New neck; change string length poss?

MiamiBasser · #1 03-10-2011, 01:23 AM

I'm having a new neck put on and would love to make my bass more playable in two ways (or more if you have ideas) if tone could be maintained:

1) by shortening the string length from 43.5" to 42"
2) moving the strings closer together horizontally. i.e. if from the E string to the G is 5 inches at the bridge make it 4.5"

Will this be a good idea?
Old neck is cracked so that's why I need a new one and it's an Eb neck.

Thanks

tstone · #2 03-10-2011, 10:51 AM

Do you have an Eb neck now, or a D neck?

If you have an Eb neck, the conversion would result in something very close to a D neck, which should be fine once you got used to it. But if you have a D neck now, the conversion would give you something close to a C#/Db neck. You could probably get used to that, but I think it would make the bass less attractive to any future buyer if you ever wanted to sell it.

The above assumes that you keep the bridge in the same position on the body and that the neck heel geometry stays the same as it is now.

I don't see any problem with the tighter string spacing at the bridge. Some people (e.g. Traeger) think that yields improved volume.

Eric Hochberg · #3 03-10-2011, 11:37 AM

You could also try a 3/4" extended nut on your current neck and moving the bridge north 3/4". That will maintain your current heel note.

With a new neck, can't the heel be shaped or the neck inset into the block lower or higher to create either a D or Eb neck?

tstone · #4 03-10-2011, 12:12 PM

>> You could also try a 3/4" extended nut on your current neck and moving the bridge north 3/4". That will maintain your current heel note.
On a D neck, the distance from the nut to the heel note is 1/3 the string length, and from the heel note to the bridge is 2/3 the string length. So MiamiBass would need to move the nut 1/2" south and the bridge 1" north to maintain that 1/3:2/3 relationship. That's a big move for the bridge. Interesting idea, though.
>> With a new neck, can't the heel be shaped or the neck inset into the block lower or higher to create either a D or Eb neck?
If MiamiBass has a D neck, and wants to keep it as such, and leaves the bridge where it is, he'd have to remove a full 1" of material from the neck heel. On most basses, that would result in very little heel left, and the button would just about disappear.

Again, it would really help to know if the current neck is a D or an Eb.

Eric Hochberg · #5 03-10-2011, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tstone

[i][indent]>> On a D neck, the distance from the nut to the heel note is 1/3 the string length, and from the heel note to the bridge is 2/3 the string length. So MiamiBass would need to move the nut 1/2" south and the bridge 1" north to maintain that 1/3:2/3 relationship. That's a big move for the bridge. Interesting idea, though.

I don't understand why that specific 1/3:2/3 relationship is important here. Moving the bridge and nut equidistant shortens the string length and maintains the D or Eb neck, AFAIK.

MiamiBasser · #6 03-10-2011, 01:42 PM

Old neck is cracked so that's why I need a new one and it's an Eb neck.

tstone · #7 03-10-2011, 02:16 PM

That's great news (not that your old neck is cracked, but that it's an Eb neck).

Your luthier should be able to fashion a new D neck which gives you the string length you want, a strong and normal-looking heel geometry, and requires minimal repositioning of the bridge. Be sure he knows that that's what you want.

=====
>> Moving the bridge and nut equidistant shortens the string length and maintains the D or Eb neck, AFAIK.
The math doesn't work out that way. Just as an example, say you had a bass with a D neck and a 42" scale length. By physics, the D note on the G string would be at 1/3 the string length from the nut, or at 14". And by the definition of a D neck, the neck heel would be at 14" as well.

Now let's say you decided to convert the bass to 40" string length, and did so by extending the nut 1" south and moving the bridge 1" north. Again, by physics, the D on the G string is located at the 1/3 point on the string length, so it's now at 13.33" from the nut. But the neck heel didn't move, so it's now at 13" from the nut. So if you put your thumb in the curve between the neck and the heel and plant your index finger on the G string in the familiar hand postion you used to use to get a D, it's going to be painfully flat.

Whereas before, the D note and the neck heel were perfectly aligned, now they're a little off. To maintain the perfect alignment -- and the familiar ergonomics -- you would have had to extend the nut 2/3 inch south and move the bridge 1-1/3 inches north. Same 2" total change in string length, but distributed differently.

gaelmckeon · #8 03-15-2011, 06:19 PM

I would also make sure that the overstand is sufficient (aprox 30mm), as it will effect your thumb position playing greatly. I don't believe string spacing will effect volume, but bridge height certainly will, and a new neck will determine bridge height. Depending on the size of the bass, and the curvature of the top plate, my preference for bridge heights tends to be between 6 1/2 to 6 7/8 inches from the top plate to the top of the bridge. But if its a fragile bass, less is better. I find spacing the strings so that theyr're 78mm apart (G to E) is a good place to start. Assuming that your fingerboard curvature is adequate, I think you'll find it easy to play that way. The danger and problem with getting the strings to close to each other is that your access to each string with a bow actually diminishes. Imagine if the g and a were right up next to the d. There would hardly be any clearance for your bow at all. I haven't actaully come across an arco player who wasn't comfortable playing a 78 mm spread.

Eric Hochberg · #9 03-17-2011, 09:57 AM

Quote:

>> Moving the bridge and nut equidistant shortens the string length and maintains the D or Eb neck, AFAIK.
The math doesn't work out that way. Just as an example, say you had a bass with a D neck and a 42" scale length. By physics, the D note on the G string would be at 1/3 the string length from the nut, or at 14". And by the definition of a D neck, the neck heel would be at 14" as well.

Now let's say you decided to convert the bass to 40" string length, and did so by extending the nut 1" south and moving the bridge 1" north. Again, by physics, the D on the G string is located at the 1/3 point on the string length, so it's now at 13.33" from the nut. But the neck heel didn't move, so it's now at 13" from the nut. So if you put your thumb in the curve between the neck and the heel and plant your index finger on the G string in the familiar hand postion you used to use to get a D, it's going to be painfully flat.

Whereas before, the D note and the neck heel were perfectly aligned, now they're a little off. To maintain the perfect alignment -- and the familiar ergonomics -- you would have had to extend the nut 2/3 inch south and move the bridge 1-1/3 inches north. Same 2" total change in string length, but distributed differently.

Thanks, didn't know that.