Fodera Club Part XVIII

[cnltb]

Sound/weight relationships are very qualitative. And the end result definitely depends on more factors than just weight - although wood is definitely a major player. For instance, my P-bass is light alder but doesn't sound thin. I honestly don't know enough about it to make claims on what does or doesn't work.

A light(ish) alder '51 style P bass is an example for the same, that I could cite too.
Mind weighs in at 3.5 Kg and really is not thin sounding at all.(I compared it with a few basses similar to it although all had ash bodies and most had maple boards whereas mine has a rosewood one).

 

[nostatic]

Interesting. I've been following your posts in this thread and I'm really, really looking forward to seeing your two Monarchs when they're completed.

Would you describe walnut is generally being a heavier tonewood? I've personally never been a fan of walnut - the sound is too compressed for me - but I'd definitely give chambered alder a whirl.

Jason would have way more experience than me, but walnut tends to be heavier than alder. Ash and mahogany seem to be all over the map wrt weight. For some reason I've gravitated to walnut for tops and necks on my Rob Allens, and bodies on the Foderas. The chambering likely isn't a huge effect but I think it helps take some of the compression out - opens it up a bit. For me it is somewhat of an elimination thing. I am not an ash body guy - have sold every ash body bass I've owned, with the only one that I kept for a long period of time being a Zon Lightwave fretless. Alder is probably my favorite but sometimes it can be a bit too warm and round. Walnut seems to have a nice snap and some heft to the notes. Of course it is a system, and really my thing is walnut body with ebony fingerboard. That just works for me. Alder/ebony I liked as well.

I'm interested to play the new Monarchs as well. I've actually been playing my MGS a lot less as I'm trying to really focus on having 34" scale be totally automatic. Well, except for the upright but at 41.25" scale that is a totally different beast. Once the twins are done I'll likely dive heavily back into 5 E-C - I'll especially need to 'shed on the fretless as I've never had a fretless with a high C. Of course if it is too much of a train wreck I can restring B-G

 

[Damian Coccio]

I agree alot more factors then weight, but if you started at a 2lb bass (if its even possible..lol) and started going to 3, 4, 5 lbs, etc, surely you would be able to make a graph that would show some point where increasing the weight didnt add much more tonally, and you would probably also see a trend of fundamental, sustain, evenness, and harmonics with weight. Id be willing to bet the 2lb bass would sound thin, and probably have sustain issues, its just the physics. Not saying light basses are thin or dont sound good just pointing out a trend that could exist imho.

 

[steubig]

i'm a dunce, but i'll ask this anyway.

assuming you have a 2-pound bass, you're talking about having less surface area and less volume, no? less mass? i assume those will figure into it as well.

i assume that there is some sort of sweet spot. judging from the differences in body thickness between 1985 and 2009 for my fodera basses, i assume they have made some decisions regarding the balance of all these factors. (the beeze stuff was based on a very thick body to get a lot of mass. *after* those were made, i believe that they started making somewhat thicker bodies.)

 

[Rich Treat]

Has Fodera ever actually built super light basses? Not sure if I have heard of a sub 8lb Fodera. I know chambering is an option as is fairly light ash bodies. Just curious....

Tonally, I am not a big fan of chambered super light swamp ash personally. I would love a 7.5lb Monarch 5, but I likely wouldn't like the tone. I like light basses (who doesn't), but I can only deal with anything up to about 10lbs on a gig. My 11.75lb Spector 5er was a tone machine, but i had to dump it as it was a complete b!tch to wear around my neck for 4 hours.

I wouldn't compare an 11lb Spector to an 11lb Fodera in terms of causing fatigue. In my opinion and experience, Spector basses are horribly balanced. I used to have a Spector 5 string that had a really bad neck dive issue. (But, it had a killer tone it and because of that it was one of my favorite basses.) My 6 string Fodera definitely weighs more than the Spector 5, but because the balance is better on the Fodera it is way more comfortable. For me, balance and tone is more important than weight.

 

[KJung]

Body weight has very little to do with balance or neck dive.

While every component of a bass impacts the tone somewhat, the impact of weight is IMO and IME greatly overstated. IMO, there is NO reason to make an instrument that weighs over 10 pounds... zero reason.

I've played Tommy Kennedy's Fodera a couple of times, and it is stupid lightweight (swamp ash body, reduced Emperor II body size). I've had a chance to A/B it with a couple of my buddies 'boat anchor' 11 and 12 pound Fodera's. Even with Tommy's bass having the neck pickup moved toward the bridge, guess what.... they all sounded very, very, very close.

Per Vics comment, once you get under 8 pounds with some chambering, I do think the low end opens and the top end sweetens a bit (which isn't a bad thing, but it is different). That 'magic' spec of between the mid 8 to mid 9 pounds should make virtually any player 'tonally happy', and it won't break your back.

Again, Tommy's 8 pound or so bass balances exactly the same as my old 11 pound Emperor

 

[Baird6869]

Rich,

That is true. Spectors are not well balanced by any stretch.

I find a 11+lb bass of any kind is too heavy for me regardless of how well balanced that are. I have owned a 11+lb Fender Jazz, Peavey T-40, Stingray 5 and the Spector. They all hurt my neck on gigs. Just not for me.

Interestingly, I sold the Fender Jazz (a 77 or 78) a few years ago to a friend that was touring with American Idol. He LOVES that insanely heavy thing.... but has guitar techs and only plays it for a couple of songs in a row.

 

[Jared Lash]

Again, Tommy's 8 pound or so bass balances exactly the same as my old 11 pound Emperor

This made me think of my old Stambaugh twins.

I knew the fretless would be heavy as it was a bubinga body, zebrano top and wenge neck with zebrano and flamed maple stringers with an ebony fingerboard. All of them were very heavy woods, chosen because (along with the EMGs and their placement) I wanted a Warwick Thumb type vibe.

It weighed in at 10.6 lbs.

On the other hand the fretted was African mahogany with a walnut top, maple neck, and pau ferro fingerboard. I figured it would be average weight but it was a featherweight.

It topped the scales at 7.4 lbs.

Both basses balanced EXACTLY the same. That's to say nothing of tone and since they had totally different electronics, placement, woods AND one was fretless. But to KJung's point, there's nothing that says a heavier body (or heavier bass overall) necessarily makes for better balance. You certainly can have both if you want.

 

[Vic]

I wouldn't compare an 11lb Spector to an 11lb Fodera in terms of causing fatigue. In my opinion and experience, Spector basses are horribly balanced.

That is true. Spectors are not well balanced by any stretch.

Interestingly, I recently had the opportunity to spend a bit of time with a Spector 5, and I also had balance issues with it, also complicated by overall weight. I used to GAS for one of these, as I (still) love their tone, but I don't think I'd be physically happy with them at this point... even if it was within my weight spec.

Body weight has very little to do with balance or neck dive.

Well, kinda'... If the body is super light and relatively small, then the neck could be "heavy" by comparison... but then you also have to factor in design, like the top horn length/button position, etc, so I'd say it could affect balance, but not be solely responsible for it.

While every component of a bass impacts the tone somewhat, the impact of weight is IMO and IME greatly overstated. IMO, there is NO reason to make an instrument that weighs over 10 pounds... zero reason.

+1, tho also, IMHO.

 

[tombowlus]

We had some interesting discussion regarding the impact of wood density from the Link Removed.

 

[Baird6869]

Interestingly, I recently had the opportunity to spend a bit of time with a Spector 5, and I also had balance issues with it, also complicated by overall weight. I used to GAS for one of these, as I (still) love their tone, but I don't think I'd be physically happy with them at this point... even if it was within my weight spec.

They look and sound so damned good though! I have wanted one since I was 16 (28 years ago!) and got the chance late last year to trade for one. My E5S sounded better in any case.... Even for metal surprisingly!

 

[Damian Coccio]

i'm a dunce, but i'll ask this anyway.

assuming you have a 2-pound bass, you're talking about having less surface area and less volume, no? less mass? i assume those will figure into it as well.

i assume that there is some sort of sweet spot. judging from the differences in body thickness between 1985 and 2009 for my fodera basses, i assume they have made some decisions regarding the balance of all these factors. (the beeze stuff was based on a very thick body to get a lot of mass. *after* those were made, i believe that they started making somewhat thicker bodies.)

Im not a professional lutheir and these are imho, but the way I think about it is with weight set aside, a large piece of wood tapped is louder than a small piece if wood tapped. So the more wood that there is, the more it can contribute to the tone. On the hypothetical 2lb bass there is very little wood (if any) compared to the bridge, tuners, pickups, etc.

Was the beeze chambered?

This is where it gets complicated to me -when people talk of an instrument being very resonant.

Comparing two basses I have, one is [email protected] lbs, is loud unplugged and you can feel the whole body vibrate, sounds great plugged in.

The other bass is [email protected] lbs, is quiet unplugged, you cant feel it vibrate, sounds great plugged in.

The 11.5lb bass has more fundamental and fullness, but the 8.5 is great too, very punchy aggressive attack. Granted the woods and construction arent the same.

 

[steubig]

Im not a professional lutheir and these are imho, but the way I think about it is with weight set aside, a large piece of wood tapped is louder than a small piece if wood tapped. So the more wood that there is, the more it can contribute to the tone. On the hypothetical 2lb bass there is very little wood (if any) compared to the bridge, tuners, pickups, etc.

this is sorta of where i was going with this.

Was the beeze chambered?

to my knowledge, it was not. i think i played it/one? (this was a long time ago) seemed heavier than i would want. i remember the sound/feel had a certain heft to it (again, very long ago).

 

[Damian Coccio]

We had some interesting discussion regarding the impact of wood density from the Link Removed.

Fun & informative

 

[Vic]

Fun & informative

Bass Gear Magazine in a nutshell. IMHO of course.

 

[Christian Houmann]

In my "Got up late because of a late Night gig and having breakfast alone with my iPad" I saw this blue standard Emperor 5. Sweet

http://www.bassplayer.co.jp/VWFair.htm

 

[Lennard III.]

yeah, that looks great !

also this baby here is a nice one

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[Baird6869]

In my "Got up late because of a late Night gig and having breakfast alone with my iPad" I saw this blue standard Emperor 5. Sweet

http://www.bassplayer.co.jp/VWFair.htm

Cool! Refin, I would guess, but very nice!

 

[Just Thumpin']

We only use two sizes of fretwire now, so the small fretwire will be like what you got in 2011.

Regards,

J

My Emperor build in 2004 have many small frets like mandolin frets. My 2011 Emperor has small frets but not as small as my 2004 Emperor. Will it be possible to have the very small frets as my 2004 Emperor on the new bass

 

[Just Thumpin']

There are a lot of complexities involved with weight and tone. We do not believe that our instruments sound good sub-8 pounds. Period. The reality is that we use a high mass bridge and machine heads for a reason. When we listen to our instruments with a lightweight bridge and ultra light tuners, we feel that the level of sustain and tonal complexity drops fairly significantly. Titanium is a bit of an anomaly as it is lightweight but retains a lot of the tonal benefit of brass. Of course it is hugely expensive.

So, if you are looking at a Fodera 5-string with our 19.0mm bridge and a set of Dual Coils PUP's, you have close to 4 pounds in parts -- we need at LEAST 5 pounds of wood to make the bass sing...

So, no, we never have made nor will we ever make super light basses. We know what we are and have grown fairly comfortable in that skin. We'd rather not build an instrument than build one to meet someone's specs that we think will not sound or play well. We turn away several potential sales every month because we believe that the specs we are being asked for would not turn out well.

Hope that makes sense.

J

Has Fodera ever actually built super light basses? Not sure if I have heard of a sub 8lb Fodera. I know chambering is an option as is fairly light ash bodies. Just curious....