Building a custom fretless bass

I haven't been on the internet much lately (weather's too damn nice, why would I want to spend all my time indoors?), so I haven't read everything that's been said, but I do have a couple of things I'll point out. First of all, on the cutaways on your body, I HATE doing bodies where the cutaways come into the body at a very sharp angle like that. I always prefer to have there be a little curve right by the joint there, simply because that angle is a major pain in the ass to work on. It will make it a more difficult to get your curves fair, and sanding in a fairly tight space like that is no fun at all. I'm not saying don't do it, just warning you. Also, if you are spraying a finish on it, you are going to have to be very careful in that area to watch out for either excessive build up or insufficient finish thickness. As I said, it's a pain.

Second, whatever scale length you go with (and I would absolutely go with at LEAST 35"), if you want the B string to sound good, you need to make the neck as stiff as is practical. Your doing a laminated neck, which is a very good thing from a stiffness point of view, but I would go further and inlay either a couple of ¼" X ¼" graphite rods (you can get them from LMI, or some steel rods, along the lines of what Warmoth does on their "Supper Bass Construction" necks. It will make a pretty big difference in the sound of your B string, and for the better.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
metalhead28 said:
Okay, you guys have just about convinced me to go to a 35". I'm sure I won't do 36 though.

I plan on putting active electronics in there - and I don't honestly think the finish on the body, or even the body wood is going to effect the tone very much. I may be wrong. However, I may end up with just an oil finish, I'll decide once I get to that point I suppose. :D

Okay. Talk to me about pickups. The bass I'm used to has active humbuckers. I like the sound pretty well, but it's a fretted bass. The fretless bass I own now has a single passive soapbar pickup. It's a little bland, and I'm not sure how much more I might like an active soapbar pair.
I want this bass to have a fat ass thump in the lower registers, and I want the growl and really pronounced "mwah" sound in the mid and upper registers...but no harshness. What sort of pickups do I want? Should I stick to humbuckers?
Click to expand...



All I'm going to say on the finish thing is oil is BAD, and spraying nitro without proper equipment is stupid - the potentially lethal variety of stupid. Go with LMI's KTM-9 or Stew-Macs waterborne finish, and get Dan Erlewine's book on finishing - it will improve your results 100 fold, seriously. If you want a diatribe, go read one of my other posts on the subject.

As to the electronics, it depends on what you want. From your screen name, I would guess EMGs would be a good choice, but then again this is a fretless, so it's just not going to be an aggressive sounding instrument no matter what you do. Still, they make nice bass pickups.

Personally, I'd probably go with Bartolinis, and if you want to go active go with one of their ±9v preamps (which can be almost any of their preamps, if you wire them correctly - at least if my memory is correct). Also, as a sound guy, I'd STRONGLY advise that you put in an active/passive switch, because there are times where active electronics add just hideous amounts of noise and can make your bass completely useless. I'd just use a push/pull one of the controls.

Either way, on a five string I'd go with a set of soap bar type pickups. With EMG that's your only choice, but even with Bartolini I would go with the soap bars because they will usually pickup a larger portion of the string, which will improve the bass response (a good thing), though at the loss of some of your high end (bad, but not that big of a deal on most basses).


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
eyeteeth said:
The "major" builders use it because it is cheaper, more durable, and quicker to apply.
Click to expand...


I really wasn't going to get into this, but just one point on this one. My (nitro) finish process takes a minimum of about a month, and even Gibson (who rushes their finishes, in my opinion), is taking at least a week or two. I know that I probably have between 20-30 hours into most of my finishes (I make really stupid body shapes which requires the vast major of the sanding to be done by hand - bad planing on my part), and while Gibson does better on that regard than I do, they are still probably around ten hours of actual labor on most of their nitro finishes, if not more (and even at that, they are cutting a lot of corners on their finishes). Now, that is a lot of (very expensive) labor, and a lot of (very expensive) storage space for a nitro finish.

Taylor uses a UV cured poly, and from start to finish they do their high gloss finishes in about an hour (if I'm remembering correctly, which I'm pretty sure I am). Much less sanding, so far fewer hours of labor, and NO storage space.

So explain to me how, exactly, a nitro finish is going to be a cheap option? Sure, most of the manufactures went to it because it was cheaper than a French Polish, but that was in the 1920s. These days, it is the most expensive finish used on guitars, and by a pretty large margin.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
Badass bridges are good..... had one on my jazz once and it ruled. Till i ran out of money and had to sell it.
 
Light said:
Taylor uses a UV cured poly, and from start to finish they do their high gloss finishes in about an hour (if I'm remembering correctly, which I'm pretty sure I am). Much less sanding, so far fewer hours of labor, and NO storage space.

So explain to me how, exactly, a nitro finish is going to be a cheap option? Sure, most of the manufactures went to it because it was cheaper than a French Polish, but that was in the 1920s. These days, it is the most expensive finish used on guitars, and by a pretty large margin.
Click to expand...

curious. if poly is better then why is nitro still used at all?
 
castlerock said:
curious. if poly is better then why is nitro still used at all?
Click to expand...
Poly is not better. At best it is different. A good nitro finish will beat a good poly every time. Poly is quicker and is easier to control the quality when dealing in large quantities with relatively unskilled labour. This in a nutshell is the point both light and myself are making. The guitar buying masses have become used to it but the selective player will opt for a good nitro everytime. To attempt a good nitro finish that matches the pro stuff requires a lot of investment and also a good awareness of the product and potential dangers. You can't just load up a gun and spray away. Well you can but don't come here moaning that you wern't warned when you and you house, workshop, shed or whatever goes up in an impressive fireball. Go with the LMI or Stewmac finishes I and light have mentioned. I've used both and they are great.
 
muttley600 said:
Poly is not better. At best it is different. A good nitro finish will beat a good poly every time. Poly is quicker and is easier to control the quality when dealing in large quantities with relatively unskilled labour. This in a nutshell is the point both light and myself are making. The guitar buying masses have become used to it but the selective player will opt for a good nitro everytime. To attempt a good nitro finish that matches the pro stuff requires a lot of investment and also a good awareness of the product and potential dangers. You can't just load up a gun and spray away. Well you can but don't come here moaning that you wern't warned when you and you house, workshop, shed or whatever goes up in an impressive fireball. Go with the LMI or Stewmac finishes I and light have mentioned. I've used both and they are great.
Click to expand...

ahhh. i see. well, i operate an offshore production platform for a living so chemical hazards and explosive environments are nothing new to me. i think if i were going to invest so much time and money in building my own guitar, i would definitely want to use the best finish.

does nitro yellow over time? (somthing that bugs me about polyurethane)

still, i can see not wanting to recommend it to those not trained in handling hazardous materials.
 
I have never built my own bass, but hey, I feel qualified to reply anyways!!

I have done some modifying on all of mybasses, and I have afew opinions on some stuff, although I am not touching finishes, that is for pros as far as I am concerned!

For bridges, there are the typical hipshot, badass, etc etc that are gonna be good. I found a small company on ebay called Choppers Music based out of vancouver, and I bought a bridge off of the, and it is actually really nice! I have not had it for a long time yet tho... so the quality of the chrome is TBD. As for the way it changed how my bass felt, and such, it was wonderful(their locking bass bridge model). If you are going with a brass bridge like you suggested... maybe try a brass nut too. My old Atilla Odyssey has all brass and it has a very growly sound that really cuts!

For pickups... if you want full, try something in the way of a musicman style humbucker... they have always sounded pretty full to me!

BTW here is a thread at talkbass if you want to get some of your hardware for a decent price!!
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=330577


Simon
 
Light-

To answer your Question... I was refering to the Poly being quicker and cheaper. Nitro definitely takes more work... but it'a labor of love, no? Even after all the spraying, I let the body sit for 3-4 weeks before starting the final sanding.

Muttley..

Muttley600 said:
Poly is not better. At best it is different. A good nitro finish will beat a good poly every time.
Click to expand...

Now ya got me confused? What were we talkin' 'bout? :D

I'm trying to leave it alone... 'cause build threads are cool, hijacking isn't... yet here I go. lol. Warmoth will warrantee a 3rd party applicatino of Tru-Oil, but not the other oils... in addition to everything else I've read, it leads me to beleive it is different from Tung, Danish, etc.

I like the natural-ness of the wood from an oil finish, but its not very durable, and definitely requires careful handling of the instrument with more care and upkeep.
 
castlerock said:
ahhh. i see. well, i operate an offshore production platform for a living so chemical hazards and explosive environments are nothing new to me. i think if i were going to invest so much time and money in building my own guitar, i would definitely want to use the best finish.

does nitro yellow over time? (somthing that bugs me about polyurethane)

still, i can see not wanting to recommend it to those not trained in handling hazardous materials.
Click to expand...
I don't use Polyurethane on guitars never have and likely never will. I know some manufacturers are doing so at present. Nitro does have some aging colour change in the finish but a lot of the mellowing of the colour is in the wood and dyes as well. Its really a combination of all three. A good old finish is often the result of nitro yellowing, dyes fading and timber mellowing. Different types and brands of Nitro can yellow by different amounts. A UV inhibitor in the lacquer can help. There are also some cellulose types that are yellowing resistant, these are normally acrylic blends.

I'm not sure if you can compare the two finishes in terms of colour change. At least I don't have enough experience of polyurethane to make a judgment.
 
castlerock said:
curious. if poly is better then why is nitro still used at all?
Click to expand...


I said UV cured polyurethane is cheaper, not better. I use nitro for a couple of reasons. First, I like the look of it, and second I have to be able to repair nitro finishes in my spray booth, and the idea of spraying multiple kinds of finish in my spray booth gives me the heebie-jebbies (particularly since most of the people in our shop are less than perfect in their clean up of the spray equipment).


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
Light said:
I haven't been on the internet much lately (weather's too damn nice, why would I want to spend all my time indoors?), so I haven't read everything that's been said, but I do have a couple of things I'll point out. First of all, on the cutaways on your body, I HATE doing bodies where the cutaways come into the body at a very sharp angle like that. I always prefer to have there be a little curve right by the joint there, simply because that angle is a major pain in the ass to work on. It will make it a more difficult to get your curves fair, and sanding in a fairly tight space like that is no fun at all. I'm not saying don't do it, just warning you. Also, if you are spraying a finish on it, you are going to have to be very careful in that area to watch out for either excessive build up or insufficient finish thickness. As I said, it's a pain.

Second, whatever scale length you go with (and I would absolutely go with at LEAST 35"), if you want the B string to sound good, you need to make the neck as stiff as is practical. Your doing a laminated neck, which is a very good thing from a stiffness point of view, but I would go further and inlay either a couple of ¼" X ¼" graphite rods (you can get them from LMI, or some steel rods, along the lines of what Warmoth does on their "Supper Bass Construction" necks. It will make a pretty big difference in the sound of your B string, and for the better.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
Click to expand...


Thanks Light. I know exactly what you mean about working on those corners. I plan to add a little curl at the edge of that body wing and blend it into the neck to avoid that sharp intersection.

I appreciate all the feedback.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top