Speaking of headless basses I need some ideas

[tjclem]

I am building a small bodied bass. Bigger than the old steinburger bass but not much. I want to use a set of Hipshot ultralights at the bridge endand have the strings anchor at the top. Any ideas on how to align/place the tuners? Any of you done this before? Any photos of basses or links where a headless bass has been done with standard tuners? Thanks.....T

[Zooberwerx]

The Kramer Duke has a routed area on the backside which accommodates the Gotoh style (?) tuners. Why don't you find a Duke on E-bay and see if the seller will zap you a digital pic?

Bunker Guitars sells their micrometer headless bass tuners in a variety of finishes and with three different mounting options. I don't care much for their necks but the tuners are really solid and easy to install with the included template. Word of caution: you really need to have access to a drill press so all holes / channels are true. FWIW, Status makes a great micrometer tuner as well.

Not to derail the thread, but I'm looking for a replacement headless 5 neck. Any ideas?

Riis

[PilbaraBass]

here's how the duke is done...



meh....i think the A string is wound on the peg the wrong way...

i don't know...doesn't look very nice, does it?

[Jazz Ad]

Yeah the "tuners at the end of the body" thing has been tried many times. It always looks dorky.
Most hardware builders offer elegant headless systems that don't even require double ball strings. Why bothering with tuners ?

I really like Status.

[tjclem]

Originally Posted by PilbaraBass

here's how the duke is done...



meh....i think the A string is wound on the peg the wrong way...

i don't know...doesn't look very nice, does it?

thanks you got a close up of the back by the tuners?

[PilbaraBass]

Originally Posted by tjclem

thanks you got a close up of the back by the tuners?

nope...got this off of a google image search (not much to choose from)

I imagine that the tuners look just like the would on the back of headstock...

there would have to be a region at the end of the bass(most likely via a routed cavity) that would allow the bass body to be thin enough to accept the tuners in a conventional fashion.

[tjclem]

OK thanks I thought it might be your bass..t

[Dugz Ink]

Originally Posted by Jazz Ad

Yeah the "tuners at the end of the body" thing has been tried many times. It always looks dorky.
Most hardware builders offer elegant headless systems that don't even require double ball strings. Why bothering with tuners ?

A bit expensive, but they are fantastic... and they look great.

Go to their site, select the type of surrency that you use, and the main page will open. (Frames... GAH!) Roll over "On-Line Shop" then select "Spare Parts." In the next frame, click on "Bridges."

As far as using standard tuners, I have seen a picture, but I can't find it at the moment. However, you're basically just routing out a pocket on the back of the bass... just big enough to mount your tuners. (The wood that's left will be the thickness of a standard headstock.)

[Captain_joe6]

One thing to consider, if you want to go with a totally Kramer-like setup, they used a bridge on their basses that has holes in the back plate of it. Its basically a fender bent-plate bridge with those holes. You'd have to drill those holes yourself if you wanted to go that route.

[PilbaraBass]

Originally Posted by Captain_joe6

One thing to consider, if you want to go with a totally Kramer-like setup, they used a bridge on their basses that has holes in the back plate of it. Its basically a fender bent-plate bridge with those holes. You'd have to drill those holes yourself if you wanted to go that route.

ummm...don't Fender bridges COME with holes in the back of them? Isn't this where the strings are anchored on a conventional bridge?

I don't think you'd need to modify a standard bridge, other than making sure it was burr free.

personally...I'd go for the status design, or try and get a steinberger like bridge.

[Suburban]

Aye! Status, ABM or ETS are all better ideas (even though they are rather the same idea ) than using a twist tuner. Both functionally and aesthetically.
Another idea is used on the Staccato bass...that is pretty interesting! You should try to find somebody that can tell you about that one (and then, you tell me, OK?).

[tjclem]

http://www.bunnybass.com/e-zine/amus...ngbass06.shtml

very strange

[Suburban]

And a lot of intreaguing solutions. You'd almost think it was french...

If anybody can find out how that tuner works, please tell me!

[A9X]

Originally Posted by Suburban

Aye! Status, ABM or ETS are all better ideas (even though they are rather the same idea ) than using a twist tuner. Both functionally and aesthetically.

Agreed.

[Geoff St. Germaine]

I thought that this was a pretty slick setup for a small headstock. http://www.doolinguitars.com/abg.html

Mike Doolin makes amazing instruments. I just love his dual cutaway acoustics.

[PilbaraBass]

Originally Posted by Geoff St. Germaine

I thought that this was a pretty slick setup for a small headstock. http://www.doolinguitars.com/abg.html

Mike Doolin makes amazing instruments. I just love his dual cutaway acoustics.

That's very interesting... I'm not sure about the practicality...and it looks a bit strange...but the rest of the instrument is INCREDIBLE...

[Jay Terrien]

Definitely go for the Status headless design!!!

That Doolin is pretty amazing as well.....

Originally Posted by PilbaraBass

ummm...don't Fender bridges COME with holes in the back of them? Isn't this where the strings are anchored on a conventional bridge?

I don't think you'd need to modify a standard bridge, other than making sure it was burr free.

personally...I'd go for the status design, or try and get a steinberger like bridge.

[Ninelions]

Is okay to post links to other forums? I'm building one similar to this:

http://www.mimf.com/library/marchesini_smontolone.htm

Nicest solution to the tuners that I've seen, and simple. Right now I'm figuring out how to use a standard metal bridge so I can get individual intonation tuning.