time trying to just find info on them and how to get them, and I just wasted time and gave myself a headache. Their strings must be pretty good if people continue to buy them when someone who wants to has such a hard time doing it. Whatever. Suffice it to say, they’re ruled out. So that brings me back to the 34. I looked at the tailpiece… there’s very little additional room to move it closer than standard to the Omega, just a millimeter or two, nothing to be gained by asking you to move everything in a millimeter or two. I thought about sacrificing the Omega, and have you bury the fingerboard, that is move the peghead closer to the tailpiece. This was the best option so far. Switch to the point, and move the neck in. That way, I have less reach for sure. But I’d have to sacrifice that Omega… and I really love the Omega. I like the Point better than the Rogue; and about the same as the Europa, but it would score points for being different (than the Europa). So it comes down to a contest between the Balance K Omega, and the Balance K point. I looked at numerous Balance K Omegas, and 3 different point versions I could find… over and over again… and I concluded that I find the Balance K Omega to be FAR more exciting/pleasing aesthetically. So I want the Balance K Omega. Like the original plan. But what about the reach? Well, though I don’t completely understand it, I respect and accept your expertise, and your statement that you don’t think anyone can give me a definitive answer. I consider your and Bob’s statement that the reach is “similar” (between a 34” Europa and a 34” Balance K). I tentatively assume that it should therefore require at least slightly less reach than my 35” 8-String. I’ve found several testimonials regarding how “ergonomic” and “easy to play” the Balance K is. And I think that, with a much smaller neck/more narrow neck, and with “only” 1 Ebony laminate, and a smaller peghead, the overall feel… the other factors besides reach & scale length MUST surely make this bass MUCH easier to play. So, I’m gonna take a chance with the reach issue, because, by process of elimination, I’m not willing to risk/sacrifice anything else. I spend a LOT of time trying to find medium-scale strings, and, after looking about 300 different string offerings, and google-ing galore, I was unable to find even ONE set of medium-scale 6-string strings –from ANYONE!!! That sealed the deal on a 34 being the thing. I’m not going to order an instrument with a medium or medium-long scale when apparently no strings exist for them (or are this hard to find)! After reviewing Val’s “Bird of Prey”, I AM REITERATING MY INTEREST IN THE “PISTOL GRIP”. I know I’ve seen more than that example, and “Raging Bass”, but those were the only ones I could find. Now the “Pistol Grip” on Raging Bass didn’t grab me that much, especially as far as fitting in the the aesthetic nuances of the Balance K, but after looking at it a bunch of times, the obvious hit me (aided by the explicit comments that) that bass ISN’T a Balance K. Then I remembered Val’s Bird of Prey having the Pistol Grip, and when I looked at HIS/that example, THAT Pistol Grip looks MUCH cooler, and looks like it adds a good inch or more while flowing better/fitting in better –with the Balance K Omega. SO I WANT THE BALANCE K OMEGA –LIKE ORIGINALLY PLANNED… but I’m also VERY INTERESTED in the option of adding the “Pistol Grip”, and request pricing for this essential detail, as well as an estimate of added length. A really nice touch would be –if it’s not too much trouble- to draw me a little simple mockup of what it would look like on a REGULAR (non-pointy variety) of the Balance K Omega –maybe even superimposed OVER the regular, to really maximize the “seeing” of the difference. To be clear, I’m gonna stick with the BALANCE K OMEGA REGARDLESS. But I’m VERY SERIOUS about considering the option of the extended Pistol Grip option. If I can get something like Val’s Pistol Grip which doesn’t interfere with the flow/aesthetics of the body, and which adds an inch of “reach”, I’ll want to get it, and price/affordability would be/is the only consideration. The last I checked (earlier today) I still hadn’t received any price/info for this feature. Actually, the most simple thing would seem to be to post it here, but if for any reason you prefer to send it privately via email, I’ll remind you my email address is: charlieshep@cox.net I should be able to give you a decision on this final detail pretty quickly upon receiving a price, and even quicker if there’s a mockup/picture to compare to/evaluate visually. Also –reminder- I’m still interested on price info for the “mini-Omega” in the peghead. Thanks again for your devotion to detail and greatness, Mica & gang! I look forward to getting this info, so this can be resolved and put back into production! P.S. Tomorrow -well, actually today (Friday) I'll be leaving for work by 6:30 a.m. and hopefully back before 4:00, at which point I'll immediately check back here, and possibly call, bassed on what's happening. But I won't be here much before then. If we don't hook up for whatever reason, I wish you all a happy weekend! Mark | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 321 Registered: 9-2005 |
By the way, I'm starting to think that Burl Redwood Balance K is the prettiest I've EVER seen... if I wasn't so totally sold and gung-ho on the Coco Bolo and it's sound... Wow, it REALLY looks awesome! | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 62 Registered: 10-2006 |
Maybe I'm missing something here, Mark, but why would the overall length of the string be an issue? As we discussed in an earlier thread, what's above the nut doesn't affect the tension. Pitch is a function of the combination of gauge, scale & tension, so I would think that the quest, rather than finding a specific overall length, would instead be to find a gauge that gives you the tension you want on your scale and still feels good. If it's too long, just clip off the excess. Us guitar types do it all the time. Or, to look at it another way, if you want a 33" scale, the tension WILL be less with the same strings, so your decision is whether the tension is more important to your fingers than the reach. If reach is the main thing, long-scale strings will cover 33" as well as 34". If the tension is more important, go with the long scale. But I wouldn't base the choice on a lack of medium scale strings. But if there's a factor I'm missing, please enlighten me; I freely admit (though never to my children) that there are many things I don't know. Peter | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 322 Registered: 9-2005 |
NOTE: I'm submitting this post in 2 places: here, and in the "Build Record & Discussion" area. Hi all. I just got off the phone with Valentino, and based on our conversation, I now feel COMPLETELY secure with my decision to stick with the Balance K Omega. Further, (again, based on that conversation) there doesn't seem to be any need for an extended horn/pistol grip. So I'm withdrawing the request for price info on that. So I'm giving you the go-ahead to proceed with the original plan, and I appreciate your having beared with me while I went through the necessary inconvenience of figuring it out and making sure I'd get the right thing for me. I now feel very confident about it. So at this point, I'm going to kick back and leave y'all alone for a while. The biggest pending issue is just the Coco Bolo, and again, I'd appreciate the opportunity to see & approve your choices. Other than that, the only other small things are the estimate for the 5-screw setup and a price for the peghead Omega; and both of these are minor details that can be addressed down the road when the bass is actually built, so there's no hurry. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled here on FTC, and anxiously anticipating and appreciating the updates as they come, however big or small! I look forward to the next stage -which I assume is putting on the body wings. Thanks again for everything, and have a great weekend, folks. Mark | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 324 Registered: 9-2005 |
Peter, after reading and rereading your post, I'm completely clueless about what you're referring to. You ask "why would the overall length of the string be an issue?" Uhm... I don't know. Who's saying it is, and where? You state "As we discussed in an earlier thread, what's above the nut doesn't affect the tension." I remember... but... why are you bringing it up... what's it got to do with anything here? I'm not clear. This thread is about concern over the "reach"... the distance my hand/arm must "reach" to reach the 1st fret -NOT about "overall string length" nor "the length of string above the nut." I can't see any point/connection to anything that has been said here. (Don't take that the wrong way, ya rascal... I appreciate 'yer feedback! Thanks again for sharing your thoughts on that previous thread!) | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 66 Registered: 10-2006 |
Two posts above mine, you were worrying over the trouble with finding medium gauge strings, and seemed to be leaning away from your first choice of scale due to that. (" I was unable to find even ONE set of medium-scale 6-string strings –from ANYONE!!! That sealed the deal on a 34 being the thing. I’m not going to order an instrument with a medium or medium-long scale when apparently no strings exist for them (or are this hard to find)!") I was wondering why the easier availablity of longer strings would dictate a change to 34" when a pair of sidecuts can render them any (shorter) length you want. Sorry if I misunderstood your lament. And, oh yeah - I LOVE that neck! Peter (Message edited by Cozmik_Cowboy on January 05, 2007) | ||
| mica
Moderator Username: mica Post Number: 3966 Registered: 6-2000 |
Okay, now that I reread your post, it seems you're not quite as ready on the body shape as I first thought (sorry sometimes I do get lost in a long post). What I heard from Val this afternoon was that we were sticking with the Balance K Omega style. Any custom body shape design starts at $650. This is not an item that is discounted through the dealer as it's strictly labor. It's not as simple as just adding a horn from one to the other; even when you change one small part, every curve needs to be reconsidered or it will look stuck on. If the details of the custom shape impact labor, like with extra carving for a pistol grip, you'll be charged for that as well. Even though Valentino's Bird of Prey is based on the Balance K, it's a dedicated shape with many subtle changes to the perimeter, and not so subtle changes (like the extra pointies). To adapt this shape with the pistol grip (it must have two points in it - too long for any other consideration), it's still a custom design. It still gets the full attention of our staff to make sure it will be beautiful and functional. Now, I don't recall that we've made a Balance K with a pistol grip yet. The pistol grip option is an additional $300. Since it's a template that we'll use and reuse many times, we wouldn't charge the $650 minimum custom body shape design fee. Of course, you'd have like the shape we come up with for our standard library. Just some food for thought. See peghead shape thread for the last little bit. (Message edited by mica on January 05, 2007) | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 325 Registered: 9-2005 |
Hi Mica. After reading & rereading your edit to your post, and then going back over my most recents posts, I'm mystified. There seems to be a misunderstanding, though if I've said something to cause it, I'm not sure what. Anyway let me clarify. I'll do it in terms of a timeline. After thinking real hard about it in great detail and checking all sorts of things, I came to the conclusion THAT I WANT TO STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN... with the BALANCE K OMEGA. And there were only 2 other issues: interest in the pistol grip, and the cost of the peghead omega. I explicitly stated this above in my post #320. Here are 3 paragraphs that state that, quoted from above: "SO I WANT THE BALANCE K OMEGA –LIKE ORIGINALLY PLANNED… but I’m also VERY INTERESTED in the option of adding the “Pistol Grip”, and request pricing for this essential detail, as well as an estimate of added length. A really nice touch would be –if it’s not too much trouble- to draw me a little simple mockup of what it would look like on a REGULAR (non-pointy variety) of the Balance K Omega –maybe even superimposed OVER the regular, to really maximize the “seeing” of the difference. To be clear, I’m gonna stick with the BALANCE K OMEGA REGARDLESS. But I’m VERY SERIOUS about considering the option of the extended Pistol Grip option. If I can get something like Val’s Pistol Grip which doesn’t interfere with the flow/aesthetics of the body, and which adds an inch of “reach”, I’ll want to get it, and price/affordability would be/is the only consideration." and also: "Also –reminder- I’m still interested on price info for the “mini-Omega” in the peghead." AFTER posting that at 1 am that morning, I called and spoke to Valentino that afternoon, and explicitly CONFIRMED the BALANCE K OMEGA. He assured me there was nothing to worry about with the reach, and that it was easy to reach the 1st fret. After speaking to him, I felt comfortable that the pistol grip wasn't needed, and told him to withdraw the request. I asked about the pricing for the peghead omega, and he said he'd have to get that from Susan, so at that point I again confirmed explicitly that I wanted to stick with the original plan, the BALANCE K OMEGA, and told him I'd also immediately post a posting to that effect. And that's exactly what I did. As soon as I got off the phone, I made another post (post# 322, above) which I began with a note stating it was dual-posted here, and on the main thread -and that post explicitly referred to my conversation with Val, that I was dead-set on the original plan -the Balance K Omega- and that I was withdrawing my request for pricing on the pistol grip. And I give you the explicit go-ahead in that post. It seems as clear as it could be. Apparently something has made you think that I'm "not quite as ready on the body shape as you first thought", but I'm clueless what it would be. I actually didn't see the edit until now 'cause I'd been thinking about the Omega in the headstock, and I didn't want to post about it until I was sure. This was further complicated by reading Shim's threads, which made me aware of something significant that I wasn't aware of -which was that you could add the bass & treble toggles to Signature electronics for $400 per set. This led to some thinking about that, 'cause I'd love to have Signature electronics IF I also had the B&T toggles -even if there were only one set; but it was too expensive, as I'd have to pay $400 just to get back the Signature package, and then ANOTHER $400 for the B&T toggles, and then another $125 for the other 3-position Q... and even with the dealer discount, it's still a bit too much, as much as I want it. So, after I eliminated that consideration, and returned to the issue of the peghead omega and the bevel, I did decide that I WANT TO HAVE BOTH THE FRONT & REAR PEGHEAD BEVEL WITH THE PEGHEAD OMEGA. (Based on the assumption that we'll run it through Beaver and get the dealer discount. With that, I can, gasp, afford it! [By which I mean, go further into debt over it!]) SO, TO SUMMARIZE: prior to this post, I'd decided FOR CERTAIN that I WANT THE BALANCE K OMEGA body WITH THE PEGHEAD BEVELED (front&back) AND THE PEGHEAD OMEGA. And I HAD dismissed the pistol grip. But y'know what? You went and got me intrigued. You haven't done one on a Balance K, you say...? I guess the Bird of Prey doesn't count since it's not exactly a Balance K, but a custom Variant. Yeah, now I'm curious again. Perhaps it's some weird vanity or otherwise silly value, but the idea of having an Alembic "first" definitely has some appeal for me. What can I say? And we're talking about a functional feature here. So now, at this point, I'm seriously re-considering the pistol grip... re-considering adding it. $300 bucks isn't too hideous, and it could fit in well with the dual omegas. I'm certain you'd make it look great. The big question is: "how much longer would the horn be?" Approximately. It add's a little, right? To be clear, if it DOESN'T add any length, we can scrap the idea right here. But if it does go further towards the peghead, then I'm interested in considering it, and how much length it adds to the horn would be an important factor. So, just to completely, absolutely clarify, I'm going to summarize the final details again, with the disclaimer that there are just TWO details left: whether or not I ADD the pistol grip; and whether the tailpiece will have 3 or 5 screws (which may affect whether I get the bird I'd prefer, or the bar. I'd prefer a 5-screw bird to a 5-screw bar, but I'd prefer a 5-screw bar to a 3-screw bird.) FINAL CONFIRMED SPECIFICATIONS FOR MARK'S CUSTOM BASS: Mark King Deluxe Custom 6-String Alembic Bass Balance K Omega body Coco Bolo, front & back, BTC on front & back Hollow Mahagoney Body Custom neck, completed Crown peghead, beveled front&back with omega -NO "MARK KING" LOGO (assuming dealer discount) Pinstripe(s)at Alembic's discretion -BUT AS THIN AS POSSIBLE TO MINIMIZE SHAVING NECK down. NO THICK ACCENT/PINSTRIPE(S), PLEASE. Peghead laminates at Alembic's discretion, if you happened to be inspired to create a combo to really go with the unique neck, that'd be extra cool. Continuous wood backplates. Europa electronics with 3-position Q, 1st preference is for the "Diamond" configuration -if there's no extra cost; otherwise, I prefer the "Essense/Europa" configuration. If possible, I'd prefer (just) one electronics cavity, and if more than one is necessary, please avoid doing one on the neck, which I really hate. That's it. Really, we should be virtually ready to go here. I was completelly ready, but now you've piqued my curiousity about the pistol grip, so I just want to know ABOUT how much length it adds. Valentino's seems to add a good inch or so -but of course that's not necessarily the same as what mine would offer. I don't even need to see it to make a decision, I know you'll do a great job. But the added length is essential; again, if the pistol grip wouldn't add any length, then you can scrap the idea. But I got the impression that it did add length, that that was part of the point. It's explicitly stated that the pistol grip on Raging Bass adds length, and it's obvious that Val's is visibly longer than "standard." So really, this is the only thing. Just get back to me on this, I'll give you a decision, and then y'all can go ahead with it. The only other VERY small thing in the screw/tailpiece issue, which I assume we have a little time on, but which I can give you a decision on the minute I get the price. If you need any clarification or anything else from me, let me know. Once I decide on the pistol grip, I can call up Beaver and add on that, the bevel, and the peghead omega (and any extra for a 5-screw tailpiece -unless that goes directly to Alembic) that day. If you had any pictures or references for the pistol grip, that would be cool. Would it be pretty much like Raging Bass, or different? (Message edited by the 8 string king on January 07, 2007) | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 326 Registered: 9-2005 |
Peter, cutting a long-scale string doesn't make it into a medium-scale string. Medium-scale strings would be a different thickness, thicker, to compensate for their shorter-ness. By all accounts, it's not as simple as just cutting the string; a long-scale string on a medium-scale bass simply won't have the same tension it does on a long scale; that's WHY you need the medium-scale strings... that's WHY they exist. (At least, according to everything I've been told by all the experts -including the ones here!) Thanks again for you input, and for helping me with my decision on custom #2! | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 1974 Registered: 7-2004 |
O.K., I'll jump in on this one. It seems to me that if you take, oh say for example, a .45 gauge long scale string and cut some of the length off, wouldn't it still be .45 gauge? As length changes, the gauges may change that are used for strings labeled a simple generic "light", "medium", or "heavy", but if one chooses specific gauges, I don't see how changing the length will result in a change of the thickness? But what do I know, I only Bill, the guitar one. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 328 Registered: 9-2005 |
Eggzactly. Thet's whaht Ah'm theyin'! | ||
| jacko
Senior Member Username: jacko Post Number: 983 Registered: 10-2002 |
One BIG problem with using long scale strings on a short scale bass is that the end that goes round the tuner capstan is likely to fracture. The winding end of a bass string is tapered for a good reason which I found out to my cost the first time I ever accidentally put long scale strings on my first homemade short scale bass. graeme | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 68 Registered: 10-2006 |
Mark - Bill has made my point somewhat more succinctly than I. A .45 is a .45, no matter what the length. Graeme - AH! That would come under the "Maybe I'm missing something" heading. It's been so long since I strung a bass, I'd forgotten the tapered end - and this would explain Mark's reluctance to snip. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Back to Mark - in the words of Emily Lattella, "Oh. That's very different. Never mind." We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread. Peter | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 331 Registered: 9-2005 |
This is getting pretty funny. There is obviously a significant misunderstanding here. For the record, I am fully aware that a .45 is a .45, regardless of length. At no point in this -nor any other thread- have I said anything to the contrary. If your postings DO have any bearing on anything I've said, I can't see what the connection is. Cutting the end off a long-scale string simply (and obviously) will NOT turn it into a thicker gage medium-scale string -and thus has no value as a solution for an inability to find MEDIUM SCALE strings. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 332 Registered: 9-2005 |
Mica, to confirm the conversation we just finished moments ago, I will be sticking with the STANDARD (NON-pistol grip) Balance K Omega. That leaves only the possible/if needed approval on my part of the Coco Bolo (but if you think you've got it, go for it!!!) and the minor issue of 5 vs 3 screws. So I'll leave y'all alone for a while, and I look forward to seeing the next stage here in my FTC thread when it comes. Again, thanks so much, I appreciate your patience, and apologize for my sometimes excessive density! | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 69 Registered: 10-2006 |
Sorry, Mark - I usually don't have this much trouble expressing myself clearly. I'll make one more attempt. You said that the lack of medium scale strings led you to decide on 34". This confused me, and I was asking for clarification as to why you couldn't buy long scale in a gauge that gives you the tension you want & cut them to fit (of course you can't cut them thicker). Graeme's explanation about the tapered ends answered that for me - now I understand (and hope you do, too). Either way, I'll now limit any input on this thread to oohing and ahhing (and did I mention that I love the neck?) Peter | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 337 Registered: 9-2005 |
Hey, thanks Peter! I appreciate the compliment, and also the feedback. The only thing that really ruffles my feathers is this little ugly thing called "deliberate malice". I don't get any of that from you, and I don't sweat little things, most of all misunderstandings. If I did... I have to become suicidal!!! The understanding I have, is that (relatively) "shorter" scale-length strings tend to have GREATER string tension. If one were to take long-scale strings off a long scale bass and put them on a medium-scale bass, they'd have significantly/noticeably less tension; and if they were taken off and put on to a short-scale bass, they'd be "wet noodles." For this reason, as I understand it, "shorter-scale" strings thus have THICKER gauges; medium-scale strings should be THICKER/WIDER than long-scale strings (so that, when they're "tightened up" they produce comparative tension and pitch). And short-scale strings should be even thicker/wider -for the same reason. If (wider/thicker) quality medium-scale strings were available... if I could buy THICKER medium-scale strings that would have the same tension/pitch as my longer-scale strings (which can ONLY be accomplished by making the strings thicker) I'd have been interested in them; but since I couldn't find any, I decided to stick with the "status quo" long scale strings. And of course, cutting the ends off of long scale strings would obviously NOT make them into thicker, medium-scale strings!!! | ||
| bigbass
Intermediate Member Username: bigbass Post Number: 117 Registered: 6-2002 |
Mark: With what I just read above in your post and understand about strings, I would have to say that just the opposite is true in each instance. None of my instruments are set up that way nor have I ever played one that has been. Just to give ya heads up. ~David |
