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.
- Status
I may be misreading you on this, but this seems to suggest the P body is lighter than a J body. I'm pretty sure they'd be essentially the same given the same original chunk of wood.
No I wouldn't think generally that a P or J would have any difference in weight based on how the wood is cut. I do think Jimmy uses very light Alder on the KBPs, not sure if his selection process is any different from P to J though. The P body does sit differently on your body and I think the perceived weight can feel different. You also don't have that additional pickup or preamp weight and the vintage bridge which has less weight then the high mass.
In any case my particular KBP5 is super light and I have no reference point to his other Ps to know if it's in the norm or not. It's certainly significantly lighter then my LG5, which is lighter then my alder rosewood USA JO4. Hopefully the LM5 won't be a boat anchor...
Very generally, "reasonably light but not at the sacrifice of tone" was my thoughts to him. I don't know what a body should way so I never did get down to that detail.
The ash bodied Sting Ray 5 I owned was HEAVY and the ash bodied USA JO5 I had was relatively light and was lifeless. Obviously none of those are at Jimmy's quality.
Ok, that makes sense. If he does do this, then yeah, at least in Jimmy's case, the P would typically be lighter if that's actually a specific design criteria for the reason you mentioned. I'll try to remember to ask him about that next week.
Oh yeah, they hang differently, and while I do prefer the feel of a J body, at least I've never really noticed anything relative to perceived weight. YMMV tho of course.
Here's a quick question on somewhat of a side topic. NAMM is primarily a trade-show designed so that manufacturers can preview their new gear to their dealers, and nail down orders for the year. From what I understand, it is quite expensive to both belong to the organization and to rent space in the hall.
Since Jimmy has no distribution (i.e., no dealers), I wonder why he would go through all the trouble and cost. He is obviously selling everything he makes already (and strangely has built a bunch of 'spec' basses for NAMM while some of his customers are still waiting for orders).
Anyone have an idea why Jimmy would bother with this? Just curious from a business perspective. Seems like easier and less expensive ways to get your name out there (maybe not).
Just curious
Since Jimmy has no distribution (i.e., no dealers), I wonder why he would go through all the trouble and cost. He is obviously selling everything he makes already (and strangely has built a bunch of 'spec' basses for NAMM while some of his customers are still waiting for orders).
Anyone have an idea why Jimmy would bother with this? Just curious from a business perspective. Seems like easier and less expensive ways to get your name out there (maybe not).
Just curious
Huge +1
This is something I wish a lot more people were more aware of. Going for a lighter weight bass with tone comparable to a similar but heavier one is a bigger challenge than a lot of people might think.
The two most typical ways to go on this (given the same body design, just to keep it simple) are...
You can select lighter wood:
This is a challenge because if you aren't extra careful about wood selection, you can have the problem you describe above, and due to this, lots of luthiers/builders won't even use the super light ash unless a customer simply demands it, and then it goes along with disclaimers as well... and regardless of the disclaimers, most top luthiers/builders will still go through a more stringent process to find the right piece to get as close to the same sound as possible.
You can chamber the body:
This is a cool solution, but it complicates the build process, especially if there's no figured top and the finish won't cloak a glue line as well, meaning a lot more time has to be spent to make that joint look good.
Bottom line is, while it's TOTALLY possible to get tone from a lighter bass that is fairly comparable to a somewhat heavier one, it does require extra effort, which then correlates to increased costs.
Note, I'm being careful to use the word "comparable" here, because I don't want to imply that two very different pieces of wood would actually sound the same.
I'm going to try and ask this question as well, but I'm going to initially suppose that he expects to be able to ramp up capacity yet some more (either through process refinement and/or staffing.) I'm not sure if it's still true, but a while back I think he also mentioned that we was not yet fully benefiting from what he can do with the new CNC machine, either.Here's a quick question on somewhat of a side topic. NAMM is primarily a trade-show designed so that manufacturers can preview their new gear to their dealers, and nail down orders for the year. From what I understand, it is quite expensive to both belong to the organization and to rent space in the hall.
Since Jimmy has no distribution (i.e., no dealers), I wonder why he would go through all the trouble and cost. He is obviously selling everything he makes already (and strangely has built a bunch of 'spec' basses for NAMM while some of his customers are still waiting for orders).
Anyone have an idea why Jimmy would bother with this? Just curious from a business perspective. Seems like easier and less expensive ways to get your name out there (maybe not).
Just curious
Bottom line is, if he does expect to be able to meet higher demand in 2010, it does make sense to prioritize show basses so he can make the best use of the show in attracting new channels.
Purely to get the name out there as well..remember we on Talkbass are just one tiny microcosm of the bass buying public there are thousands of players that have never heard of AC's...
Yes, but to Ken's point, if he IS already at (or "comfortably beyond") capacity, he doesn't need to get the name out more... word of mouth is good enough as it is.
So I think it comes down to whether or not my supposition is right that he's not currently at what he expects his capacity to be in the coming year.
I am really not sure how the difference in the way a bass hangs would effect the force on our shoulder but I would guess it does somehow. In any case the angle of the bass relative to our bodies does change from P to J and I am learning that I may prefer P to J from that standpoint in and of itself. Asthetically either way works for me.
Given identical specs the body style should only have an ergonmic impact not tonal. But there may be some reasoning to have a more dense or lighter piece of wood to convey a tone that is more specific to a P vs J. This is obviously the case with an Ash J bass but I thought I remember someone saying Jimmy spec'd his KBPs with lighter alder then he does the LG5s...I could have made that up too...
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Uber Eats class action lawsuit alleges their priority delivery is a scam- Latest: monsterthompson