30 years ago I brought an old broken-down barely playable bass I purchased from a paraplegic W. Virginia bluegrass bass-player to Chuck Traeger to overhaul. I still have this 200+ year-old German flat-back instrument, and its huge, clear, dark, consistent tone and "buttery" playability impress all who hear it and play it, while inspiring me to continually improve my technique to warrant such a beautiful instrument! The guy must know something! I don't know much about the science of acoustics or the intricacies of bass repair, but if he were still in business I wouldn't hesitate to bring my bass to him for repair!
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass A message from Chuck Traeger
- Thread starter Robert Kopec
- Start date
Let's start saying that i'm not a luthier but a professor of electrical engineering. Nonetheless living in Greece, where a real luthier is a nonexistent commodity, i had to learn basic lutherie in various seminars abroad, short courses etc., in order to fulfill my own needs with my own instruments (violins and double basses). I have constructed some violins with excellent results and after a decade i am in a position to perform a decent set up and various repairs in violins and double basses.
During all these years i used Traeger's first book (and lately his second one) to supplement my knowledge. I used many of his methods and in most of the cases with impeccable results. I tried the slightly beveled soundpost approach, which has improved many East and Central European double basses. I also made a scroll graft following his suggestions, i tried the high saddle method which reduced tension in a couple of basses, i installed adjusters according to his method etc. I don't know if his methods are traditional or not, since i had not any prior knowledge of the craft. I also know thet some of his suggstions must be taken with a bit of salt. But i can say that his books have been of enormous help for me and for many other folks worldwide. In most of the cases i discuss the cases with some of the respectable luthiers who are members in TBDB and i add their opinions to my arsenal. Usually they agree with his proposals. To make a long story short IMHO i believe that his book makes him a very good writer and he deserves the kudos and the respect of all the double bass players.
Mike
During all these years i used Traeger's first book (and lately his second one) to supplement my knowledge. I used many of his methods and in most of the cases with impeccable results. I tried the slightly beveled soundpost approach, which has improved many East and Central European double basses. I also made a scroll graft following his suggestions, i tried the high saddle method which reduced tension in a couple of basses, i installed adjusters according to his method etc. I don't know if his methods are traditional or not, since i had not any prior knowledge of the craft. I also know thet some of his suggstions must be taken with a bit of salt. But i can say that his books have been of enormous help for me and for many other folks worldwide. In most of the cases i discuss the cases with some of the respectable luthiers who are members in TBDB and i add their opinions to my arsenal. Usually they agree with his proposals. To make a long story short IMHO i believe that his book makes him a very good writer and he deserves the kudos and the respect of all the double bass players.
Mike
Wow. I'm sure that almost eveyone posting here is a better double bassist than I.
That said, I have read Mr. Traeger's book and am amazed, reading some serious s**t in this thread apparently posted by folks who didn't actually read the book AT ALL (uprightben) or seemingly skipped over some of Mr. Traeger's explanatory remarks, hoping to get to the "meat" (I suppose) only to be crippled in their understanding of the work as a whole by their own biases and laziness in not carefully reading and absorbing the meaning of THE ENTIRE TEXT.
At all times, Mr. Traeger is making clear that his is only one view. He devotes a third of the book to methods that diverge from his significantly, and that he does not specifically endorse! Don't like using metal work for neck repairs? Great! There is a WHOLE CHAPTER on using wooden pins/dowels, written by David Brownell (no slouch, either!). It is, however,at the BACK of the book- you have to WORK for it! I have yet to read another work where the author is bold and confident enough to include extensive, detailed contributions by another craftsman whose methods HE DISAGREES WITH. If you know of another, please post the title, author, and ISBN#. If this doesn't PROVE a) a comprehensive approach and demeanor ("scientific"? well...) and b) a distinct lack of "hubris" (really?) I have to question the understanding of those terms by those in this thread carelessly tossing them around. He makes very clear that his views and methods are as much informed by his training, education and experience as a structural engineer (degree, day job, and all- read the book!) as they are by his apprenticeship with Meister Cillecek.
This is not a book for novice woodworkers, with "step by step" pictoral instruction, or general ww information. You can get that elsewhere, and it still won't replace the time that needs to be put in milling, carving, sharpening, etc. before becoming proficient. If you don't have the time or wherewithal, take the damn thing to a luthier and let him decide on the validity of the "Traeger principle".
For the record, he endorses metal work for several reasons:
Inherent structural strength and durability
Ease of reversibility
The fact that the surrounding wood WILL move over time, necessitating re-repair (see previous point)
The fact that a bolt in exactly the right place at exactly the right angle is the very best clamp for any gluing job, and will outperform an external clamp every time. This is not a controversial notion at all- Cabinetmakers and boatbuilders have been utilizing it for 100 years. A careful reading of the text (and experience in one of the other endeavors I have mentioned [which I have]) leaves open the possibility of the bolt being removed and relying solely upon the strength of the bolt-aided gluing job (bolt, strictly as clamp). Mr. Traeger advises leaving the bolt in so that it can be tightened after re-liquifying the hide glue in the (in his eyes) inevitable case of dramatic movement/joint failure. But your glue joint still has to be good (tight and clean)!
His VERY EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE/OBSERVATION that metal work has no deleterious effects upon the sound. After fifty years, I think I will choose to trust this observation. I don't think anyone has the standing to challenge it unless they have at least half of that time in. Yes, I realize that there are folks in this forum who fit that description. I haven't heard any of them disagree- yet.
Is his book perfect? Hardly. I wince when I think of people paying $80 for a book so poorly sequenced and indexed (all the more reason to read it carefully). Unfortunately, this is not uncommon (see the previous poster re: textbooks) and seems to be epidemic in luthiery texts ( a nice exception is Cumpiano's "Guitarmaking", BTW). I'm guessing this is also what sets Weishaar apart, but have not been fortunate enough to get my hands on a copy of that text.
There are actually quite a few variables, many of which (like, uh, the weather) are totally uncontrollable.
Kind of like bass luthiery
That said, I have read Mr. Traeger's book and am amazed, reading some serious s**t in this thread apparently posted by folks who didn't actually read the book AT ALL (uprightben) or seemingly skipped over some of Mr. Traeger's explanatory remarks, hoping to get to the "meat" (I suppose) only to be crippled in their understanding of the work as a whole by their own biases and laziness in not carefully reading and absorbing the meaning of THE ENTIRE TEXT.
At all times, Mr. Traeger is making clear that his is only one view. He devotes a third of the book to methods that diverge from his significantly, and that he does not specifically endorse! Don't like using metal work for neck repairs? Great! There is a WHOLE CHAPTER on using wooden pins/dowels, written by David Brownell (no slouch, either!). It is, however,at the BACK of the book- you have to WORK for it! I have yet to read another work where the author is bold and confident enough to include extensive, detailed contributions by another craftsman whose methods HE DISAGREES WITH. If you know of another, please post the title, author, and ISBN#. If this doesn't PROVE a) a comprehensive approach and demeanor ("scientific"? well...) and b) a distinct lack of "hubris" (really?) I have to question the understanding of those terms by those in this thread carelessly tossing them around. He makes very clear that his views and methods are as much informed by his training, education and experience as a structural engineer (degree, day job, and all- read the book!) as they are by his apprenticeship with Meister Cillecek.
This is not a book for novice woodworkers, with "step by step" pictoral instruction, or general ww information. You can get that elsewhere, and it still won't replace the time that needs to be put in milling, carving, sharpening, etc. before becoming proficient. If you don't have the time or wherewithal, take the damn thing to a luthier and let him decide on the validity of the "Traeger principle".
For the record, he endorses metal work for several reasons:
Inherent structural strength and durability
Ease of reversibility
The fact that the surrounding wood WILL move over time, necessitating re-repair (see previous point)
The fact that a bolt in exactly the right place at exactly the right angle is the very best clamp for any gluing job, and will outperform an external clamp every time. This is not a controversial notion at all- Cabinetmakers and boatbuilders have been utilizing it for 100 years. A careful reading of the text (and experience in one of the other endeavors I have mentioned [which I have]) leaves open the possibility of the bolt being removed and relying solely upon the strength of the bolt-aided gluing job (bolt, strictly as clamp). Mr. Traeger advises leaving the bolt in so that it can be tightened after re-liquifying the hide glue in the (in his eyes) inevitable case of dramatic movement/joint failure. But your glue joint still has to be good (tight and clean)!
His VERY EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE/OBSERVATION that metal work has no deleterious effects upon the sound. After fifty years, I think I will choose to trust this observation. I don't think anyone has the standing to challenge it unless they have at least half of that time in. Yes, I realize that there are folks in this forum who fit that description. I haven't heard any of them disagree- yet.
Is his book perfect? Hardly. I wince when I think of people paying $80 for a book so poorly sequenced and indexed (all the more reason to read it carefully). Unfortunately, this is not uncommon (see the previous poster re: textbooks) and seems to be epidemic in luthiery texts ( a nice exception is Cumpiano's "Guitarmaking", BTW). I'm guessing this is also what sets Weishaar apart, but have not been fortunate enough to get my hands on a copy of that text.
You've obviously never poured a foundation in New England. I've seen many collapsed foundations because the wrong person won the argument.
There are actually quite a few variables, many of which (like, uh, the weather) are totally uncontrollable.Kind of like bass luthiery
Interesting post, CAPITALS, bolds, and all. You're right-- people really should read thoroughly what they choose to critique. I like to consider a bit about the source and was surprised to find your profile empty. How 'bout a little info?
Okay, okay, sorry about all the caps and bold stuff. I get excited
.
If a filled out profile sheds light- consider the curtains opened.
I realize, despite my vigorous defense, that not everything CT says is gospel, and does not apply to all basses.
The example that comes most readily to mind is his assertion that the neck should vibrate as freely as possible. The bass luthier who is working on my bass currently (who studied with Lou DiLeone) puts a premuim on the stiffness of the neck, as he sees any lack therof as a dampening factor. I wouldn't necessarily call these views mutually exclusive, or in opposition, but they could be hard to reconcile in practice. When I mentioned CT's view, my friend said "That applies to relatively few, top-end basses; most basses benefit from a stiffer neck- certainly ALL Kays and Englehardts need it." (I'm paraphrasing here). Of course, he also plays and works on bass guitars, too where this tenet is totally unchallenged. He has plenty of work, and many happy customers.
I have to wonder about your request for a filled out profile. Why would the kind of axe I play say more than the post I took the time to write? Do I need to be a "heavy hitter" for my words to make sense? Does it matter that I haven't played with anybody famous despite having played for 25 years? Are you looking for some defect to call me out on ("This ***hole doesn't even own a carved bass!")? I didn't see a field for the experience I have as a stagehand/LD, building houses, boats, furniture, farming cranberries, doing biological fieldwork, concrete forms, shellfishing, singing etc. I feel I'm more than the sum of my humble, cheap, abused gear.
The phrase CT repeats over and over in the book is that he is "trying to change the way people think about...". His presentation may be imperfect, and the initial post in this thread may be too truncated to give the reader a real taste of the "open" tone of the book, but I find it vaguely offensive to intimate that he is being overly pedantic or conceited. Reading his book will give just the opposite impression. Having recieved the book sight unseen, I was very suprised by those sections written by others and his somewhat humorous prefaces.
I am currently in the process of trying to get some space and (more)tools to do my own DB luthiery. I already do work on guitars, electric basses, ukes, for myself and friends, and have a basket case DB in storage for the day when I have my space sorted. Hence my ownership and interest in CT's book, which is a godsend for fellows like myself, flaws and all!
P.S. Anybody interested in wood working should buy a copy of "The Complete Guide to Sharpening" by Leonard Lee- great book!
.If a filled out profile sheds light- consider the curtains opened.
I realize, despite my vigorous defense, that not everything CT says is gospel, and does not apply to all basses.
The example that comes most readily to mind is his assertion that the neck should vibrate as freely as possible. The bass luthier who is working on my bass currently (who studied with Lou DiLeone) puts a premuim on the stiffness of the neck, as he sees any lack therof as a dampening factor. I wouldn't necessarily call these views mutually exclusive, or in opposition, but they could be hard to reconcile in practice. When I mentioned CT's view, my friend said "That applies to relatively few, top-end basses; most basses benefit from a stiffer neck- certainly ALL Kays and Englehardts need it." (I'm paraphrasing here). Of course, he also plays and works on bass guitars, too where this tenet is totally unchallenged. He has plenty of work, and many happy customers.
I have to wonder about your request for a filled out profile. Why would the kind of axe I play say more than the post I took the time to write? Do I need to be a "heavy hitter" for my words to make sense? Does it matter that I haven't played with anybody famous despite having played for 25 years? Are you looking for some defect to call me out on ("This ***hole doesn't even own a carved bass!")? I didn't see a field for the experience I have as a stagehand/LD, building houses, boats, furniture, farming cranberries, doing biological fieldwork, concrete forms, shellfishing, singing etc. I feel I'm more than the sum of my humble, cheap, abused gear.
The phrase CT repeats over and over in the book is that he is "trying to change the way people think about...". His presentation may be imperfect, and the initial post in this thread may be too truncated to give the reader a real taste of the "open" tone of the book, but I find it vaguely offensive to intimate that he is being overly pedantic or conceited. Reading his book will give just the opposite impression. Having recieved the book sight unseen, I was very suprised by those sections written by others and his somewhat humorous prefaces.
I am currently in the process of trying to get some space and (more)tools to do my own DB luthiery. I already do work on guitars, electric basses, ukes, for myself and friends, and have a basket case DB in storage for the day when I have my space sorted. Hence my ownership and interest in CT's book, which is a godsend for fellows like myself, flaws and all!
P.S. Anybody interested in wood working should buy a copy of "The Complete Guide to Sharpening" by Leonard Lee- great book!
Could be explained by the "Optimum is not necessarily maximum" thing.
I have read the "Setup..." book and CT goes out of his way over and over to remind the reader that there are more ways to do things and his is only one of them.
I'll have to look that up. I can't sharpen worth crap...
George
...I have to wonder about your request for a filled out profile. Why would the kind of axe I play say more than the post I took the time to write? Do I need to be a "heavy hitter" for my words to make sense? Does it matter that I haven't played with anybody famous despite having played for 25 years? Are you looking for some defect to call me out on ("This ***hole doesn't even own a carved bass!")? I didn't see a field for the experience I have as a stagehand/LD, building houses, boats, furniture, farming cranberries, doing biological fieldwork, concrete forms, shellfishing, singing etc. I feel I'm more than the sum of my humble, cheap, abused gear.
Gee, a more benevolent, friendly, optimistic approach might help. It would also help not to assume. Specifically:
1) The kind of axe you play does not say more than your post.
2) You do not need to be a "heavy hitter" for your words to make sense. Your words represent your thoughts.
3) It doesn't matter that you haven't played with anybody famous.
4) I am not looking for a reason to call you out. You might go back and notice that, while I asked you to fill out your profile, I also mentioned that I agreed with you!
5) There certainly is a field where you can list whatever hobbies, activities, you think are relevant. So, yes, you could have listed your experience as a stagehand/LD, building houses, boats, furniture, farming cranberries, doing biological fieldwork, concrete forms, shellfishing, singing etc.
None of these were a primary reason for my asking you to tell us more about yourself.
Instead of assuming that my motives were negative, which they were not, you might have simply taken my own words at face value. I gave the reason for asking you to fill out your profile. Quite simply, it was:
I like to consider a bit about the source...
When people state opinions and points of view, I find it enlightening to know what kinds of experience have led to those. Thoughts about the value of Traeger's book certainly take on different weight and meaning for me and for others if they are offered by someone who never read the book vs. someone who read it but never picked up a chisel vs. someone who read it and does his/her own luthiery vs. a master luthier who also read the book.
In the same vein, when someone who posts that he played an XXX carved bass and finds it to be one of the best values on the market, it makes a difference if that player is a 15-year-old just staring out who has played three basses in his life vs. a "heavy hitter."
Be calm, no one here is against you.
Jake deVilliers
Commercial User
- May 24, 2006
- 6,349
- 607
- Disclosures
- Owner of The Bass Spa, String Repairman at Long & McQuade Vancouver
I've noticed a real division of opinion on Mr. Traeger's book between those who don't work on instruments (Against) and those who do work on instruments (For).
I think the book is a wonderful resource and I'm very happy that he took the trouble to put the book together. God knows it must have been a labour of love - there's no way he made minimum wage writing and illustrating the book - and I think that DB repair has been improved worldwide as a result.
Do I agree with his every word - hell no, but there's a lot of thought-provoking information in the book that's been derived from hands-on experience and its definitely made me a better repairman.
I think the book is a wonderful resource and I'm very happy that he took the trouble to put the book together. God knows it must have been a labour of love - there's no way he made minimum wage writing and illustrating the book - and I think that DB repair has been improved worldwide as a result.
Do I agree with his every word - hell no, but there's a lot of thought-provoking information in the book that's been derived from hands-on experience and its definitely made me a better repairman.
Jake deVilliers
Commercial User
- May 24, 2006
- 6,349
- 607
- Disclosures
- Owner of The Bass Spa, String Repairman at Long & McQuade Vancouver
You can have a stiff, CF reinforced neck that vibrates freely because of a smaller neck block and its lower damping effect on the swinging of the neck as a whole i.e. the CF keeps the neck from wiggling throughout its length and dissipating highs, whereas the freer-moving neck/scroll assembly makes larger amplitude swings that help to power the bottom end.
Works well on guitars too!
- Jan 24, 2002
- 2,117
- 950
- Disclosures
- NS Design / AER Endorsing Artist
I'm not comfortable naming names, but there are certainly luthiers whom I respect who take Mr. Traeger's treatise with a big grain of salt. TalkBass is not a representative sample -- most professional luthiers don't post on here. Fewer still lack the professional courtesy to post their negative opinions in this particular thread.
I'm always interested in reading different points of view. I've read some of the book in question, and it's a fascinating perspective. I'm certainly grateful he took the time to commit his thoughts to paper.
Matthew Tucker
Commercial User
- Aug 21, 2002
- 2,686
- 387
- Disclosures
- Owner: Bresque Basses, Sydney Basses and Cellos
I think the luthiers who have refrained from making negative comments in this thread are being very professional, actually.
The only thing I have to contribute after reading this novel of a thread (I just found it today..) is that I disagree wholeheartedly about one thing Chuck mentions in the article.
If your repairman won't adopt methods in this article, refuse his services and find one who does.
This thread is thorough proof that it's not that simple. I've found many times that a setup that I find to be optimal is sometimes not in the eyes of my customer. For example, I had a heated debate with my college roommate once about stereo systems. While he had his $4000 audiophile setup in an acoustically resonant room, I had my 1973 Marantz with big cheap speakers setup in the other room and liked the sound of it more. I grew up listening to that amp and, though it's not as clear and crisp as his, I still preferred it.
You have to act based on what your customer wants. Though I keep my thoughts that my customer is a nutjob in my head for keeping to his/her opinion, I shut my mouth and do the work they ask of me. Sometimes their idea of optimal sound isn't mine. Sometimes the soundpost is directly under the bridge foot and they don't want me to touch it because they like where it is.
Though it is another situation all together when your customer trusts your expertise and offer no course of action, only want a good setup. I've adopted a number of CT's principles, but I have to say that mode matching is way to hocus pocus for most of my customer base. It's not everyday that I work on some of the world's most pedigree basses... yet. That being said, the subtile-at-best improvements in tone are just not worth all the effort with a good quality chinese bass owned by a high school or college student. In this economy, I get scoffed at for quoting a price on a new bridge with wheel adjusters. "Can you just sell me the bridge? (blank)" :scowl:
I like to think that Chuck's totalitarian viewpoint is justified in his mind (and that of others) based on his experience. Not to mention the fact that he lived and practiced in a very competitive city. Just like any dancer or broadway performer, it's part of the business to be full of yourself or you just won't make the cut..
By the way, I have two of his books and have thoroughly studied them. Just making that point for those with doubts.
If your repairman won't adopt methods in this article, refuse his services and find one who does.
This thread is thorough proof that it's not that simple. I've found many times that a setup that I find to be optimal is sometimes not in the eyes of my customer. For example, I had a heated debate with my college roommate once about stereo systems. While he had his $4000 audiophile setup in an acoustically resonant room, I had my 1973 Marantz with big cheap speakers setup in the other room and liked the sound of it more. I grew up listening to that amp and, though it's not as clear and crisp as his, I still preferred it.
You have to act based on what your customer wants. Though I keep my thoughts that my customer is a nutjob in my head for keeping to his/her opinion, I shut my mouth and do the work they ask of me. Sometimes their idea of optimal sound isn't mine. Sometimes the soundpost is directly under the bridge foot and they don't want me to touch it because they like where it is.
Though it is another situation all together when your customer trusts your expertise and offer no course of action, only want a good setup. I've adopted a number of CT's principles, but I have to say that mode matching is way to hocus pocus for most of my customer base. It's not everyday that I work on some of the world's most pedigree basses... yet. That being said, the subtile-at-best improvements in tone are just not worth all the effort with a good quality chinese bass owned by a high school or college student. In this economy, I get scoffed at for quoting a price on a new bridge with wheel adjusters. "Can you just sell me the bridge? (blank)" :scowl:
I like to think that Chuck's totalitarian viewpoint is justified in his mind (and that of others) based on his experience. Not to mention the fact that he lived and practiced in a very competitive city. Just like any dancer or broadway performer, it's part of the business to be full of yourself or you just won't make the cut..
By the way, I have two of his books and have thoroughly studied them. Just making that point for those with doubts.
I think it's important to make a distinction between criticizing the article at the top of this thread and criticizing the book. The two have gotten mixed up here (but not by you). I certainly agree with you about the suggestion that if a luthier won't follow CT's advice, one should find another luthier.
This is right on target. Preferences cannot be legislated by principles or specifications. In the audiophile world, many prefer a response that's not flat at all. That's fine! The arguments often rage when one even mentions that the response someone may like is decidedly different from what that same individual considers to be ideal.
I think you're right that the same issues apply to double bass setup as well.
Agree. Very different tone is used in the book than in the article at the top of the thread - but I would expect that.
- Jan 24, 2002
- 2,117
- 950
- Disclosures
- NS Design / AER Endorsing Artist
+1 This is my point with much fewer words. I blabber.
The tone of this article seems, at best, a cornering sales tactic forcing luthiers to buy his books by generating the loyalty of players with, at best, a crude understanding of good bass setups. This posturing troubles me. Though I might have come up with different methods and practical applications, I'm no slouch because I don't use many of Chuck's methods. I might not have half a century of experience, but I have successfully generated a following in my practice..
For clarity's sake, I offer to say that his books don't mimic the tone of this article. In retrospect of CT's career, they do offer quite a bit of general principles he's found success in given the sheer number of instruments that have come across his bench..
OTOH, outside of the NY Luthiers that had a hand in writing the book, I haven't seen a single Luthier here support every single tidbit the book offers. Everybody is taking some amount of salt along with CTs advice. Why not? Why isn't it the bible for some folks just as there are people who disagree with it completely for the most part? Why not have outliers on both sides of the curve?
Who knows, maybe those a part of the book are truly at the very top tier of bass repair but is that really true? When I hear people talk about the book in person (luthiers included), I find them usually biting their tongue or not saying anything at all. Seems ominous to me.
And just because some of us don't work on basses for a living doens't neccessarily discount our arguments. For instance, I've tried things similar to CT's advice on a drumstick for an endpin. Lightening the mass at the end of my bass may not have been optimal. Does my experience get discounted because I disagreed with CT's advice? Seems like I'm not the only one holding this position about endpins either.
Still in the end, whether you agree with it or not, the production of the book I think has been a good thing. It gets people talking about bass repair and finding out more about what works with everyone else and what doesnt. At least it gets us players some visibility into what goes on with repair on our own instruments.
Who knows, maybe those a part of the book are truly at the very top tier of bass repair but is that really true? When I hear people talk about the book in person (luthiers included), I find them usually biting their tongue or not saying anything at all. Seems ominous to me.
And just because some of us don't work on basses for a living doens't neccessarily discount our arguments. For instance, I've tried things similar to CT's advice on a drumstick for an endpin. Lightening the mass at the end of my bass may not have been optimal. Does my experience get discounted because I disagreed with CT's advice? Seems like I'm not the only one holding this position about endpins either.
Still in the end, whether you agree with it or not, the production of the book I think has been a good thing. It gets people talking about bass repair and finding out more about what works with everyone else and what doesnt. At least it gets us players some visibility into what goes on with repair on our own instruments.
What I do is write notes in the margin of my reference books. Usually tweaking the method described. I also do this with cookbooks. I personally have enjoyed and benefitted from his books. My teacher also wrote a book on violin making / repair, and it's not really surprising to hear the same tone of voice in both books. It's the nature of the beast.
I'd like to post my very recent experiance with the book. A little background first. Here in Shanghai there are no bass only repair shops. Shen sells basses and has a nice fellow, Mr. Lee that does mostly simple repairs for him here. But he's not a bass player and most of what he does to the instruments that Sam sells locally is string them up, and fit decent, but very tall non-adjustable bridges to the basses. Sam's bread and butter (some say his fortune) has been made by selling basses overseas (USA) where they re-sold with expert set-ups by many of the fine luthiers that post often post here, along with others. Sam sells container loads full of instruments to North America! Why not, they are good basses, IMHO and in many others great values for the money. But here in China, the bass Sam sells you features only a very basic set-up. I had gone through quite a few frustrating hours at Sam's trying to explain exactly what I wanted done to the bass I bought to make it play easier. More than a few trips there. Up to now the best I could expect to get out of the nice fellow Mr. Lee, in terms of results directly relates to my knowlage of set-up tecniques, which is not much. I've owned basses in the States that were set-up by the best in LA and sometimes got to hang a bit in the shops while they were being worked on and at least got to watch some stuff being done. Outside of that I only knew what I picked up over the years reading Talkbass! Good stuff for sure but far from enough to direct Mr. Lee's most sincere attempts to satisfy my request for a "good, easy playing somewhat growly but not too much, not too high but not too low, plays easy in thumb position but still sounds fat everywhere while playing like butta' dream set-up that makes my Shen Willow sound as good as John Heard's hundreds of years old bass that I got to try the last time I saw him playing in LA last year"...and oh..did I mention that Mr. Lee barely speaks any English and my Mandarin is even worse! Honestly, I'd be happy enough if I could just get him to make the bass work well with strings set at 5 mil. at G and 8mil. under the E. Since buying the bass about 6 months ago I'd been able to get him to successfully install an adjustable bridge and lower the nut slots. But the fingerboard was not dressed well enough to allow for such a low string height, so I've been fighting with the bass everynight since I've bought it. So far, I'd had to deal with about 9 mil. under the G and about 11mil. under the E. That's real high for me playing Spirocore Mittles, 4 sets, 6 nights of jazz, often at burning tempos and the band and patrons like it when I solo, please! My hands hurt! But ever so thankful that I manage to keep work when so many others, often more deserving have trouble working enough, even here in China!
But just this past Weds. I had an opportunity to borrow what is likely the only copy of Chuck's book in existance in Shanghai from one of my fellow ex-pat bassist friends here. I read quite a bit of it in the last few days, particulary Chuck's directions on how to plane and dress a fingerboard. I was able to determine that my fingerboard was lacking sufficent camber, was almost nothing under the G string and had some bumpy spots that caused buzzing at my half-position B on the G string, even with such a high string height! So today I took my bass, and the book to Shen's and did my best to explain to good Mr. Lee what I wanted him to do and how much of a camber to plane into my board. Chuck recomends about a 1/8 inch camber, measured at the middle of the board and a string height of 6 mil.@ G and 8 or nine @ the E. Mr. Lee does not read English but does understand concepts of measurement and has a very steady and sure hand with wood working tools, along with a full compliment of them in the shop. Turns out he's quite capable, just in need of very specific direction regarding what's involved in a bass set-up for jazz. So this afternoon he planed and sanded, I checked playing the bass as we went, more planing and sanding and checking for bumps and more sanding and more checking and playing and about 3 hours later my bass feels and sounds pretty darn good, and sports that 5 to 8 mil. string height that I've been looking for! And at no charge, Shen just wants me to be happy with my bass!
So in my case, living and playing for a living in a city where there is not much of a bass culture having "The Book" really made a differance today. Now if only I could buy Spirocores, pickups and all the other bass goodies I like here instead of having to order on the internet and wait for them to clear customs and all!
