Showing posts with label pick-ups. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pick-ups. Show all posts

Friday, July 23, 2010

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(=<









Thursday, March 25, 2010

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