5 to 4 string ?

[ERIC A]

I have a 5 string Eastman Carved Bass that I love the sound of, but have always found difficult to play. I have never been able to get use to the string spacing, and using gut strings (because of the thickness) doesn’t seem to help. I tried converting it to a four, by having a luthier convert the nut and bridge to accommodate 4 instead of 5 strings. But, now the spacing is way too far apart. I am entertaining the idea of having the neck shaved down (it is a wide neck), but I am worried what it might do to the overall sound of the bass. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[toman]

If the sound with four strings now is what you like, I don't see how cutting the neck is going to change that sound much...

[robobass]

In my experience, small = good. A small neck is not only easier to play, but it vibrates more. You can feel the pitch in your left hand, and you can hear it too. It means you can play more in tune in a section. I don't know Eastman basses, but generally, a 5-string has a thicker top and a bigger bar. If the bass sounds really good to you when set up with four strings, then go for it. But, are you sure you wouldn't be better off just finding yourself a 4-string bass?
Robobass

[arnoldschnitzer]

[quote=robobass]In my experience, small = good. A small neck is not only easier to play, but it vibrates more. You can feel the pitch in your left hand, and you can hear it too. /QUOTE]

I think it's generally accepted opinion that thin necks on double basses contribute to hand fatigue and injury. As far as making the neck flexible so it will vibrate more, this is also not a good idea. A flexible neck will bow over time, causing excessive camber (scoop), poor tone, and injury to the player. Stiffer necks which vibrate less allow the body to vibrate more, resulting in a faster responding, punchier, and louder bass. Few things make a bass sound and play as bad as a mushy neck.

[uptonbass]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

Stiffer necks which vibrate less allow the body to vibrate more, resulting in a faster responding, punchier, and louder bass.

I can't agree more with Arnold on this...more rigidity in the neck (99 percent of the time) improves the instrument

Eric, Get the board brought in not the neck, quite a bit of trickery can be done in that margin to make it feel like a 4 and not an obvious "did this use to be a 5 string"

Worst case scenario replace the board and bring in the edge margin of the maple 2-3mm on each side to meet a thinner board. This would not result in a weaker neck at all.

Or throw the 5 to the wolves get a new bass

[drurb]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

I think it's generally accepted opinion that thin necks on double basses contribute to hand fatigue and injury. As far as making the neck flexible so it will vibrate more, this is also not a good idea. A flexible neck will bow over time, causing excessive camber (scoop), poor tone, and injury to the player. Stiffer necks which vibrate less allow the body to vibrate more, resulting in a faster responding, punchier, and louder bass. Few things make a bass sound and play as bad as a mushy neck.

Glad you said this! I read the "small=good" and thought of my old Kay. For me, skinny neck=bad.

[ERIC A]

I have tried to sell my 5 string bass, but I have been unable to find a buyer (even at a good price. I bought the bass for $7,500, I was asking for $4,000.00). Everyone who had tried it loves the sound, but are put off by the 5th string. So, since it does sound good I decided to try to make it work. My concern is if I do shave down the neck it might not be such a great sounding bass any more. But, before I make that move, I figured I ask for some advice. Thanks

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by robobass

In my experience, small = good. A small neck is not only easier to play, but it vibrates more. You can feel the pitch in your left hand, and you can hear it too. It means you can play more in tune in a section.

While I don't agree with the concept of "small = good", I do think that having a neck that vibrates in sync with the body of the bass so that you feel the pitch in you left hand is very good idea. Anyone who has followed my posts here over the years knows that I am talking about A0-B0 matching. I'm not going to rehash that again, but the idea is to "tune" the neck so that it vibrates at the same resonance frequency as the air inside the body. There are several threads where A0-B0 matching has been discussed in the archieves that can be found with the search facility.

[Silversorcerer]

Not to change the subject, but it is already moving from conversion to reselling the bass.
There have been multiple members of this forum who from time to time express interest in the 5 string option. If you are having trouble getting resale bites (and I am keeping in mind that I do not know to what extent you have gone to try to sell it as a 5 string) that perhaps you need to expand the area to national/regional from local, if that was your approach, and concentrate on college level players on the east coast. Every time I take my big 5-string out there is some 4-string player that goes ape over it. There is a market for these even if it is smaller. On the other hand if you are looking for one specifically, these are not easy to find. I looked for 2 years in the southeast USA and finding one in your asking price range just didn't happen. I finally commissioned one to be built.

In any case I think your best option is to leave it a five string, market it on the web here, maybe alert some college/university music departments of it's availablility, get some consignment agreements with some resellers and look for a 4-string.

Not that the conversion can't be done, but it is similar to changing a car with a manual transmission to an automatic. It's not as straight forward as it may seem, and perhaps more costly in the long run than just swapping for what you really want.

[robobass]

“I think it's generally accepted opinion that thin necks on double basses contribute to hand fatigue and injury”

I find the opposite to be true. My thumb gets really sore if I sit in on a jazz gig and the neck on the bass is really big. I can play my own basses indefinitely without fatigue.

…A flexible neck will bow over time, causing excessive camber (scoop), poor tone, and injury to the player.”

Just because a neck is small doesn’t mean it’s flexible or mushy. My V&G’s neck is only 3.8cm wide by 2cm deep (the fingerboard adds an extra 2cm thickness + 2mm width). It is totally rigid and stable. I’ve never had anybody pick the bass up that didn’t love the action. Of course this is no Kay. But, don’t necks on low quality instruments end up warping even if they are quite beefy? My friend BM says that necks on plywoods warp not only because of the low quality boards, but because the boards are attached with false glues that allow “creep”.

Now I do concede that thinning the neck on the OP’s instrument could be a bad idea, and trying to sell it rather than converting it seems like the way to go. I particularly like the car analogy.

Robobass

"You humans, when are you going to learn that size doesn't matter..."

[arnoldschnitzer]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

While I don't agree with the concept of "small = good", I do think that having a neck that vibrates in sync with the body of the bass so that you feel the pitch in you left hand is very good idea. Anyone who has followed my posts here over the years knows that I am talking about A0-B0 matching. I'm not going to rehash that again, but the idea is to "tune" the neck so that it vibrates at the same resonance frequency as the air inside the body. There are several threads where A0-B0 matching has been discussed in the archieves that can be found with the search facility.

Bob, if the bass has a wolf tone, which is generally at the frequency of the body resonance, and you then match the neck resonance to be the same, do you improve or worsen the wolf tone?

[uptonbass]

Originally Posted by Silversorcerer

Not that the conversion can't be done, but it is similar to changing a car with a manual transmission to an automatic. It's not as straight forward as it may seem, and perhaps more costly in the long run than just swapping for what you really want.

More like a brake job, new tires, and a wash and wax

This could be done with great results without even taking the top of.....trust me.....yes one may think the bar is larger and the arching thicker but it would add the ridgidity to the top that those instruments usually lack....thus resulting in possibly a better sounding bass. And chances are the top and bar are standard as they give with a 4 just with a retro neck.

Eric what is the width of the bridge from outside foot to outside foot in mm?

[ERIC A]

I hate to say this, but I have no way of measuring the
width. I'd have to take it to a luthier. All I have is my
kid's ruler, which only gives inches. Do you think thinning
the neck instead of shaving down the width would be a
way to go? Thanks for the input.

[arnoldschnitzer]

[QUOTE=robobass
My thumb gets really sore if I sit in on a jazz gig and the neck on the bass is really big. I can play my own basses indefinitely without fatigue.

You are the exception. And I did not say "really big"


Just because a neck is small doesn’t mean it’s flexible or mushy.

The thinner the neck, the more it will bend. Simple physics.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

Bob, if the bass has a wolf tone, which is generally at the frequency of the body resonance, and you then match the neck resonance to be the same, do you improve or worsen the wolf tone?

As I said in my previous post, I have no intention of rehashing all of this again. You were not willing to accept the fact that A0-B0 matching works 2 or 3 years ago and somehow I doubt that your position has changed since then. If it has, then all of my previous comments on A0-B0 are still in the archieves. However, the answer to the question is that it will do neither.

[uptonbass]

Fine.... inches will work, I guess I just wanted to limit my amount of work

[uptonbass]

Oh and while we are at it the distance between the upper eyes of the f holes

[arnoldschnitzer]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

As I said in my previous post, I have no intention of rehashing all of this again. You were not willing to accept the fact that A0-B0 matching works 2 or 3 years ago and somehow I doubt that your position has changed since then. If it has, then all of my previous comments on A0-B0 are still in the archieves. However, the answer to the question is that it will do neither.

My question was an honest inquiry about AO/BO matching's affect on wolf reduction. Many luthiers (myself included) continue the search for the "holy grail" of wolf elimination, and I posed a simple question to you, an avowed believer. Frankly, if you said it was a cure, I would likely try it out. My question did not warrant your harsh and unfriendly response.

[drurb]

Originally Posted by ERIC A

I hate to say this, but I have no way of measuring the
width. I'd have to take it to a luthier. All I have is my
kid's ruler, which only gives inches. Do you think thinning
the neck instead of shaving down the width would be a
way to go? Thanks for the input.

25.4 mm per inch. Use your kid's ruler, we'll do the math.

[drurb]

Originally Posted by robobass

I find the opposite to be true. My thumb gets really sore if I sit in on a jazz gig and the neck on the bass is really big. I can play my own basses indefinitely without fatigue.

Well, sure, too big can be a problem as well but I find that to be quite rare. Do you play with a "classical" left-hand position, i.e., forming the proper "claw?" I have found that when one does that, the "proper" sized (not skinny) neck is the one that leads to less fatigue. Players who tend to let the thumb point up, collapsing the palm against the neck would seem to prefer skinny necks. I am not assuming anything about how you play, nor am I being critical-- I am simply asking.