Neck-through basses allow lower action? - Page 2

bizzaro · #21 03-05-2002, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMX
There shouldn't be a major difference, but one some bolt-ons the neck doesn't really fit the body in terms of height.
The singer of my old band has a 70s Fender, and it's neck is set in too low. So even when you lower the bridge all the way, the action is still (too) high.

Tell him to shim the neck

Bruce Lindfield · #22 03-05-2002, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pkr2

I completely agree that there is a huge difference between the examples that you used.

I'm pretty sure that the huge difference that you feel is because of the quality of building/setup. Not to mention comparing two different brands.

Well they are very similar in price over here and are examples of factory-built, but very high quality basses from two manufacturers who are not "boutique" class, but are well-respected by many pros.

My argument was particularly not about the hand-built "boutique" basses, as I know very well that they can be made equally as well, but rather about factory made basses.

I just wonder why Warwicks are so popular if there is such a huge difference - or maybe their standards have slipped recently?

uglybassplayer · #23 03-05-2002, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Lindfield
...I just wonder why Warwicks are so popular if there is such a huge difference - or maybe their standards have slipped recently...

I don't about the quality slipping or not, but I can speak to the difference in a good vs. bad setup. While I'm not too partial to the classic Warwick "baseball bat" neck profile, I have played a number of FNAs and Thumbs (both neck-thrus and bolt-ons) that had good, if not great action. I've also seen them with setups so high that you could do the limbo under the strings (I'm reminded of this EVERYTIME I visit my local Guitar Center). To be fair to Warwick, I've seen equally poor setups on some Spectors & Pedullas (as well as yamahas) at the same GC.

I guess YMMV.

- Frank.

pkr2 · #24 03-05-2002, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMX
There shouldn't be a major difference, but one some bolt-ons the neck doesn't really fit the body in terms of height.
The singer of my old band has a 70s Fender, and it's neck is set in too low. So even when you lower the bridge all the way, the action is still (too) high.

I agree with you,JMX. There are lots and lots of bolt on necks that are badly in need of a good set up.

The bright side, though, is the fact that what you describe with your friends Fender is very easy to correct with a neck pocket shim. If the pocket is really cut too deep, a shim of the proper thickness will bring it into specs.

If it's a neck tilt, or angle problem, it's corrected either by shimming only one end of the neck pocket or using a tapered shim.

I believe all standard production Fenders, especially new ones will benefit from a careful set-up. Most are pretty bad out right of the box.

Pkr2

JMX · #25 03-06-2002, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bizzaro

Tell him to shim the neck

We did, but it's a pain to get it correct.
One of the reason I'm not too fond of Fenders. Why do I have to correct this myself? It's Fenders job to get it right in the first place.

Hambone · #26 03-06-2002, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMX
We did, but it's a pain to get it correct.
One of the reason I'm not too fond of Fenders. Why do I have to correct this myself? It's Fenders job to get it right in the first place.

Well just jump in your time machine, go back 25 years and have Fender do it right this time

Seriously, it makes little sense to complain about a bass this old when you have little or no idea of what it's history is. For instance, I can imagine it would be some yahoo's idea that, to lower the strings, they should deepened the neck pocket

If the bass has had a lot of playing done on it, then I would imagine that it was suited to it's previous owners.

In this case I would make a maple wafer that fit the neck pocket perfectly. This wafer would have parallel top and bottom surfaces to make sure the original neck angle was transferred to the new height. If the neck needs still needs shimming, then use thin strips of veneer for the fine tuning. All of this could be removed to restore to it's original condition to sell or whatever.

eli · #27 03-11-2002, 08:25 PM

Well, Bruce, I gotta say that this issue is NOT solely determined by whether a bass is a neck-through or a bolt-on. I can say, as a mechanical engineer, that this is strictly a matter of how the designer chooses to dimension the fretboard vs. the back of the neck heel vs. the bottom of the neck pocket. For your perfect high frets, the top of the end of the fretboard has to be perfectly coplanar with the low adjustment of the bridge saddles. But if you design it that way, only a tiny error in any of the three surfaces can put the highest fret too high, rendering the entire top half of the fingerboard unplayable.

So I would guess that the design is to leave the action up there a little high -- that is, design the high frets so the higest ones fall away as you describe -- so that even with manufacturing tolerances (irregularities in fabrication which must be taken into account on less-expensive production instruments) the final result can still be adjusted to play reasonably well on the higher frets. Maybe you can't get it perfect, but at least it won't fret out.

This parallel mating surface problem, of course, is nonexistent on a neck-through instrument.

So perhaps the answer to your question is that it is LESS EXPENSIVE to build a bolt-on if it is designed in such a way that the highest frets can't have low action. This supports your empirical observations, but it does not eliminate the possibility of building a really properly aligned bolt-on joint. In fact, that's pretty much what fine luthiers do for a living, isn't it?

JMX · #28 03-12-2002, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hambone

Well just jump in your time machine, go back 25 years and have Fender do it right this time

Seriously, it makes little sense to complain about a bass this old when you have little or no idea of what it's history is. For instance, I can imagine it would be some yahoo's idea that, to lower the strings, they should deepened the neck pocket If the bass has had a lot of playing done on it, then I would imagine that it was suited to it's previous owners.

In this case I would make a maple wafer that fit the neck pocket perfectly. This wafer would have parallel top and bottom surfaces to make sure the original neck angle was transferred to the new height. If the neck needs still needs shimming, then use thin strips of veneer for the fine tuning. All of this could be removed to restore to it's original condition to sell or whatever.

Well ,it's in almost mint condition and with no mods.
BTW, I see this on new models too.

Brad Johnson · #29 03-12-2002, 10:39 AM

Sorry, I don't get the line of thinking that there's some inherent difference in string height capabilities based solely on the type of neck. By that logic, would set necks fall somewhere in the middle?

Here's the only general difference I can see between the two: the neck/body joint on most bolt-ons will be bulkier than the same area on a neck-through and can hinder upper fret access. The rest of the neck does not have to be any bulkier or thicker than a neck-through.

Anyone ever play a Yamaha TRB 6II? US MTD? Either of these will go as low as any bass I've seen and they're both bolt-ons. My Lakland 55-94 can go as low. My Zon is another example of being able to go super low.

It's not about the neck joint, it's about the total package. A neck-through with a poor leveling job and setup will not go as low as a well designed and executed bolt-on. Flatness of the fretboard has nothing to do with it either. You can have a curved fretboard with very low action... it may take more effort on the builder's part but it's hardly impossible. Again, all things being equal, you'll get the same action either way and a bigger neck to body joint on the bolt-on.

BTW shims are not evil

. They're for the purpose of adjustment, you can find them on Fenders and Zons, they're even used on several set-neck basses though I doubt most people realize that's what they're looking at, like the back of my Elrick:

The dark wood between the Mahogany body and the Maple neck is a shim. A permanent shim but still, a shim.

I guess I'm kind of confused as to how the correlation came to be... maybe because there are more bolt-ons than NT's and most people don't spend the time it takes to learn how to be able to use low action explains why people are seeing what they think they see. Just a guess.

Brad Johnson · #30 03-12-2002, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMX

We did, but it's a pain to get it correct.
One of the reason I'm not too fond of Fenders. Why do I have to correct this myself? It's Fenders job to get it right in the first place.

That's why you take it to a qualified bass tech. If it was easy...

jasonbraatz · #31 03-12-2002, 06:08 PM

this thanksgiving i played about 8 BO warwicks in a row - this is when i still had my thumb but was just about to get my SSII.

all of them played great and had nice action all the way to the 24th fret, even the streamer standard i tried.

as for the specific problem you're talking about, shimming the neck would definitely fix it. i had to shim the neck on my musicman when i got the graphite neck for it now it plays as good or even better than my SSII.

jason

JMX · #32 03-12-2002, 06:19 PM

I still don't see why I need to have it fixed.
Again, it's Fender's duty (quality control).
A MIA Fender is almost 1500$ over here.
I can choose from at least half a dozen handmade custom-build German brands in that price range that don't need shimming - guaranteed.
YMMV, but no Fender for me.

pkr2 · #33 03-12-2002, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMX
I still don't see why I need to have it fixed.
Again, it's Fender's duty (quality control).
A MIA Fender is almost 1500$ over here.
I can choose from at least half a dozen handmade custom-build German brands in that price range that don't need shimming - guaranteed.
YMMV, but no Fender for me.

I'm not defending Fender but it's not realistic to expect any maker to perform warrantee work on an instrument made in the seventies.

As someone else pointed out, it could have had faulty work performed on it by anyone in that period of time.

I believe as do millions of others that Fender builds a good instrument. I also don't think that their production basses are even set up before they are shipped. Anyone that disagrees only needs to look at the new fenders hanging in stores all over the country that I don't even consider playable.

I also think that nearly all of them can be made into good players with a proper setup.

The simple and easy thing to do is just fix it and play it. The other alternative is to stand on principle and try to play it the way that it is.

Either light a candle or curse the darkness. It's ultimately your choice.

Pkr2

**Ryan L.** · #34 03-16-2002, 12:57 AM

The action on my Modulus is just as low as the action on my Cirrus. Different price ranges, of course, but one is bolt on and one is neck thru.

bassist4ever · #35 03-16-2002, 01:14 AM

why dont you just do what guitar techs have done for ages and rip off a little piece of match book cover or the like and stick it in the pocket... it changes the angle of the neck... that or check for a neck angle screw... some basses have em.

its so simple most anybody with 2 hands and a screw driver can accomplish it on a BO

neck throughs i havnet a clue...

Brad Johnson · #36 03-16-2002, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bassist4ever
why dont you just do what guitar techs have done for ages and rip off a little piece of match book cover or the like and stick it in the pocket... it changes the angle of the neck... that or check for a neck angle screw... some basses have em.

its so simple most anybody with 2 hands and a screw driver can accomplish it on a BO

neck throughs i havnet a clue...

It really can be that simple.

eli · #37 03-18-2002, 08:02 AM

The reason purists shy away from the shim option is that it can change the sound of the instrument. A bolt-on's only contact between the neck and the body is that little rectangle. Sticking in any shim -- especially a piece of spongy cardboard -- can compromise the integrity and rigidity of the entire structure, and so can interrupt the vibrations that should be transmitted from the neck to the body.

That having been said, back in the real world, if you're playing rock'n'roll through a $500 combo, you may not notice much of a difference. And then if it feels better, you're gonna play better anyway, so the subtle nuances of the tone change can be outweighed by the fact that your "feel" is better, and as a whole you sound better.

JMX · #38 03-18-2002, 08:12 AM

Just to clearify it (again).

It was our singer's bass, not mine. If it was mine, I would've complained when I bought it new.
We did get it set up very well, but it took a while, since we wanted it to be really good, and we used wood (2-3mm!), not scraps of paper (sic).

I still wouldn't buy an instrument in that condition new (or used, unless it sounded really good and looks fixable) , and there are enough flawless bolt-on, neck-thru and set-neck alternatives around...