• 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.

Double Bass Fingerboard Question

D

Dr.Ken

Mar 31, 2004
17
0
Lexington, KY
#1
I did a search and came up short, so I thought I'd post this question.

Has anyone run across a DB with koa wood as the fingerboard? I just picked up what I lovingly call "Frankenbass" from a luthier friend who restored it as a piece damaged in shipment.

Short story: He gets a dmaaged bass cheap and thinks the wood is "ebonized" and decides to clean it up. Lo and behold the wood is koa and looks extremely cool so he leaves it as is. He is a very accomplished luthier (not bass specific) and has never run across a koa fingerboard before.

Just curious to see if anyone has thoughts or experience. The bass itself plays great and has no distinguishing markings or identifiers. The back and sides are flamed maple. No rare or big deal here other than the koa.
 
#7
LouisF said:
Then, just out of curiousity, why are these woods good for tailpieces (as I'm sure they are; other wise Mike P wouldn't be using them). Could you explain the dynamics/physics there - if you have time?

Thanks

louis
Click to expand...

We suppose that any tonal qualities a tailpiece imparts are mostly due to it's density. Whether the surface of the TP is bumpy or untrue is irrelevent. A fingerboard however must maintain a high degree of precision-to thousands of an inch. Any unevenness in the grain will lead to irregular seasonal movementresulting in troublesome bumps.
 
#9
Thanks, both. I find this fascinating (even if no one else does).

But... (and this might be a really dumb question) don't various kinds of woods have various densities as opposed to weight (i.e. is a pound of walnut or koa etc "heavier" than a pound of rosewood) and how does this relate to preferences for composite tailpieces.

Louis

PS: Jeff & Steve - If you're too busy to reply (or if this a REALLY stupid question) - I understand. This may be common knowledge with others. I'm just curious. I took Latin instead of chemistry in HS
 
#10
LouisF said:
(i.e. is a pound of walnut or koa etc "heavier" than a pound of rosewood)
Click to expand...

A pound of air weighs exactly the same as a pound of lead......they both weigh a pound. What would be different is the volume because air is less dense than lead . In other words a pound of air is going to take up a lot more space or volume than the a pound of much denser lead

Conversley a cubic foot of air will weigh much less than a cubic foot of lead due to the differences in density

If you had two of the same tail pieces in every aspect(size shape etc.) apart from the wood used on each, the tail piece with the denser wood would both weigh more and have a greater density than the other making it a better tail piece
 
#13
theshadow2001 said:
...apart from the wood used on each, the tail piece with the denser wood would both weigh more and have a greater density than the other making it a better tail piece
Click to expand...

Well, if mass was all there was to it, we'd be using lead tailpieces. My point is that I've never seen anyone (else) claim that the denser and heavier (more massive) the tailpiece, the better it is.
 
#14
drurb said:
My point is that I've never seen anyone (else) claim that the denser and heavier (more massive) the tailpiece, the better it is.
Click to expand...

From a few posts up....

Jeff Bollbach said:
We suppose that any tonal qualities a tailpiece imparts are mostly due to it's density.
Click to expand...

Of course density isn't the only variable thats just being overly simplistic. But thats what I based my assumption on. Im sure jeff knows one or two things
 
#17
Been watching this for a while and thought I'd post a pic. Looks like this board only lets you post 640x640 <150kb images.

So, as a trial, here goes. Hope the pic attaches.
 

Attachments

  • UprightBass004_small.jpg
    UprightBass004_small.jpg
    59.7 KB · Views: 143
#18
Here is another pic of the bass. Again, no idea what this thing really is, but the sound is great. I'm sure that is mostly the work of the set-up and prep. I'm sure it is a CCB of some sort, but it has no identifying marks.
 

Attachments

  • UprightBass001_small.jpg
    UprightBass001_small.jpg
    78.2 KB · Views: 120
#20
being Sunday and all, here's the meditation for the morning:

I was at Nick Roubas's shop yesterday. Nick did the refinish on my Argentine bass and is rebuilding thi 3-string 1840's bass we found ito what should be a really spectacular smaller instrument for me. He is almost exclusively a violin maker (http://www.violuthier.com), but said something that resonated with me yesterday - that each bass is unique in ways that vioins and cellos just aren't any more - and whether its the odd koa fingerboard, or the fact that the bass is from Argentina or that we use X strings as opposed to Y, or German v. French bow, or bent endpin or not, we, as a bass playing tribe, seem to value our individuality in ways the other string players do not and want that expressed in the instrument, and the sound we make.

Okay, that's it.

Louis
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back