what do you think about this body

artistanbul · #1 06-26-2004, 04:16 AM

I had a thought yesterday, and had time on my hands so I did a somewhat illustration of the idea.

basic idea is a longer body to increase the tension, while having a regular scale fingerboard. the rest is mostly aesthetical. so dont mind them much (especially the soundhole

)

what do you think about it? would the body hold? Would it work? Does back horn seem too fragile? What? Tell me.

edited the image...

boofis · #2 06-26-2004, 05:22 AM

Hey! I too had the same Idea about increasing the tension by extending the body but it screws the fretting up badly, like people told me (I actually tried it with scrap wood, didn't work for me, maybe its just me. I'm still trying to work on something like it though) Have you any ideas? I'm liking your body shape! Head stock is very classy, would change the horns though.
THanks
Troy

iualum · #3 06-26-2004, 05:54 AM

Absoultely beautiful.

6 string demon · #4 06-26-2004, 05:54 AM

i like the design. but i think it would look better if the little "kick" on the end of the headstock was also on the top horn. and would you have a brdige just behind the rear pup? otherwise it is still longer scale and so requiring (sp?) long scale board. if the bridge was just beond the rear pup with the extented strings behind the bridge would give you the idea you seemed to have explained. from what i have read and experienced the string length behind the breaking points of the sting makes little difference. but i could be wrong.

but yeah i like the deign. not for me, but its very nice.

artistanbul · #5 06-26-2004, 06:22 AM

Yeah a bridge was supposed to be there.. just like tuners and stuff...

so you think this may work?

6 string demon · #6 06-26-2004, 06:26 AM

i cant see any reason why it wouldnt.

rusty · #7 06-26-2004, 10:17 AM

Looks... different?

Well, it looks cool. Really

I'd rather the treble side horn be a bit more refined though. Right now it seems rather chunky.

I think you'd be able to get more educated/experienced answers regarding the length/fret issue.
Why not a fretless?

bryan bailey · #8 06-26-2004, 10:20 AM

With string lengths like that, a standard sized neck wouldn't work.

The pitches would be all different.

And I like the body shape, except the end of it, if it were just rounded off like a normal double cut away bass, I'd think it would be sweet.

danshee · #9 06-26-2004, 10:44 AM

Nice design though.

artistanbul · #10 06-26-2004, 10:52 AM

I thought it could change the pitch... so having a bridge on regular position and strectching the rest wont do it? Oh well...

Munjibunga · #11 06-26-2004, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by artistanbul

I had a thought yesterday, and had time on my hands so I did a somewhat illustration of the idea.

basic idea is a longer body to increase the tension, while having a regular scale fingerboard. the rest is mostly aesthetical. so dont mind them much (especially the soundhole

)

what do you think about it? would the body hold? Would it work? Does back horn seem too fragile? What? Tell me.

edited the image...

Surprisingly, I like the body. Usually, I'm not big on avant-garde shapes, but that one is smooth and well-balanced. Some bad news for you, though. Lengthening the strings behind the bridge is not going to increase the tension. It's the distance between the nut and the bridge that determines how tight the string will be. If it's a 34-inch scale, the strings will have the same tension as a bass with normal bridge placement.

Munjibunga · #12 06-26-2004, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaz

With string lengths like that, a standard sized neck wouldn't work.

The pitches would be all different.

And I like the body shape, except the end of it, if it were just rounded off like a normal double cut away bass, I'd think it would be sweet.

It'll work just fine like that. It's the bridge location that determines the effective length of the string. The extra stuff behind the bridge looks cool, but won't do anything else. He may have trouble finding strings for it, though.

artistanbul · #13 06-26-2004, 11:53 AM

ok. so how about having some kind of a saddle behind the rear pup, and then setting the strings to the rail bridges at the rear?

something like this to give a little arc..

6 string demon · #14 06-27-2004, 04:27 AM

http://www.ritter-basses.com/ritter-...es-jupiter.htm

is this the kind of idea your thinking of? i think there is no point in using the monorail bridges as all you need back there is an anchoring point. with a bridge 34" from the nut.

artistanbul · #15 06-27-2004, 05:58 AM

wow, yes thats the idea... So it helps putting tension on strings? or is it just cosmetics.. lots of guitars also have something similar to this. with much shorter length after the saddle though..

6 string demon · #16 06-27-2004, 06:20 AM

i guess you are refering the gibson style guitar bridges? these are not quite the same idea. as most bridges have a length of string behind the saddles. your idea seem to spefically be to lengthen the string behind the bridge to increase tension. i have no idea if this wpuld work, but as far as i can tell its the breaking length of the string, between the nut and bridge, which determines tension.

take a look at warrior basses. They use an extended B and E string design on some basses which go throught the body out the back of the bass.

ZenBass · #17 06-27-2004, 12:29 PM

Great Design I see Mr Ritter has got undernieth ur skin as well..

The point at where the strings make contact on the Saddles and the Nut Determin the scale lenght i.e 34" between nut and Saddle..th eextenders do nothing for the scale

...they are simple anchore to achive good tension again Mr Ritter has a similar design as do Warwick...seperate Bridge and Saddle...I am sure the Bride can be place wherever as long as the saddles are in the right place...throw it over to the Luither's if ur unsure..

The Design is great.. I really can see it in Walnut with a Cocobola finberboard would look yummie oor maybe lotsa Maple..

...

Keep it goin.!!!

lbanks · #18 06-27-2004, 01:35 PM

THAT will sell....

artistanbul · #19 06-27-2004, 08:11 PM

well, the fact that its been done makes me feel good

I've not seen a ritter before. what a good idea eh?

Oh and ZenBass thanks for advice on putting this on luthier forum.

Geoff St. Germaine · #20 06-27-2004, 09:01 PM

Like Munji said, lengthening the strings behind the bridge or the nut will not increase the tension on the strings.

It would be mostly cosmetic, though I imagine it will still affect the sound... either through the massive body or the fact that the tension of the strings will change differently while they're vibrating.

Geoff