Building the uber-J. Part Eleven.

Bits and pieces.

Ok....so... a few things happened while I was absent from this blog and I've got quite a lot to cover so, here it goes....



Headstock ferrules - On the left is the one I made. On the right the one I bought. They are very similar. Only, the one I made is 1.5mm thinner and slightly smaller in diameter. Which works better since ferrule and anchor's size together must be smaller than the total HS thickness including about 4mm allowance for the screws.

I much prefer the look of brass to that of gold - it goes well with the brass nut too. BTW the nut will be slimmer and with less sharp angles than this - I'll do that when it's time to fix it to the neck.



I used this thing here to carve the ferrules. It's a cheep China-made drill press - which over here costs about $80. I can do most of what I need with it.

Everything else is pretty much done by hand. I hand sawed the part from the rod - thicker than I needed coz the cut was bound to be irregular.

On a block of scrape wood I drilled a cavity exactly the size I wanted the final brass part to be (thickness and diameter). With the rough brass sticking out of the cavity I shaved off the excess metal on both sides and end up with a flat, leveled top and bottom. That is crucial to drill straight through the center.

I drilled the hole first, then the beveled part - which was made with the bit you see in the picture. Finally with sandpaper and steel wool I shaved off tiny irregularities and sharp edges.

Once I figured out how to go about with it it took me about 20 min each. Maybe the next batch will take me less if I don't screw up too much



I made this t-rod cover in Macassar Ebony, trying to match the grain. Eventually I will route a shallow recess on the headstock for the cover to sit into.



I've drilled the headstock cavities. The ferrules are flush with the wood. Right now are only sitting there for picture purpose ;) I just luuuuuv it!

The little MOP inlay is a symbol I have used for years to sign off my emails.... O(=< ....... To me it looks like a bass. And it just so happens that my fellow musicians call me Mr. Bassman......yeah.....and this symbol does look like a man when you turn it 90ºCW.... so Bass- man. Perfect! :) ( some say it looks like a mairmaid......or in the position of the picture it reads Vivo...which is Italian for Alive......OK...enough meanings!

The name Uber-J will likely be engraved on the t-rod cover.



The elec. cavity is done. I must confess I'm not 100% pleased with it - never work when you're in a hurry.... well... it will be fine after some more routing and sanding.

I routed a jack recess to try and achieve a few goals. 1. jack doesn't stick out. 2. jack points upward to facilitate inserting cable behind strap 3. in case the cable is not secured to the strap it won't be disconnected accidentally. We'll see if that works pretty soon. ;)

I won't be able to spray until next week. So, this next few days I'll finish the cavity; cut the cover - brass or M Ebony.... mm...brass, I think; route the recess for the t-rod cover; insert the side dots....make the slot for the nut.

Before spraying I will assemble every part - p-ups and el. excluded - and string it to double check that everything is right.

I will also test a few positions for the strap locks, just to make sure the bass is both well balanced and the 22nd fret positioned where I like it - clear of the thumb, that is.

till next update ;)

O(=<

Wood and p-ups. Never ending story.

Is wood or p-ups responsible for a bass's sound?

Frankly we are all tired of hearing this question and the ensuing verbal fight. But I keep on bumping in it in one form or another.
I've steered clear from it until now, as it produces more foes than friends. But maybe I've been a coward. So, lets engage.

As it is formulated, it's as pointless a Q as it is impossible to answer to. Even if The One Answer did exist, it would be of little help in building a superior bass.

For argument sake, let's forget that wood's influence on tone in electric basses is minimal compared to acoustic instruments and say that Tone is in the woods. So what? Are we going to choose the best sounding woods - which is what top makers do anyway - and screw the rest? No, right?

So, it's in the electronics. Sure, lets get the cream of the electronics crop then. I've got an old frying pan sitting there, kiln-dried to perfection for the body.

No? OK then, so it is a pointless Q because whatever A we get will be basically useless.
And it is an impossible Q because it is far too generic. Is Manchester United a stronger team than AC Milan? Wanna fight? Is Ferrari a better car than Lamborghini? You and me, outside, now!

We would have to agree - as we usually end up doing when exhausted enough - that wood and pick-ups are only two of the many components linked in a chain reaction - and we're back to square one.

But if MU beats AC M hands down, then asking 'Why did this happen this time around?' might take AC M to recognize mistakes and change strategy for the next match.

Try this for a change - What do truly great basses have in common?

Is it the wood? Yes, but a Steinberger, Basslab, Status, Modulus and Moses would prove that wrong.

Then it's the p-ups. Yes. But a cheep bass mounting Alembic p-ups and electronics will never quite sound like an Alembic.

Hardware then? Yes. But what exactly. A Furlanetto sounds like a Furlanetto with either brass or wood bridge/nut.

Alembic, Sadowsky, Status, Wal and others use own proprietary electronics. MTD, Steinberger, Fodera and others use p-ups and electronics custom-made for them by top makers. So there is no apparent consistency here either.

What is then the common denominator across great basses?

Here's my personal experience. When I lift a great bass I know it with my eyes closed. I instantly feel its stiffness and can almost hear its voice under my fingers.

I lift up a so and so bass and can only feel the weight of parts assembled together.

Great woods assembled with so and so built quality will still sound crap. Yet a top bass sound great even unplugged.
Whether a bass is made of wood, graphite, metal, stone or kryptonite is quite irrelevant to me. I choose between graphite and wood depending on music style and/or mood of the day.

But stiffness is everything. Every great bass I have played is stiff, whatever the building style. Be it a neck through, bolt on, set neck one thing they have in common is that you can't feel the individual parts. The bass feels like one.

Of course great el/p-u/hw will make a so and so bass sound better. But more to the point, the same parts will sound helluvalot better on a bass built the way a great bass should be.

And that to me should end the wood vs. p-ups argument. However there is a more interesting angle to it. Once construction becomes the cornerstone of great basses, then everything else take a different meaning.

Because it all becomes product of a Vision - of unique sound, playability, look and feel. Which is to me a lot more interesting and insightful than finding the silver bullet. Players are interested in great basses with great personality. No one want the Perfect One - if the is such a thing.

Some makers believe in wood tone. They keep electronics, p-ups and hardware the same for every build. Then they experiment with woods. Whichever bass they make will share the same voice. But you'll be able to appreciate subtle differences due to wood choice. It's a wonderful thing. Try a few MTD.

Some others will sound almost the same regardless of woods choice. An Alembic always sounds like an Alembic and so does a Wal or a Status. And God bless them for that.

In either cases, that's the Brand's Voice.

To this point, some time ago I watched a very interesting experiment on UK TV. A guy claimed he could tell a bass only by listening to it.

So there he was, blindfolded and with a dozen basses behind him. One by one the instruments were played by Mr. Mark King, no less. Heck, the guy nailed them all! Which goes to prove that great basses have each a unique voice.

Stiffness is the foundation of it. Each maker achieves it in the way that is more akin to his nature and craft. He then blends in p-ups, electronics and hardware to perfect his unique vision.

Different vision = Different tone.
Which is why there is no universally acceptable A to the Wood vs P-ups Q. And nothing to learn from it.
I might still not know how to build an Alembic. But I sure as hell know which way to look to build my very own.

There. I said it.

O(=<

Building the uber-J. Part Ten.

The hardware. Hard indeed.

Today was Brass Day. I had to drive around for half a day though some shady neighborhoods to find a brass plate of the right size for the cavity cover and a rod to make the nut.

I finally found what I wanted and while I was there that little demon in me decided to also buy a rounded rod to make the headstock parts. Not sure it'll work but I'll give it a try.

Hope you like my porch ceiling too.....

Then I had to clean up the plate. I wish I had taken a picture first. That thing was oh-soooo dirty, scratched and stained with glue and tape...But it was the only piece they had in the right size. Those guys sell by the yard probably and I was more than happy to walk away with the only reasonably sized left over they had...scratches and all.
It took me about one hour to send it by hand with sandpaper up to 1200 and steel wool.
It's 60X45cm and .7mm thick. I should be able to cut about six to nine covers from this one

Here are the two rods....ops...a scratch.......
I'm probably going to cut a few nuts at once.

Here is a picture of all parts that I'm going to use on this project - except for the tuner-bridge which was in the previous pictures.

The two p-ups are J Bartolini 4x.

The Eq is an [sfx] Ultra-Tone. It was designed and assembled by my friend and electronics wizard Max of [sfx] fame (UK based company. Check out the web site here. Some cool stuff!).

I had a Preamp with DI designed and built by him some time ago and i am very happy with it. I told him that I was looking for an Eq for this project and I wanted one tone only but active and with a twist. He came up with this.
Basically by turning the knob cw or ccw the frequency shifts from very deep tones to piercing trebles. The Eq sports also 2 switches for a 50% mid freq cut or boost. Sounds interesting doesn't it? can't wait to hear it!!

I am going gold all the way... security locks, bridge, ferrules for the headstock, p-ups screws and the six neck screws. Brass plate and brass nut.

O(=<

Building the uber-J. Part Nine.

The Uber side of the Jay.

Here we are. This is were the whole project makes its biggest departure from its model. The Uber-Jay is going to be a headless cum headstock bass.
The tuners will be at the bridge while the headstock is going to act as strings retainer. The reasons for this are many. I have elaborated on them in my post The Headless Conundrum.

I'll just sum it up here by saying that the headless system is in my opinion much more reliable, clean and efficient than the traditional one. Having played for long time both type of basses side by side on stage I am convinced that the headless system works best for me.


The flip side is mainly an aesthetic one. The look of the Fender Jazz cannot survive without a headstock. Now that would be a serious blasphemy in my world. So I decided that the right thing to do was to preserve the headstock and design a device which would allow me to anchor the strings there.

It is very simple, and rear mounted. The strings will go through the headstock and a Allen screw will lock them in place. The part is buried inside the back of the headstock, flush with the wood, virtually invisible except for a 15mm disk. The aluminum makes it feather light.

Two little screws hold the piece but the stability is mainly given by it being inside the wood and by the string's tension itself. The small channel allows for comfortable tuning with a small Allen key. I already know I'll do this differently on the next Uber-Jay. Not that I don't like it but I can see an even less intrusive way of doing that. Well, this isn't a prototype for nothing after all.

To test the system's reliability and look for flaws I have mounted the parts on a hard wood blank with a tuner-bridge at the opposite end of a 34” scale. I have tuned both my broom-bass and one of my other basses – a Tobias – and kept them on the same stand in the same room. I have not played the Tobias nor have I touched the broom-bass for sixty days.

When I finally checked the two sets of strings the broom bass was still perfectly in tune while the Tobias needed some adjustment. To be fair, the broom's G was slightly down. But that was due to the fact that the thin .30 string had slightly dented into the wood – which shouldn't happen with Ebony or metal.
The bridge is an ABM. Very well machined and flawlessly finished. The shallow recess on the body was needed to align the bridge to a lower fingerboard level. You might remember me writing that the distance between the body and the top of the fingerboard will be much lower than usual for a total string/body distance of 5mm.


One more feature I always felt uncomfortable with on headless basses – aesthetically speaking – is the cut at the bottom of the body, where the tuners are. It surely makes them reachable. But it is also an important design feature. The fact that it look great on the Steinberger doesn't mean that it will always look just as good on traditional looking basses.

Anyway, I have carved a recess that allows to operate the tuners while preserving the shape of the body. It also gives top and core woods the opportunity to contrast. This bass is fairly basic in that only core wood and top wood will contrast. But it should work very well with top/veneer/core/veneer/back and with laminated neck through.


Thanks for reading.

O(=<

Building the uber-J. Part Eight.

It's all in the head. And in the neck.
The last eight days were spent mainly working on the neck and headstock. Granted, I managed to slot in a few days idling by the beach. But I think I deserve that, after two months in cold London/Prague/Paris/Milan. Late spring my ass.

The neck is really hard work. Sand, check, re-sand, re-check. Repeat till you're done. Take a closer look. Repeat all of the above. Avoid taking another look if it's dinner time.

It is a great pleasure seeing it come to life under your fingers and blisters. I so understand those who do this as a full time job. I kinda start seeing my retirement plan here.

Anyway, I wanted the neck to be thin but not flat in the center - a thin D shape. The lower part from the 7th fret to the end is slightly more tapered than the upper part - akin to that of my old Tobias. Not so noticeable, though.

After testing the position of the neck scarf a few times I found it a little too low. To be exact it was below the center line of the 1rst fret. Now it's a little above that and it feels just right. The smooth feel of the ebony under my thumb is phenomenal - and I haven't used any fine sanding paper as yet. I just love this wood. It should be made mandatory for sheer thumb ecstasy.

I have devoted yet another day to the headstock. In the overall economy of the project it seems like I'm lingering on it way much. But I am so very happy with the result! I'll do the final touch ups next. There I go again...

Some more time was spent shaping the neck pocket and heel. It still felt a little too big. I don't rule out more touch ups.

I know, I know... it should all be decided beforehand, on a locked down master plan. And it is. Almost. Sure enough the next Uber-Jay will be exactly the same. Almost ;)

To me doing this is an ongoing creative process. I won't change my mind on the overall direction. Only, the deal I made with myself does account for few digressions.

OK, I'm digressing. Where was I?...the body. I dedicated one full day to sanding the body back and giving the lower horn a sharper, more defined line.

Hopefully, the pictures below will do justice to the grain and texture of this Asian wood. To me the grain itself would be already enough to make it beautiful. But the flame all over it...oh boy!


Next week: Routing the electronics cavity; Drilling holes for the neck joint and on the headstock. Working on the cavity cover, which I believe it's going to be in wood. Any guess as which wood? ;)
I have a little inlay in mind - which shouldn't take me more than a day to do. I should be able to finish all this by next Friday. If I don't screw up too much, that is.

Thanks for reading this far.

O(=<

Building the uber-J. Part Five.

Back to work, with a vengeance.

I've got to say this: it's good to be back. I came back from Europe at the beginning on March and I've been stuck with a lot of work until last week. Then I've been stuck with one week off to the beach ;)

Now I'm finally back and hungry for more sanding, sawing, routing and all that Jazz. er.... ;)

My hiatus wasn't in vain though. I have finally found answers to a few issues I had left pending and I am going to line them up as the project unfolds - I'm sucker for drama, sorry ;)

So, the last few days have been dedicated to reshaping the body a bit. You might not be able to see that in this pictures, but it is slightly smaller.

The lower horn is now starting at around the 21st fret. Which means I had to re-shape the contour of the back.

I am leaving the shape of the neck joint untouched till I am done with the neck. Eventually it will be a lot smaller and less chunky than this.

Now that all the parts are finally here, I will start routing. On the masking paper I have marked down the position of the two p-ups (Bartolini) and bridge for routing.

I am using the same p-up placement as J basses made in the '60-'70 and from '82 onwards, which to me produces a more balanced sound than that of 70s models . I'll leave it there for now and take care of the neck.

Deciding on the shape and size of the headstock gave me headaches. I finally settled on this.

It is considerably smaller than the original J and there are quite a few important (IMHO) touches I am going to add later on.
So bear with me for the time being.

I must confess: sanding the fingerboard radius is not one of my favorite in-door activities. But I always try my best to see the beautiful side of things.

This is the fingerboard with frets' slots, still flat before sanding it to the radius.
As my mentor Jeffrey says: Until the center line is gone.



















So there. One and half hour later, the line is gone. The radius is 14, quite a bit more flat that the old J. For this neck I have settled on a 40mm width at the nut and 55mm at the 22nd fret - which is a lot narrower than the original 70s J.
These are the routing for the truss rod and pick-ups
They just needs to become a little smoother.

I have taken the last picture with the fingerboard sitting on the body, just to see the effect of Birdseye Mable on Macassar Ebony. Even at this rough stage...boy, I love it! :)

Commercial break. Stay tuned. :D

Review: His Majesty The Wal.

The Mk I Fretless.

Few basses have enjoyed the legendary reputation the Wal has. There is something about this bass that sets it apart from the others. More than a bass it is a statement to creativity, excellence and a blend of radical innovation and snobbish classicism.

This is the review of my '89 Mk I fretless. In a way it's also a reflection over the early days of the fretless phenomenon.

Among all Wal models - Mk I-II-III, fretted, fretless, in 4,5 and 6 strings configuration - the Mk I fret-less is, in my opinion, the most iconic of all.

I own a Mk III as well and I believe is a more refined instrument and the perfect evolution of the species. Should I buy another Wal today I would likely buy a Mk III.

So, why exactly do I think so highly of the Mk I fretless? It's not just because of its excellent quality and sophisticated electronics. Every Wal, fretted or fretless, shares that. It's rather because of it's significance in the fretless world. To me, at the very least.

In its infancy the fretless phenomenon basically meant the sound of Jaco Pastorious' Fender Jazz. Only God, and a handful of us, knows how hard it was to be a fretless bassist at that time and not wanting to sound like Mr. Pastorius - with all due respect.

Literally overnight every bass player wanted a fretless J, a Chorus and wanted to - worse, he was expected to! - make it sound that way. Makers were struggling to follow suit and in a matter of months it had become a circus. It went on and on. Holy cow, I hated it!

The Mk I fretless was the perfect alternative, so naturally inclined to sound different thanks to its unorthodox electronics. But like the fretless bass needed Pastorius, so the Wal needed his champion.

Enter Brand X and Percy Jones. Over a few recordings the genius of Mr. Jones showed us bass players not just what else a fretless could sound like, but also what a Wal was capable of. Others followed suit - notably Mick Karn of Japan Fame.

But more to the point non-Wal players started drifting away from the Fender Jazz shadow. Pino Palladino was one of the first bassists to build his sound around the Wal/Jones's lesson - and he played a Music Man Sting Ray.

Suddenly those who wanted to sound different had something to start with. Even if they couldn't afford a Wal. I'll be always grateful to the Mk I and Percy Jones for breaking the spell.

Construction.


This bass is a 21 years old. But today's Mark I are made exactly the same way. The body is Brazilian Mahogany. The neck is a six piece Maple/Mahogany laminate with Ebony fretless fingerboard.

Top and back facings of this particular one are American Walnut. Between the facing and the core is a thin layer of Maple which contrasts beautifully with the two dark woods - especially where the body has been contoured.

This is a fairly classic combination of timbers. Any extravagance at Wal is usually reserved for exotic wood tops.
















Two huge, black humbucking P-ups and a massive bridge create a distinctive look, especially when in contrast with natural finish.

The body finish is natural and you can feel the wood under you fingers, while the neck is lacquered. A beautiful effect and a great feel under your fingers.

The 21 frets Ebony fingerboard is tastefully lined with a light brown wood, probably Olive, which is clearly visible at short range while blending nicely with the beautiful black fingerboard - another elegant touch.

Side MOP dots mark the fingerboard and a simple, elegant headstock houses the Schaller tuners. This bass is a gem of inspired simplicity where everything has a role and every detail is taken care of.

Take the fifth screw placed in the center of the metal neck plate. It doesn't contribute to holding the neck. In fact it's shorter than the others and doesn't even go through the body into the neck.

All it does it holding the metal plate so it won't fall when the fourth screw is taken out. That's a Bulgari touch.

The neck is a marvel of reliability. This bass has traveled with me since 1989 from North America to many countries across Europe and Asia, through hot, cold, dry and very humid climates.

Even so, I never had to adjust the truss rod - which is a lot more than I can say of the majority of great basses I have owned or still own. Except for the Steinberger. Go figure!

When you consider that the truss rod is a 21 years old thing, not a contemporary state of the art, then you've got to conclude that the wood is dam good and the construction makes it very stiff.

My MkIII 5er shares the same quality - and it mounts only one truss rod, unlike many 5ers. It's a Wal thing.

Ergonomics.

Once you wear it, the headstock immediately looks for its balance point in the air. It does feel slightly heavier on the headstock compared to the more compact Mk III, but its natural playing position is comfortable and ergonomic. It doesn't feel heavy and doesn't make you tired.

















The bridge P-U falls in a position slightly more central that that of other basses and that is very comfortable for the right arm. It also makes the end of the fingerboard comfortable for fast articulation.

The only thing this fretless doesn't have is a 24 frets long fingerboard. Today I would like that. Than again, today I would like a five or six strings 24 frets fretless, not a four. The Mk III ;)
















Electronics.

Now, when many other basses would have been happy to thrive on such a superior crafting, the Wal hits you with electronics like no other. If you remove the Eq cover and look inside you'll see a neat and somehow spartan looking circuitry.













That is the heart of the Wal sound. Each pick-up contains individual adjustable (!) pick-ups for each string, which eliminates imbalances. It's a very quiet circuit and it uses only a 9-volt battery. Then there is a standard 1/4" jack and a Balanced DI so you can kiss goodbye to external DI boxes.

Pulling the volume Knob activates a pick-attack. As the Wal website sums it up "...a narrow band of high frequencies is added to the overall tone-setting to provide dynamic, percussive attack".


Both output level and pick-attack level can be adjusted from inside the bass. This is how Wal describes the electronics:

"Pick-up Mixing Knob:- This silently mixes the levels of the pre-EQ’d pick-ups to any desire ratio whilst keeping the combined output level constant.

Tone-Knobs:- These operate electronic, low pass filters whose roll-off frequencies vary with the position of the control. Fully clockwise at 10, the spectrum is full and flat. As the controls are backed off, the spectrums of the appropriate pick-ups are foreshortened. (Roll-off 12dB/Octave).

The dominant tone character varies, therefore, throughout the entire range of control. Pulling-up the knob produces a quasi-parametric boost of about 10dB to the harmonics which lie at or near the roll-off frequency set by the rotary position.

This provides the characteristic ‘active’ sounds so popular today, without the clinical quality common to many circuits.

By using the pan mixer like a master tone control, in conjunction with the pick-up controls, an endless range of subtle tones and dynamic effects can be created, with or without the pick attack.

On left-hand models all rotary functions are reversed to right-hand".

Wow...


All this might sound intimidating but it's actually a lot more intuitive than the traditional three knobs Eq.

Basically all you have to do is to rotate the tone knob of one pick up and listen, until you like what you hear.

Then you do the same with the other pick up.

When both P-ups sound good to you, you use the balance to move around the sound spectrum you have created. I like this way of looking at it.

It sets me free from the mental grid of B/M/T and encurages me to think of sound as a whole, not as the product of three frequencies. It's a much more creative process which over time has changed the way I set the sound on bass I play.

I have played my two Wal with large band line up, in small clubs, with horns and with less then perfect sound system. There has never been a time I couldn't cut through the mud.

The Wal's voice.

...and here is where I hit the wall - pun intended. Sorry, I couldn't resist it :) I really don't know how to describe the sound. It cannot be likened to any other, not even just for reference purpose.

I can say that the massive Mahogany body adds a dark tone to the overall voice; that the sound is round, with a huge, earthquake-like bottom and that it has so much sustain you'll have to shoot it to make it stop.

I can point out how each note sounds clear and powerful; how high the P-ups output is - higher that most basses I know; how it sounds always clear, rich and with seemengly infinite nuances.

But then, what does that really tell you about the its Voice?











The best i can do here is to suggest listening to some of the old Percy Jones recordings with Brand X recordings - Masque and Do They Hurt above all - and the sound of Mick Karn on Japan's recordings - take 'Oil on Canvas'.

That's a good start but it is only half the story. To feel the magic of this bass you'll have to try one. Well, I live in Asia. If that's not a problem for you I suppose it can be arranged.














Wrapping it up.

Now you might say I am biased, and I would accept that. How can I not be? It is not even a matter of saying 'I cannot find fault with this bass' because the Wal is in a category of one. Conventional rules simply do not apply.

I might not drive a Rolls or a Ferrari, but they are what they are regardless. And I have personally played a lot of Porches but I have found only a handful of Rolls and Ferrari.

How many great brands out there have made the questionable marketing decision to offer a line of instruments made in so n so, to produce the same uncompromising blablabla at an affordable price. Right.

It is just my point of view, but these makers are simply damaging their brand and I leave it to you all do wonder why.

Price and quality are part of the same equation and you can't have an affordable Rolls because that wouldn't be a Rolls anymore, now wouldn't it? Likewise, Wal doesn't offer a more affordable-but-just-as-good marketing miracle. Think about it.

Now that Wal has resumed production after changes at the helm of the company, the chances to actually own one are real.

Regretfully the long waiting list is real too - rumored to be at least a year. That is, unless one is prepared to bit for it on the second hand market. And with price starting from 3200 British Pounds, getting a new one is not exactly easy.

And so it happens that, while some choose to make great basses everyone can afford, near Cobham in Surrey, UK, things just work together in prefect harmony to make a legend.

>=)O




In a nutshell:
+ Top craftsmanship.
+Unique sound.
+Iconic status.

- Very hard to get one.
- 21 frets.


Links

Wal website