Are carbon fiber bars/rods worth it?

[JIO]

The Warmoth necks use steel but have an option for graphite. I had a used one once but it didn't fit the body quite right so I sold it. Killer sound and stability but it definitely added weight and I'm sure it did something extra to the tone.

I just restored a 1968 Danelectro/Coral full-scale bass that has 2 steel beams in the neck. (no tr) Heavy (nearly 4lbs) but flat/straight and can't find a dead note anywhere. Without an A/B test with a standard neck I can't say what it adds tonally - but it sounds great. Drawback is neck-dive.

 

[TrustRod]

This ‘dead spot’ thing is a bit of a mystery to me never having experienced it, but I guess it’s a resonance thing. In which case adding stiffeners will change the stiffness and the mass, both of which affect resonant frequency. I suspect it’s quite hard to design.

I don't hear them either. And when I play a bass or guitar of someone else's that has them they can no longer hear them either. Resonance is the usual explanation and it makes sense. But it's odd it only shows up on one octave and not the same note on other octaves above or below.

 

[Gilmourisgod]

I never much heard of dead spots till I got on TB, I hunted around on my G&L and eventually found a G string note that doesn’t seem to ring out as loud or long, big whup. If that’s a dead spot, I can live with it, since I never even noticed it until TB had me looking. My Steinberger, by comparison, has no dead spots whatsoever. I know it’s a resonance issue, but the unique internal structure of each piece of wood must have something to do with it, a pure CF/resin neck is just a homogenous object.

 

[5tring]

Perhaps it’s an issue of damped natural frequency, and we need to take into account the damping coefficient of our arms, hands and bellies when specifying neck stiffeners

 

[dwizum]

Also, the damping coefficient of the gray matter between the ears.

 

[Gilmourisgod]

I am Fully Damped

 

[5tring]

I am Fully Damped

I’m overdamped

 

[HaMMerHeD]

You humid sumb!+@¥€s.

 

[TrustRod]

I never much heard of dead spots till I got on TB

Mass hysteria, if the group hears it even those that don't will end up hearing it Resonance is a real thing though most bass players think it's something you get more of for your money, along with sustain.

It seems what we can hear goes in trends. For me dead spots were something I heard of in the last century with Fatheads, Sadowsky's extra thick headstocks and little brass C clamps you attach to your headstock but I don't hear about them much anymore. Back in the day everyone could also hear finishes and if your wood was breathing correctly, now it's species that controls the tone. Nitro versus poly used to be a day and night difference. Yet no one could hear color or primer or even metalflake. Just the binder in the paint. Even though half the finish is binder the other half pigments, the pigment made no difference in tone.

My experience with other's basses that don't have dead notes when I'm playing makes me think you have to know about it to hear it. Try to forget you ever heard of them

 

[Gilmourisgod]

You forgot High Mass bridges. Everybody KNOWS they add sustain and.....toney-ness.

 

[dwizum]

I always figured dead spots were places where Jerry Garcia fans hung out.

 

[TrustRod]

That deserves a rim shot, but if it's for Dead fans a 14 minute drum solo is more apropos.

 

[Huw Phillips]

The thing I find most amusing is that the holy grail of basses are from the 60s so why does all this new tech stuff get a look in, many if not all the new tech did not exist in any form, as the great man said “ shut up and play your guitar “

 

[Gilmourisgod]

Ive played a few Holy Grail 60's basses, there is no Special Sauce, just a nice old bass. Hype inflates the World.

 

[Huw Phillips]

So correct me if I am wrong, would it be accurate to compare 60s/ older basses with classic cars, they look amazing and drive ok but do t have all the bells and whistles of modern technology, and you would not want to go far for fear of a break down

 

[HaMMerHeD]

So correct me if I am wrong, would it be accurate to compare 60s/ older basses with classic cars, they look amazing and drive ok but do t have all the bells and whistles of modern technology, and you would not want to go far for fear of a break down

I don't think so. Basses are orders of magnitude less complex than cars, so are far less likely to develop unfixable show-stopping problems that will leave you stranded in the desert and force you to eat your bandmates to survive.

 

[T_Bone_TL]

And let's not forget that the bad bases of the '60s have probably mostly ended up in a dumpster by now, so other than a few that were thrown into a closet rather than a dumpster, the surviving examples are going to be "the good ones" weeded out from the entire range of what was actually produced. Or so it seems to me...

 

[non]

When most carbon fiber I've been around is thin and narrow in shape, it flexes fairly easily in human hands. I'm wondering if the constant movement of a maple neck in temperature and humidity changes wouldn't simply move these bars with ease... and thus, rendering the bars ineffective.

graphite bars used in guitar necks are not the same carbon fiber weave most of use are use to seeing used in performance parts.
there is no "weave" like the carbon fiber we have all seen. the graphite molecules are arranged to be stiff.

 

[Gilmourisgod]

Compared to whatever device you are using to post on this forum, A 60's bass might as well be a hunk of chipped flint poking holes in leather hides. Other than preamps, it's almost all 1950's technology. People like to romanticize old stuff, I get it, there's a pleasing aesthetic and tactile quality to old basses, but nothing that can't be replicated with well-dried lumber and a relic job, if you like the look of disintegrating nitro finishes. The best bass for your money is probably going to be a brand new or slightly used model, things do improve over time. Even some of the cheaper import basses are as good or better than some of the old stuff people moon about. Would I like to own a bound and blocked early 70's Jazz? Absolutely, but is it necessarily "better" than a brand new one? The one bass I own that is absolutely consistent day to day, month to month, stays in tune for weeks on end, has no dead spots, and needs no seasonal adjustment? My Steinberger XP-2, wood body, CF/Graphite/Resin neck, no trussrod, none needed. Completely "solid-state" bass. It's demonstrably a better material for neck construction, and doesn't sound "cold" ( the most common gripe I hear) to my ears. Tactile-wise, it just feels like a painted neck, which you either like or you don't. CF/Graphite construction WORKS.

 

[TrustRod]

And let's not forget that the bad bases of the '60s have probably mostly ended up in a dumpster by now, so other than a few that were thrown into a closet rather than a dumpster, the surviving examples are going to be "the good ones" weeded out from the entire range of what was actually produced. Or so it seems to me...

I hear this a lot but it doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't the good ones have been played to death and be all worn out while the crap never gets played and remains pristine? This is more of an apologetic to rationalize the cost of old crap I think. There were no testing labs in the '60s to decide which Fenders we're a little better than the others. People played what they had and that was it.

If people threw out guitars that were inferior to current ones we'd have no pre CBS Fenders left. I've played many of them and most would be returned as defective if they were bought from SX. And they all become worth a fraction of their price if you remove the decals and refinish them so there certainly isn't any intrinsic value beyond nostalgia.