Building the uber-J. Part fortheen - at last!

Ladies and gentlemen, the Über-Jay is finally here. Actually it has been here since October. My bad for not updating the blog.

It weights 3.6 Kg. or 7.7 lb. A comparable bass I own - also a 4 stringer, Mahogany body and Rock Maple neck - weighs 4 kg or 8.8 pounds.

Having said so, it's obvious to me that the absence of tuners on the headstock makes the biggest difference, changing the overall weight distribution. This makes the bass feel very neutral and a lot lighter than numbers would suggest. The sense of fatigue on the left shoulder is basically gone.



I have rearranged the knobs order to suit my playing style. From p-up to bridge: Balance/Tone/Volume.

It reflects the way I believe players prioritize controls. I have asked around a lot and I found out that Volume is actually the least used of all. It also reflects the way I use them - with B being the most important and V the least.



I then decided to make brass knobs to replace the plastic ones. The knobs are plain, no dot marker or line. I think it's unnecessary. The thing is, if the mark is placed on the top I won't be able to see it and I usually don't look at them anyway.

From the side the Allen would be visible enough; better yet, my fingers would feel it more than they would a dot. That together with the center indent does the trick - to me that is.

I mounted the knobs so as the Allen screws are all facing the player when T/B knobs are in center position and V knob is at max vol.

It looks so much better with such a little change, doesn't it?



Click here to listen to a sound clip.

I recorded it with:

Digital recorder Zoom H4. settings in flat. Stereo microphone at about 50cm from amplifier.

No effects whatsoever. The sound is straight from the amp - setting in flat. One 12" speaker. Not the best for the sound I like. But I basically wanted to recreate the conditions one usually faces when playing a bass at the shop.

As you listen to the clip you should hear - in this order:

1 - finger style, only neck p-up. Tone at zero - basically full treble cut. Right hand moving from bridge to neck position. Progressive increment of trebles.

2- f/style, only bridge p-ups selected. Right hand playing from bridge to neck. Tone at 50%

3 - p-up blend in center position with slight variations +/- 20%. Tone at 50%

4 - slap with 2 p-ups center position and variations +/- 20% mix. Tone on bass at 50%. Mid cut on amp between 500Hz and 2Khz.

Strings: roundwound stainless steel .40/105. The action is impossibly low

At 1:30 and around 2:20-2:30 you can hear bending on open strings and harmonics. That's possible because this anchoring system - as opposed to using tuners - positions them at an angle sharp enough to do without string retainers.

So, I use my left hand to bend one or more strings anywhere between nut and the h/stock ferrules.

In my experience, this is possible only on some basses with tilt back head stock and usually only on the second and third strings. Notable exception being the Status Kingbass with optional Bendwell.



To wrap it up.... I am used to playing boutique basses. I have owned or played long enough some of the best basses around. I still own five of them. I can humbly say that I can tell a good - or bad - bass just by lifting it up or playing it unplugged.

So, how does the Über-Jay compares with the cream of basses? Trying to be as detached as possible, I'd say very very well.

There are areas where it can be improved - and it will. The neck can be thinner. The body can be chambered. An accent line would have been nice. It doesn't display the same level of craftsmanship as the others I own... yet ;)

But the bottom line is, I am a very fussy player. The bass I pick is the best I can put my hands on. Since October, that bass has been the Ü-J.

Thanks for reading this far.

O(=<

ps: Future projects.

I have started a new build. It's called the Mark II. Simply because it pushes the Ü-J design forward and implements ideas I had while building the first one.

The overwhelming response this build has met with - from fellow bass players all over - has been extremely encouraging. The next build is already spoken for and I am discussing two more builds as we speak. I never thought it would get this good :)

Building the uber-J. Part Twelve.

Metal fatigue.



Since my last update I have fixed a few details I wasn't too happy with or I felt deserved improvement. Namely, covers, screws, brass parts and cavities.
The plate in the picture is now polished to a shine. Following leads and hunches I finally found someone who would engrave a line on it - not that easy due to the plate size. Kinda hard to photograph the entire line and keep it readable with reflections and all..... The complete line reads:

Uber-Jay n.1 Maurizio Caduto (my name) 2010. I like the ol' Auntie typeface

Next up - small screws. I was frankly unhappy with what I had. They were too big and didn't look sexy. IMHO there is almost nothing in the Screws Universe that looks better than a Allen. So......

These are 2mm diameter stainless steel Allen with nut. I also have a 4mm alternative. As an alternative I also bought a brass nut. I'll decide when I see how either look on the finished wood.

The first set of neck screws turned out too long and I needed a replacement. Again, I decided to investigate the Allen alternative.

All my Wal mount Allen screws at the neck - it's very cool! What I didn't know until recently is that the screw actually works together with a reverse thread nut that is inserted into the neck. Oh boy! I can own a Wal forever and I still discover something new.

So Allen it is. I'll have the screws gold plated to match the ferrules. BTW a review and pictures of my Mk1 fretless are available here.

And since I was on a spree, I decided to have the string anchors made in brass as a possibly better alternative to aluminum - both aesthetically and functionally. What the heck!

I have made a new truss-rod cover as the first carving wasn't tight enough. I want the cover to snap into position. So I did it again slightly bigger and while at that I found a piece that matches the HS grain almost perfectly.

The brass plate in the picture is the cavity cover's back, which I kept to a brushed finish.


















Spray and sand, you slave!

This is truly a chore and it has to be repeated enough times to either loose your mental sanity or get fully intoxicated - whichever comes first.

I don't own the equipment to spray so I used that of the workshop where I go when the machine required is too big or expensive, or when I need counsel - that is, every other day.

First round of spraying and sanding, 400 sand paper. Then spray again and leave it to dry overnight. I kinda like it. The color of the wood is coming out incredibly rich.

Second sanding round. 400 sand paper. Then spray again and leave it to dry overnight. I had to work a little harder on a few spots, where droplets had solidified - cheeky little bastards.

Third round of sanding. 400 sand paper. Then spray again and leave it to dry overnight. I should hate it by now. Instead, I'm really digging it. It's so rewarding seeing the final look slowly surfacing.

It is far less rewarding having to fight all those droplets again. But at the least after the first session of sanding I'm not hitting the wood anymore. Learning with practice. Hell of a thing.
























And this is where I am at the moment. I can't wait to finish this. At the same time I am enjoying the whole process. Particularly, the fact that I am wrong more often than not about timing. Most sections are taking longer than anticipated.

I have now learned that it is due to a number of factors.

1. This is a prototype and as much as I know where I'm heading to, I'm leaving the door open to some degree of improvisation.

2. I am a bloody perfectionist and it takes me time to get what I want, the way i want it.

3. Trial and error is time consuming. 4. Next time I'll have every single item ready BEFORE start the build - down to the smallest screw.



The thing is, if I were very good I could only predict so much of what's gonna happen in a prototyping scenario. I ain't that good - yet. Go figure!

But I'm having the ride of my life and I am already savoring the moment the Uber-J II will hit the workbench.

I am going to take my sweet revenge on all those little mistakes and oddities that punctuated this first attempt.

I am gonna enjoy that. Slowly, just the way i like it ;) Until then

Thanks for reading

O(=<

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 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 Seven.

A few touches before the plunge.

This is taking longer than I initially anticipated. Considering the five weeks I had given myself when I started this project I am off the mark by just four months. Blame it on work, forcing me to leave the country already twice from the beginning of the year... blame it on this weather, too good to pass a weekend or two by the seaside...blame it on the financial crisis, making us believe that there are more important things to do than building the uber-J. Bollocks.

Anyway, here's where we are now. I have roughly shaped the neck, glued the fingerboard and finally reshaped that hideously bulky heel.

For now I have shaped it slightly more slanted on the lower part, to add extra space for the left hand - I'm really becoming obsessed with this. You'll see from the close-up picture that is still needs some fine sanding. yeah...it never ends....

The three holes are in fact only marking the position of the knobs. Eventually that area will be routed for the rear mounted electronics.

At this stage you can see the truss rod slot, the fingerboard and, more to the point, the binding.
Eventually, I settled on Maple....on a Rock Maple neck...on a Birdseye maple FB....Yeah, it's nearly invisible if you're not the one holding the bass, I know....

But I like its understated nature. It's yet another tribute to the mid '70s Fender Jazz. Only, this one is Maple, not plastic. It ain't a uber-J for nothing

I am shaping the headstock in line with the body style, shaving enough veneer for the maple to show. I will probably work on those curves a bit more than that. But you get the idea.

I have, as you might notice, blended the design of the J's headstock with that of another masterpiece and personal favorite - the Music man Stingray.

I have long admired Leo Fender's ability to stay true to the basics of the original J headstock design - as much as he legally could anyway - while making it more compact and pleasingly balanced with the body.

When I'm done with mine the two designs should be fairly obvious.

I am planning to make a cover for the truss rod slot. I'm still working on it. Any ideas?

The second picture shows what's going to happen to the back of the headstock. I will shape the profile again to match the rounded, soft lines of the front and body.

I regret I didn't take a picture of the neck. How could I forget?? Anyway, it's still a long way to go. It will be a thin, rather flat neck.
In this picture you should be able to see that the neck scarf is more akin to that of a tilt back headstock and more pronounced. I find that very comfortable to 'feel' when I'm getting to the first fret without having to look at the neck.

I have also lowered that point a bit compared to the usual position so as the thumb will feel it when the first finger is near the fret....does that make sense?

Two more weeks away and I'll be back to finish this. From now on I'll get to the very heart of the project, where the biggest departure from the original FJ takes place. It will also be, I believe, the most controversial one. Stay tuned.