Extended Range Basses

[Ryan L.]

Originally posted by neptoon
hmmm...

Exactly.

 

[Ívar Þórólfsson]

Originally posted by VoodooChile
anyone else reminded of the "just got my fedora" thread a while back?

How could anyone forget

 

[john turner]

Originally posted by WarriorBass
Hi folks !

What do you guys think ok extended-range instruments. I'm a 9-string player and I absolutely love it.

sure you are. any sound samples? feel free to play any of your 46 basses, i'd love to listen.

Ok some may say now : "Jaco Pastorius needed only 4 to achieve this greatness".
I think every bass player is different in his playing style and habits and some are ok with 4 and some want to have more =)
I'm currently in contact with Warrior Instruments about a 14-string (!!) double-neck (!!!!!) bass.
14 strings on every of the two necks, one fretted one fretless. It will be tuned from low G# to high C# and will be multi-scaled with scales ranging from 46" on the low G# to 31.5" on the high C#.
I'm sure Warrior will manage this...

i'm absolutely sure that they will not manage this. why? how can i be so sure? well, for starters...

1. you will not find any strings for the g# - which, even at that scale length, would require something around a quarter of an inch wide, and in fact you'll have a hard time finding strings for the c# - there's only one manufacturer that makes strings that big, and i guarantee without even knowing your name that they've never heard of you and haven't sold to you, nor have any plans to do so.

2. as geshel pointed out so eloquently, the high c# is not going to be possible at your scale length requirements. i'll take that one further - i'll wager that it's physically impossible, period. bill conklin has been making 8 string guitars, with a high a/g above e, for over 10 years. actually getting an a or a g# above high e pretty much requires using a .007" string, along with fanned frets to get the scale length smaller than standard guitar. there isn't a string smaller, and for good reason - anything smaller couldn't handle the tension of being tuned. that's for the g# - the longest scale length that will work for that part of the neck is going to have to be _substantially_ shorter than your desire. somewhere around 22" at most, i would say. it's going to have to get a lot smaller for the high c#.

so basically you're looking at a bass who's "bass" side of the neck will require ~4 ft of scale length, and who's "treble" side of the neck will require no more than ~1.5 ft of scale length.

Tell me what you think of this 14-string double-neck and extended-range basses

i think you're full of crap. i think that your post embodies every lame-o cliche that non-extended bassists, and other musicians, think that extended range bassists pursue or embrace. i think that if i give jd a call over at warrior, he'll never have heard of you. i think that this kind of crap bs gives bassists like me, who are seriously and sincerely working hard and trying to further themselves and the extended range bass playing artform a bad name and contributes to making all of us look like fools.

but hey, i don't KNOW this, i may be wrong. in fact, i hope i am. i hope that you're totally serious and honest - there's no way that i would be happier than to be proven wrong in my thoughts.

so how about it? offer any proof? some mp3s of the ole' warrior 9 would be a good place to start. a few actual plans of the ole 14 string doubleneck would also suffice.

i'll find out one way or the other - in a few weeks i'll be at the namm show and i'll be able to ask jd myself, in person.

 

[ldiezman]

Come on now... he could be right

I mean... I myself play on a 34 1/2 stringed bass made by rogue.... I'm looking to get a full 35 string bass sometime in december.. call me crazy but I can't get enough strings...

how do i pull off such a task? well... I had my fingers lengthened so that they are 14 inches long and will stretch the width of my fret board.. yeah it was painfull.. but it was worth it

 

[neptoon]

and it's jt off the top rope

 

[john turner]

Originally posted by neptoon


and it's jt off the top rope

let's get ready to rumbbbbbbblllllllleeeee!!!

 

[neptoon]

woo hoo!!!!

 

[JAUQO III-X]

Hey my fellow TB bro's.Im just getting in from the road duties of a bassist and This is what I come back to I am so OK OK let me calm down,Im counting to ten,ok now I am a very openminded person and I have done some serious research into the lowest range possible for the electric bass and for the record Im still learning(to play also)as some of you may know I came up with a Low C# string and Im the only person with some.please before someone beats me up Im not EGO trippin.what Im getting at is the Low C# is still in development even thou Im using some now but me and D.Markley are making some minor adjustments and I know from hands on exp.that the issues with the Low C# that came up were a pain in the you know what,anyway I dont think that today it is at all possible and I have been at the machines that are used to make a string certain gauges. my Low C# and the Low F# that we came up with used not three or four windings like a great majoritie of strings we used five windings,we seriously pushed the limits of the machines that wind the string around the center core and believe me we broke a hell of a lot of windings before we finaly got it and thats just at a 95% completion.the reason we used so many windings were to capture the the lowest possible timbre we could and to allow more clarity to ring out from a string so thick.the problem with trying to make a Low G# for a electric bass would be string mass.Maybe me and a few TBers should roll over to Germany or wherever this Bassist is and have a serious discussion with him or her.and for the record this is no joke, while I was responding to this thead David Brummet one of the techs who has been working with me from the beginning on the Low C# called and I even ran it by him and he said it is not possible.if its to be lower that the Low C#.he thinks it maybe someone who feels that since a Low C# can be made then a Low G# can be made as well.Im sure this is not the end of this I will call JD at Warrior tomorrow.

 

[Chris J]

Originally posted by john turner




let's get ready to rumbbbbbbblllllllleeeee!!!

Picture his avatar saying his huge post. 14 string bass? Double neck? We're talkin about well over 40lbs of wood! There's nothing I can say that hasn't already been said.

 

[Ryan L.]

Well, with the experts on extended range basses (JT and Jauqo III-X) here saying that it is pretty much bull, that is enough for me to believe that this guy is full of crap.

But, let's see if he comes back around......

Edit: No offense to any of you other 7+ string players by not mentioning you above; I just mentioned these two guys because, well, you know.

 

[boogiebass]

Originally posted by john turner


...i think you're full of crap. i think that your post embodies every lame-o cliche that non-extended bassists, and other musicians, think that extended range bassists pursue or embrace. i think that if i give jd a call over at warrior, he'll never have heard of you. i think that this kind of crap bs gives bassists like me, who are seriously and sincerely working hard and trying to further themselves and the extended range bass playing artform a bad name and contributes to making all of us look like fools...

Well-said. Totally agree.

 

[JAUQO III-X]

Somebody is going to get a serious beatdown.

 

[Brendan]

Originally posted by john turner

i think you're full of crap. i think that your post embodies every lame-o cliche that non-extended bassists, and other musicians, think that extended range bassists pursue or embrace. i think that if i give jd a call over at warrior, he'll never have heard of you. i think that this kind of crap bs gives bassists like me, who are seriously and sincerely working hard and trying to further themselves and the extended range bass playing artform a bad name and contributes to making all of us look like fools.

Right on!

Is't 46" scale longer than a DB? and 31"...the logistics of that hurt...

 

[geshel]

Originally posted by john turner
i'll take that one further - i'll wager that it's physically impossible, period. bill conklin has been making 8 string guitars, with a high a/g above e, for over 10 years. actually getting an a or a g# above high e pretty much requires using a .007" string, along with fanned frets to get the scale length smaller than standard guitar.

I've got an acoustic guitar with a high G on it, .011 plain steel, with the usual 25.5" scale length. It's tuned CGDAEG, aka Robert Fripp's "New Standard Tuning" or "Guitar Craft Standard Tuning". There are a pretty good number of people out there now using the high G on both acoustic and electric - I think on electric most end up with a .008 or .009. .008 actually corresponds exactly to the high D on a 34" tapping instrument like the Stick or a Warr guitar - where the fifth fret D is about 25.5".

Tuning that G up takes some guts though - it's a long way. My nerves would be shot if I tried to go any higher. With a piezo / lightwave bridge maybe you could use titanium strings but yeah even an A on a 25" scale is pushing it if possible.

P.S. Thanks for calling it like I saw it, JT. Didn't want to go off because of the possibility this guy wasn't at least completely full of it. But then as you pointed out, he did ask us what we think. . .

 

[JAUQO III-X]

WarriorBass where are you.

 

[Oysterman]

Originally posted by JAUQO III-X
WarriorBass where are you.

Have patience, it's only 7 AM in Germany. Doubt he'll ever check back, though.

 

[JAUQO III-X]

OK

 

[luisnovelo]

Could it be posible that he meant G# one step and
a half below B ?

They gotta be doubled strings.. in each neck... If the treble strings where a half step lower than tuned in fourths, it would sound logic.. The 1st string would still be C# (like the high B and E of a standard guitar)

 

[luisnovelo]

Check it.. this looks more logic..



C# (D -half step)
G# (A -half step)
E
B
F#
C#
G#

There you have 7 strings... If they are doubled we have 14 in each neck


The idea of a double neck with 14 single strings with a low G# below the low F# and low C# on
each sounds stupid and ridiculously imposible..

I hope is not warriorbass' idea..

(Edited: added the # to the F)

 

[embellisher]

I've got Warrior working on my new signature instrument now, it's based on the 14 string, but it only has one neck and has tripled strings. I believe that it will be the first 42 string bass ever made. It will also have a deep cutaway like a Zon Hyperbass to facilitate access to all 42 frets.

The low G# string has 9 layers of winding, gauge is .217. It has a titanium core, but the windings are made of a uranium/nickel/magnetite alloy.

I have to wear special lead lined gloves to play it, so that I won't get cancer in me fingers from overexposure to radiation.

The real chore was getting Lightwave to design a pickup that has sensors for 42 individual strings! It wasn't cheap, let me tell you! They said that it was impossible, but with enough coaxing and cajoling(and $$$) I was able to get them to do it.

Build time is 6 months, and it's costing me $18,000, but it will be worth it! I can't wait to get my hands on it!

Oh yeah, it has a graphite neck, velvet coated phenowood board and an aluminum body with a machined steel top.