• 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.

Ergonomics of Ken Smith Basses

S

skagli

May 24, 2008
6
1
39
Fossalta di Portogruaro Italy
motozuppa.blogspot.com
#1
Hi Guys!...I would like to have some information about the ergonomic characteristics of Ken Smith basses…
I think that the “classic” body style gives a little neck diving to the bass…is it correct?...
But with the BSR body style?...the horn is longer than the classic, so the position should be more natural…
What are yours experiences?
Neck diving?
With the BSR shape the shape give a correct position to the bass?...
the neck stay horizontal or has the tendency lo "look the sky"? ...this for me is the best ergonomic choice

thanks a lot!
Matteo
 
#3
I had a BT body style 4 string for 20 years and never noticed a "neck dive" issue, although I found it some what more comfortable to play seated then standing. I now have a BSR 5 string and for me the comfort level is wonderful. The neck stays at a moderate angle, still feels good seated as well.
bill
 
#4
billbern said:
although I found it some what more comfortable to play seated then standing. I now have a BSR 5 string and for me the comfort level is
Click to expand...

I believe Ken has said that the BT shape was designed to be played sitting down, while the BSR was designed to be played either way. I've definitely noticed neck dive on older Smiths, but IMO that was moreso because of the "big head" design that they used to have. The newer Smiths with the BT body style have normal headstocks and don't neckdive (although the angle is a bit different because of the horn).
 
#5
vision said:
I believe Ken has said that the BT shape was designed to be played sitting down, while the BSR was designed to be played either way. I've definitely noticed neck dive on older Smiths, but IMO that was moreso because of the "big head" design that they used to have. The newer Smiths with the BT body style have normal headstocks and don't neckdive (although the angle is a bit different because of the horn).
Click to expand...

+1 The old, original 'big head' models (with the black headstocks) had severe neck dive issues when in standing position, but that's only on the old, original models (like in those early Patitucci video's). Both the current body styles are well balanced sitting and standing.

I believe I remember during the transition to the new body style, Ken actually called that original body style the 'studio' model, since it balanced beautifully sitting down.
 
#7
5-string Smith necks are to me to most comfortable necks in the world. The profile is just so perfect (to my hands).

Smiths tend to run a bit heavy. 5-stringss are usually 9.5 lbs or more. I don't know if you can actually order one specifically using light-weight wood. The BSR body is big.

The BSRs have no neck dive. My only complaint is that Smiths don't have a tummy or arm cut, so they don't mold to your body. This can get tiring after awhile. You feel the body of the bass poking your rib cage.
 
#8
neck dive and ken smith basses are like pig and elephant DNA they just dont splice...

They fit perfect on my body, comfortably sitting or standing... well balanced, they jsut happen to lay in the perfect spot and allow for perfect technique.

necks are very playable at any point on them..

I prefer the BMT and BSR body style... but the new Fusion style (basically a BSR crossed with a BMT (no notch behind the bridge) looks nice too... looks like all the comfort is there...

I have played BT body styles, but not enough to really compare to my BMT or BSR basses...
 
#9
BSR body is smaller than BMT / BT basses...

P1070161.jpg
 
#11
I've had many...of various shapes. They all balance great for me....my old 1985 BT and my newer 6 strings.

For me, they simply work.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back