First Full Build: Drop in a pond ripple effect

[chinjazz]

I bought a billet of rock maple for my neck, ripped it in half, and turned the two pieces so the grain was oriented vertical, with two pieces opposing. I wasn't sure if it made a difference which way the grain was oriented, as long as the two pieces opposed. Anyway, Fender made one hell of a lot of billet necks with no headstock angle, presumably to avoid any short grain that might weaken the headstock. Any consideration of trying a scarf joint? I have yet to do one, so I don't have any useful advice, but the grain on your 7 degree headstock angle would worry me a little. It would probably be a lot stronger if you veneered the top face to match your body wood. Hmm.........

We are thinking alike .. I'm planning on taking some pieces left over from my body cut and separating the figured maple, book matching it, and using it on the face. Might even put wenge in between to be consistent with the body pinstripe. Also, on the back side of the head stock I plan on doing another veneer there. Maybe something darker there. Food for thought.......

 

[chinjazz]

is your neck a laminate or a billet?
-the reason i ask is that were it a billet, imo that grain orientation could be problematic strengthwise.

how thick are you going on the headstock?
-imo, a good rule of thumb is to use the tuner barrel assembled height. too thick and you might find yourself c'boring the nut and washer because you ran out of thread or thinning the hs down some more.

looks cool otherwise

Hey Arie, this got me re-thinking my thickness and headstock design a bit. This is the tuner barrel? Image for illustration:

If not I'd like to dial in the right thickness. Any rules' thumb on this?

I'm actually going with Gotoh GB707's for this bass, and getting away from 1/2" barrels.

Thanks!

 

[Arie X]

that's the bushing.

you need to assemble the bushing and washer to the tuner and thread it on there. you want at least three complete revolutions. push the washer against the hex portion of the bushing. then, measure the inside distance from the washer to the housing flange (where the tuner attaches to the back of the headstock). or you can just measure the inside distance from the hex to the housing and subtract the washer thickness -your call. this will be the thickness your headstock should be.

hope that makes sense -i'd take a picture but i don't have a loose tuner right now.

 

[chinjazz]

that's the bushing.

you need to assemble the bushing and washer to the tuner and thread it on there. you want at least three complete revolutions. push the washer against the hex portion of the bushing. then, measure the inside distance from the washer to the housing flange (where the tuner attaches to the back of the headstock). or you can just measure the inside distance from the hex to the housing and subtract the washer thickness -your call. this will be the thickness your headstock should be.

hope that makes sense -i'd take a picture but i don't have a loose tuner right now.

Got it, thanks!!!!

 

[rwkeating]

The Sperzels I bought had a sheet that included, among other things, minimum and maximum headstock thickness. Maybe you can find that on the manufacturers web page of your tuners?

 

[chinjazz]

The Sperzels I bought had a sheet that included, among other things, minimum and maximum headstock thickness. Maybe you can find that on the manufacturers web page of your tuners?

Cool! I think Hipshot may have that. Gotoh probably doesn’t but no worries

 

[chinjazz]

Made some progress today on my two neck blanks, but I've got some decisions to make...

First I planed an angle in the headstock of the one piece:

Not enough angle no doubt.. I've definitely got homework to do on accurately cutting a 5 or 7 degree angle. this one from my design comes in at 2.5 degrees.. I am doing a zero fret, and the fretboard will be 5/16ths inch - A pre-radiused, pre slotted rosewood board from LMI.

Another lesson learned on this one piece, or any for that matter. Rough cut the shape the neck after any angles..

So this one is a work in progress, and may be just part of my R & D... Yeah that sounds good...phew.....

Next up is the 3 piece lam:

The neck is 1 1/4" thick currently, and now that I see how the first neck is turning into more research, I'm now pondering a scarf joint, or just go with a fender style flat back... But I'm not sure that a zero fret with a nut on the end of the fretboard works well.

On the scarf joint side of things, I have been mentally avoiding scarfs because it just seems un-intuitive in terms of strength... Although I know it's not, just mentally speaking... Anyway, I've got 10 3/4"from the nut to the top to play with.. Any suggestions on what angle and where to cut for "happy neck-dom"?

I've seen this video multiple times, and am leaning toward scarf method A, but need to do my cuts with a band saw, and figure in a jig for planing the final flatness.



Definitely got to peruse the planing fixtures thread Bruce has.

Luckily, both necks bacon me to learn to do precise angles, and flatten them.. I'm glad I have an 8' maple billet as a back up...

 

[rwkeating]

My take on A vs. B.
If you do A,
you will need to make sure the joint is absolutely flat so that the fingerboard sits properly,
you will not NEED to put a cap on the headstock since there will not be a joint there to hide.

If you do B,
You have to hide the joint with a headstock cap, but
your fingerboard will be sitting on the pristine flat neck surface that you previously prepared.

This is why I opted for B. I felt I had more "wiggle" room to make the headstock flat and of the correct thickness compared to making the neck to fingerboard surface flat (at the scarf) and keeping the correct neck thickness. Since you have routers and jigs for making things flat, my approach may not be a concern to you.

 

[chinjazz]

My take on A vs. B.
If you do A,
you will need to make sure the joint is absolutely flat so that the fingerboard sits properly,
you will not NEED to put a cap on the headstock since there will not be a joint there to hide.

If you do B,
You have to hide the joint with a headstock cap, but
your fingerboard will be sitting on the pristine flat neck surface that you previously prepared.

This is why I opted for B. I felt I had more "wiggle" room to make the headstock flat and of the correct thickness compared to making the neck to fingerboard surface flat (at the scarf) and keeping the correct neck thickness. Since you have routers and jigs for making things flat, my approach may not be a concern to you.

You know as I looked at the image in that video, I was thinking about the hide factor with B - a top veneer or parts of maple I have left over from the body top would work. Hmmmm... now leaning toward B...

 

[chinjazz]

Now I see another advantage to B. Once it’s glued up I would be able to very easily route the thickness on the back. Thanks for the input @rwkeating....

 

[Arie X]

well, keep in mind that video is electric guitar centered not bass specific. there is much more string pull on a bass then a guitar (around 100-110lbs -6 string electric guitar, vs. 180~200lbs -4 string electric bass) and as such, method B is a bust imo strength-wise for a bass.

fwiw, i center my scarfs at around the second fret or so as this keeps the glue-line away from any stress risers like a nut shelf for example. but on the other hand i usually put a volute on the back as well so having extra room allows me to carve that in. also having the joint more "in the neck" allows you to use that 1/4" thick piece of exotic hardwood called the fretboard as a substantial reinforcement rather then a thin headplate veneer.

there are advantages in scarf joint construction in terms of making the headstock near net which is one reason why i do it, but having a bandsaw (which i don't) allows one to cut out a headstock after it's attached to the shaft regardless of how it got there.

been doing some work with short scale ibanez mikro style basses lately; 28.6 ~30" or so and am using 9/16" headstock thickness, 7 deg pitch, rock maple laminate neck thru, scarf joint construction and everything glued up with epoxy.

 

[chinjazz]

well, keep in mind that video is electric guitar centered not bass specific. there is much more string pull on a bass then a guitar (around 100-110lbs -6 string electric guitar, vs. 180~200lbs -4 string electric bass) and as such, method B is a bust imo strength-wise for a bass.

fwiw, i center my scarfs at around the second fret or so as this keeps the glue-line away from any stress risers like a nut shelf for example. but on the other hand i usually put a volute on the back as well so having extra room allows me to carve that in. also having the joint more "in the neck" allows you to use that 1/4" thick piece of exotic hardwood called the fretboard as a substantial reinforcement rather then a thin headplate veneer.

there are advantages in scarf joint construction in terms of making the headstock near net which is one reason why i do it, but having a bandsaw (which i don't) allows one to cut out a headstock after it's attached to the shaft regardless of how it got there.

been doing some work with short scale ibanez mikro style basses lately; 28.6 ~30" or so and am using 9/16" headstock thickness, 7 deg pitch, rock maple laminate neck thru, scarf joint construction and everything glued up with epoxy.

Hi Arie, Thanks for your practical thoughts. I'm definitely planning a volute. Certainly sounds like I need to research more before I move ahead. More searching LC, and hopefully with pics should help.

 

[chinjazz]

Hi Arie, Thanks for your practical thoughts. I'm definitely planning a volute. Certainly sounds like I need to research more before I move ahead. More searching LC, and hopefully with pics should help.

I decided to put in a 7 degree angle on the head stock with the feedback on another thread I spawned.

 

[chinjazz]

And I found a decent figured maple top to add thickness from a bit of harvesting from the body cut

They’re from the outside sides so book matching should be simple.

Now I’m off to ponder how to remove it and keep it usable to re-install on the headstock.

 

[D-Smith]

... as such, method B is a bust imo strength-wise for a bass.

I've used scarf joints on acoustic guitars, but for basses I'm a one piece kind of guy, so just looking from a thought experiment angle (and looking for reasons I'm wrong), I could try to make the case that B might be as strong based on where the two joints occur. In method A it's on the neck shaft which is roughly 1-1/2" wide x 3/4" thick and a semi-circle. Method B falls a ways up the headstock, probably well into the area where it widens out. So typical thickness would be 17/32" (total of 5/8" minus 3/32" headplate), by 3"-4" wide, and square (not semi-circle). Seems like you would have as much or more mating surface as method A.

Edit: Another question I have about method A is it seems to completely ignore the whole idea of making the grain orientation stronger than a one piece. You've now taken the weakest point, where the grain cuts across the thickness of the neck (on one piece across the headstock), and simply moved it to the first few inches of the neck. Seems like a worse spot to have it. I've seen lots of pictures with this kind of scarf joint where the neck broke in between the nut and 1st fret. With method B the neck shaft is completely straight grain, and the headstock is straight grain and the transition is not a weak spot if you do a good job.

With a 7 degree angle you just need to watch out where you put your tuners. Obviously the string posts are above the headstock plane, so they will eat up your clearance pretty quick if you put them close to the nut. Just make sure you take that into account when laying them out.

 

[chinjazz]

I've used scarf joints on acoustic guitars, but for basses I'm a one piece kind of guy, so just looking from a thought experiment angle (and looking for reasons I'm wrong), I could try to make the case that B might be as strong based on where the two joints occur. In method A it's on the neck shaft which is roughly 1-1/2" wide x 3/4" thick and a semi-circle. Method B falls a ways up the headstock, probably well into the area where it widens out. So typical thickness would be 17/32" (total of 5/8" minus 3/32" headplate), by 3"-4" wide, and square (not semi-circle). Seems like you would have as much or more mating surface as method A.

Edit: Another question I have about method A is it seems to completely ignore the whole idea of making the grain orientation stronger than a one piece. You've now taken the weakest point, where the grain cuts across the thickness of the neck (on one piece across the headstock), and simply moved it to the first few inches of the neck. Seems like a worse spot to have it. I've seen lots of pictures with this kind of scarf joint where the neck broke in between the nut and 1st fret. With method B the neck shaft is completely straight grain, and the headstock is straight grain and the transition is not a weak spot if you do a good job.

With a 7 degree angle you just need to watch out where you put your tuners. Obviously the string posts are above the headstock plane, so they will eat up your clearance pretty quick if you put them close to the nut. Just make sure you take that into account when laying them out.

Hey Smithcreek!

Thanks for your feedback and analysis on Method A vs B. Before I started this build I was merrily going along as one piece kind of guy as well (minus doing laminates). In post 33 above I leveled a 7 degree angle on a one piece neck blank, and of course that'll stay that way. I was visually laying out tuner posts last night as well. Think they are too close to the nut here? I'll have a 5/16th thick fretboard on it. I'll have the nut at the end, and a zero fret in front of it which will make things a bit easier (I think). I'm trying to figure out a way to understand a good comfort zone on planning this, but I think there's no simple easy way, other than to try it....

 

[Arie X]

Seems like you would have as much or more mating surface as method A.

while potentially true (i'm not going to try to calculate the surface area on someone else's bass) moving the scarf into the shaft area allows the fretboard to add even more gluing surface. many mfg's do this, and while it's not aesthetically appealing to the taste makers in the acoustic guitar world, as far as i know bass player's don't seem to mind unless their bass neck is a multi-lam from high figure woods.

 

[chinjazz]

And I found a decent figured maple top to add thickness from a bit of harvesting from the body cut

View attachment 2765468

View attachment 2765469

They’re from the outside sides so book matching should be simple.

Now I’m off to ponder how to remove it and keep it usable to re-install on the headstock.

Anyone know of good ways to remove these top sections? I used LMI Instrument glue which is a bit stronger than Tightbond original (I understand). I was thinking a heat gun and a spatchula, and gingerly prying from the side.
Or I'm starting to see some folks mention using a damp cloth and iron. Of course I want to preserve these pieces for use on the peg head.

 

[chinjazz]

“One drop in a pond ripple effect” is I’m making jigs all the time now.

I saw a cool jig posted by @xaxxat
On @Gilmourisgod’s build thread. Neat jig with Aluminum rails. I made one for neck work.

The rails flex so 3/4 MDF strips come in handy. Also, Initially the bolts on the bottom were causing the MDF to flex so they needed to be recessed.

 

[chinjazz]

Anyone know of good ways to remove these top sections? I used LMI Instrument glue which is a bit stronger than Tightbond original (I understand). I was thinking a heat gun and a spatchula, and gingerly prying from the side.
Or I'm starting to see some folks mention using a damp cloth and iron. Of course I want to preserve these pieces for use on the peg head.

Tried a brief attempt today and failed. Tried a heat gun and a 3-4” metal flat edge. The HF freight heat gun died.. I also tried steam ironing and i basically gave up. Shelved it for another day. Lol