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.
basses for newbies (SX batch build thread)
- Thread starter chunger
- Start date
- Status
This is exactly my feeling about the ugly Ursa headstock design.If headstocks are trademarks, you might as well have a great one that's unique because it doesn't cost any more per unit to manufacture a good shape as opposed to a crappy one.
If SX basses cannot duplicate the shape of the Fender HS, due to copyright/patent issues and Rondo can't afford to get sued, no problem, we all understand that.
Several manufactures managed to find very nice alternatives on HS designs and why Rondo can't?
Like you said Chung, this is not rocket science. The Ursa's headstock shape is too big in one side and too small on the other side. It is esthetically wrong and anyone can see that.
BTW: I've lost interest on buying more SX instruments after the changes.
I took a couple of hours with paper and pencil last night to come up with a good headstock shape. . . traditional and flowing, but most assuredly not Fender and substantially different from Sadowsky and Lakland as well. This is not rocket science. There are lots of aesthetically great ways to go. Just have to sit down with it and put in some design work. If headstocks are trademarks, you might as well have a great one that's unique because it doesn't cost any more per unit to manufacture a good shape as opposed to a crappy one.
Hello ... Been reading this from Post #1. This really intrigues me, as I am an illustrator as well. As long as you are not trying to trademark this, I for one, would love to see your work. I'm borderline fanatical with it all ... Great work. All of it.
- Aug 5, 2005
- 7,243
- 92
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: J.C. Basses
Chunger, there's a bass for sale near me. SX, Old headstock, blocked & bound.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Price seems reasonable including case. If you can't get the guy to ship it to you, let me know and I can go pick it up for you and ship it to you.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Price seems reasonable including case. If you can't get the guy to ship it to you, let me know and I can go pick it up for you and ship it to you.
Wasn't this one on Ebay just a couple days ago? I smell problem if it was. Better to have someone "on the ground" take a look in person. I'm not sure if Rondo ever sold that specific configuration. . . the manner in which the neck was re-attached to the body can sometimes be problematic. That being said, IF this one is a lightweight, I'm interested (under 9 lbs.).
I just placed a MASSIVE order with Nordstrand $$. I'm not sure if I can take on any more basses in this batch. . . I'm doing 14 as it is.
In 2006 I bought an SJB-75 which has the same neck with block inlays. Haven't seen quite that combination with the stock bridge. There was one which was very similar, but with the LTD bridge.
Link Removed
Link Removed
I kicked it around in my head a while and then decided that at this point, it's better to have a paper trail or "e-trail" verifying that this was the first appearance of a unique design than to be a super-secret about things. . . plus, folks really like to see the process and open commentary in this thread. If this idea of sourcing my own spec base instruments comes about and I do increase volume to the point of sustainability or beyond, I'm sure that success will be built on the free exchange of solid technical and procedural information.
So, here's the first scrap. . . penned in the critical mechanical components that cannot move on an in-line 4 bass headstock and then went at it with a pencil with squares, triangles, and curves until I liked it.
Using a freely shared sketchup model by an online model builder who calls him/herself "Stonefree", I applied my headstock to a standard profile bass to see how it would look in relation/proportion to the body as well as get a sense of how the hardware lines up with actual measurements. The general concept remained intact, but several proportions needed to be tweaked from the original concept to facilitate tuning machine screws. When viewed as a whole, I personally find the design unobtrusive while giving a somewhat unique signature.
Is not the "design to end all designs" but just solid and practical. With this stuff you really don't have to hit one out of the ballpark with your sheer genius. . . you just have to not screw it up too badly and make sure you don't contradict what the body shape is calling for. It's a bass. . . make it look like one
So, here's the first scrap. . . penned in the critical mechanical components that cannot move on an in-line 4 bass headstock and then went at it with a pencil with squares, triangles, and curves until I liked it.
Using a freely shared sketchup model by an online model builder who calls him/herself "Stonefree", I applied my headstock to a standard profile bass to see how it would look in relation/proportion to the body as well as get a sense of how the hardware lines up with actual measurements. The general concept remained intact, but several proportions needed to be tweaked from the original concept to facilitate tuning machine screws. When viewed as a whole, I personally find the design unobtrusive while giving a somewhat unique signature.
Is not the "design to end all designs" but just solid and practical. With this stuff you really don't have to hit one out of the ballpark with your sheer genius. . . you just have to not screw it up too badly and make sure you don't contradict what the body shape is calling for. It's a bass. . . make it look like one
It's a Lakpeavdowskyman. . .I think mine actually has a slight advantage in a bar fight to the Sadowsky. .. well, the advantage may not be physical. . . it could be strictly due to cost.
I dig the direction! I like headstocks with 'hooks', and I like that yours has a bit more shape than the Sadowsky. It also looks like you're going for a slightly smaller headstock overall, which gets a big +1 from me. Nobody's ever complained about 'body dive'... My vote's for shaving wood wherever you can.
reminded me, angularly, of the Rumblefish ... yeah, it works. But I feel a slight tweak coming...
Chunger, would you make a 22 fret design or stay with the 20 fret?
Because personally I vote 22 frets!
Because personally I vote 22 frets!
This is possibly a long ways off and perhaps will not even happen depending on what kind of reception this first SX batch gets. But, do you ever get de-moralized when dressing frets when you get up to the 17th or so fret? I do. . . I'm probably going to stick to the traditional 20. Plek I don't think will get demoralized though. We'll see.
How many times a gig do you think. . . "Man, if I only had 1 more fret!"
Maybe it's just that I don't live up their at the heel area when I play, but I make my money in 1st position 
- Aug 5, 2005
- 7,243
- 92
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: J.C. Basses
Chung, how do you have access to a Plek? Did I miss a big part of this thread? I'd love to give all of my basses a good plekking.
- Aug 5, 2005
- 7,243
- 92
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: J.C. Basses
This is possibly a long ways off and perhaps will not even happen depending on what kind of reception this first SX batch gets. But, do you ever get de-moralized when dressing frets when you get up to the 17th or so fret? I do. . . I'm probably going to stick to the traditional 20. Plek I don't think will get demoralized though. We'll see.
How many times a gig do you think. . . "Man, if I only had 1 more fret!"
I don't need 22 frets, like I don't need a condom.
But there is always use for it when the time comes to it!
- Status
