• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Chambered Body, What's The Upside?

The alembic series basses also tend to be chambered unless specifically requested otherwise. I think this is more for weight and to hold the electronics than tone specifically. I did pose this question about the tonal benefits of their cavity design and Mica said that because they use a thick top and back laminate the bass behaves like a solid body instrument.

187676.jpg
 
Chambering for the most when used with bass building is to reduce weight. Does it affect the sound? I don't know if there is a clear answer on that. But I had two Sadowsky basses, one chambered and the other solid. I really could not tell the difference. I know Sadowsky started to chamber his basses mainly due to he was having a harder time finding good light weight body woods and the weights were going up on the instruments.

I agree with this in the case of Sadowsky/Warmoth style chambers (like swiss cheese - not connected). Big chambers gradually take on more of a hollow body tone depending on how large the chambers are and if there is a sound hole.
 
This is an early stage photo of a plunge router job on a Gretsch Junior Jet. I can finish the project in about an hour at present, so I am pretty stoked to play it but that might mean the end of the longest project in history.
WP_20150401_001.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: andruca
The alembic series basses also tend to be chambered unless specifically requested otherwise. I think this is more for weight and to hold the electronics than tone specifically.

I think it might be disingenuous to refer to an Alembic Series bass as "chambered" ...and I can't see how you could request an "unchambered" Series bass: All that open space is a requirement of the Series electronics.
 
I've got a heavy bass.
13.6 lbs of weighty walnut to be exact.
I've thought about boring some shallow holes of different sizes in the back to take some weight off.
But I'm not really sure about the percentage of wood/weight removal to make a difference.
There's only so much surface area on the back.
(Of course noone should bore holes in the neck through stringers)
View attachment 1021171
I don't think you have enough area available there to make a significant difference. Even if you used a router to enlarge the control cavity and the battery cavity to their maximum possible size, I doubt you could remove 1 lb of walnut from it. Look up the average density of Walnut and do some math.
 
I've got a heavy bass.
13.6 lbs of weighty walnut to be exact.
I've thought about boring some shallow holes of different sizes in the back to take some weight off.
But I'm not really sure about the percentage of wood/weight removal to make a difference.
There's only so much surface area on the back.
(Of course noone should bore holes in the neck through stringers)
View attachment 1021171
@JIO did that with his Dark Sparkle P I think he mentions a before and after weight in the thread but I'm not sure.
black & blond P makeover (etc)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watchootognbout
Another way to lose a lot of weight is a thinner body. A body at 1.25 inches thick loses roughly 2/7 of the body weight or more than 1/4 of the weight of the standard 1.75 thickness. I've made a number of bolt ons in this thickness and it works great though it limits your choice of jacks and switches and you have to trim some of the screws so they don't pop out the back.

I like this solution if you want to use a dense body wood but keep the weight similar to alder.

I'm pretty sure the standard Fender thickness was decided by having the option to buy 4/4 or 8/4 wood but not 6/4.
 
@JIO did that with his Dark Sparkle P I think he mentions a before and after weight in the thread but I'm not sure.
black & blond P makeover (etc)

(thanks Will! :)) I do but you'll have to search to where I first started that project within my multi-project thread. It made a huge difference in both weight and tone. Using forstner bits, you can drill as large an area as deeply as you can because the wood left behind (between holes) provides stability. (think honeycomb) I'm planning on doing this on one of my current projects and also one coming up to lighten a bass for a petite novice player who needs a lighter bass when standing at her schools Jazz band performances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watchootognbout
Another way to lose a lot of weight is a thinner body. A body at 1.25 inches thick loses roughly 2/7 of the body weight or more than 1/4 of the weight of the standard 1.75 thickness. I've made a number of bolt ons in this thickness and it works great though it limits your choice of jacks and switches and you have to trim some of the screws so they don't pop out the back.

I like this solution if you want to use a dense body wood but keep the weight similar to alder.

I could be wrong, but are the Fender Road Worn basses not slightly thinner? My P comes in at 7lbs even. I know the wood is light, but I thought they were thinner as well.
 
Last edited:
Chambering goes back aways. Back in the '60s Supro had the Pocket Bass that had a chambered body with a a hunk of plastic covering it. Pop one open and it looks like this:
supro pocket bass.png


In the case of the Supro they did it in an attempt to get a more upright bass sound. It is a pretty interesting sounding instrument. Not sure where (or if) you'd ever want to use one. But it's still pretty cool.

There's a video on YT demoing and discussing the one in the picture above.

 
  • Like
Reactions: JIO and pudge
I've thought about boring some shallow holes of different sizes in the back to take some weight off.
The problem with just holes is it only covers a small part of the surface of the body. You could probably drop about a pound and a half planing 1/4 off the back. (using a router sled and then re-rounding the back.) This is pretty drastic and you would have to have room to be able to recess the battery boxes and back plate but it could take a large chunk off.
 
I have a couple Warmoth bodies that are chambered, a couple that are solid, and the "Holey bass" ( pic attached). All play well, sound great , and all are under 7.5 pounds.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1136.JPG
    IMG_1136.JPG
    582.5 KB · Views: 238
Here's what Epiphone has to say about the Zenith bass :

Acoustically Chambered Body
The Epiphone Zenith body is a cross between a solid-body and a semi-hollow bass and is computer-routed to create acoustic chambers. The top is made from laminated Flame maple with tortoise style bound "F" holes. The 5-piece, satin finish neck is made from a combination of Hard maple and Walnut. It's attached to the body with a deep-set, 5-bolt design that holds the neck solidly in place and adds to its deep, rich tone.

I have one of these, and I notice two things compared to my Epiphone Jack Casady hollow body. One is the tone; two distinct instruments, tone-wise, and the Zenith seems not to want to feed back as does the JC if I dial in too much gain.