• 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.

Fodera Guitars Introduces the Imperial Mini-MG

#82
Anchoring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The peculiar thing is that if they made an ordinary headpiece, and moved the drop-tuner mechanism to the bridge, they could have at least a full 32" scale instrument, or even 34".
It's the total length of the instrument that matters if it's on the "overhead bin" on flights. Then it would be real headless. But then it would be prone to these "tonal response" idiosyncrasies that they claim all headless has.
 
Last edited:
#83
FunkHead said:
Thanks! Then I will elaborate:
If this Fodera was presented to me as a Prototype, I would understand it better. Then I would expect the "Real" one to include some changes. As an example: I would make the Headstock Symmetrical. It would be Fashioned from either wood or a lightweight metal such as Titanium or even Graphite.
The B string tuner would definitely have to be relocated. The Drop D Gizmo should be a new Higher=Tech design to fit the bass better. Better yet just leave the Drop D out of the picture as it's a 5 string.
Click to expand...

Matthew sat with us as Vinny penned the design. The headstock? He loves it that way. He wanted it to look a bit "industrial," a bit "raw." The headstock was deliberately made to look this way -- which comes across differently in person than in photos. We also knew that we wanted to get a very specific minimum amount of mass on the headstock side of the nut (for tone). Either way, you can love it or hate it, but the design is deliberate.

The headstock is wood (same wood as the neck billet) overlayed with Aluminum in the front and painted on the back.

The B-string is exactly where it should be from an ergonomics standpoint for Matthew based on the location of the Drop-tuners on his previous four Foderas (Which he still will play from time to time). The drop tuner mechanism is the one Matt is familiar and comfortable with.

Matt plays E-C with a drop-tuner that let's him get down to a low-B. That's what he wants and that's why it's there.

So, yes, you might have done all of those things differently and we would happily do them for you if we were working with you on your own Fodera. But you are missing a major part of our DNA...this bass was designed to be Matthew Garrison's bass and, ultimately, it needs to work for him. Thus far he is absolutely thrilled with it based on the way that it has felt and sounded during the gigs that he has been recently using it on with Jack DeJohnette and Ravi Coltrane.

As for the other ten that we plan on building? Maybe we will and maybe we won't -- that depends on whether or not others out there decide that they like the package of specs that Matt has worked with us on. Time will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Hamilton
#85
Just Thumpin' said:
Matthew sat with us as Vinny penned the design. The headstock? He loves it that way. He wanted it to look a bit "industrial," a bit "raw." The headstock was deliberately made to look this way -- which comes across differently in person than in photos. We also knew that we wanted to get a very specific minimum amount of mass on the headstock side of the nut (for tone). Either way, you can love it or hate it, but the design is deliberate.

The headstock is wood (same wood as the neck billet) overlayed with Aluminum in the front and painted on the back.

The B-string is exactly where it should be from an ergonomics standpoint for Matthew based on the location of the Drop-tuners on his previous four Foderas (Which he still will play from time to time). The drop tuner mechanism is the one Matt is familiar and comfortable with.

Matt plays E-C with a drop-tuner that let's him get down to a low-B. That's what he wants and that's why it's there.

So, yes, you might have done all of those things differently and we would happily do them for you if we were working with you on your own Fodera. But you are missing a major part of our DNA...this bass was designed to be Matthew Garrison's bass and, ultimately, it needs to work for him. Thus far he is absolutely thrilled with it based on the way that it has felt and sounded during the gigs that he has been recently using it on with Jack DeJohnette and Ravi Coltrane.

As for the other ten that we plan on building? Maybe we will and maybe we won't -- that depends on whether or not others out there decide that they like the package of specs that Matt has worked with us on. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
Understood. I would certainly change some things but overall I do like it. Everyone knows that Fodera is #1. Maybe that's why some are being so tough on this design.
 
#86
nutdog said:
Man...tough crowd.
Click to expand...

It's to be expected and, we are totally cool with it. When you are doing new things and trying to stretch yourself some will dig it and some will think you blew it. That's life in any endeavor -- especially creative ones. That said, we really were only building this bass for Matt and anyone else that cares to avail themselves of that spec. And, frankly, the instrument actually far, far exceeded our expectations from a tone and playability standpoint and that is really where the rubber hits the road for us. As I have stated previously in this thread, to fully "get" / judge this instrument (one way or another), you really need to play it and hear it personally. I wish that we could provide that opportunity to everyone, but sadly, we just can't...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Hamilton
#87
Just Thumpin' said:
It's to be expected and, we are totally cool with it. When you are doing new things and trying to stretch yourself some will dig it and some will think you blew it. That's life in any endeavor -- especially creative ones. That said, we really were only building this bass for Matt and anyone else that cares to avail themselves of that spec. And, frankly, the instrument actually far, far exceeded our expectations from a tone and playability standpoint and that is really where the rubber hits the road for us. As I have stated previously in this thread, to fully "get" / judge this instrument (one way or another), you really need to play it and hear it personally. I wish that we could provide that opportunity to everyone, but sadly, we just can't...
Click to expand...
I'd love to visit your shop but I'm a small town southern boy and New York scares me. And I'd just be a tire kicker so it would be wasting your time. But keep up the good work.:)
 
#88
I'm sure it suits Matt Garrison's needs as a touring musician. If I was having those concerns I'd probably go for one of these if I liked the sound of them.
Streamfront.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: son_of_mogh
#90
I've always thought that the Yin Yang was a really beautiful bass-I hope to play one one day. It would also be great to play this new bass-that's actually kind of the point at which the 'rubber meets the road' on this new design.
All that being said, it is great that there is a company like Fodera out there-they are forward-thinking, and uncompromising in their work. I think that change and innovation occur at the outside edge of our comfort zone-that, in and of itself, makes innovation and progress controversial at times. Anyone who is willing to weather that controversy in an effort to try(and possibly fail at) something new deserves our respect,at least.
All this humbly coming from an overcaffeinated guy who hasn't got $11k lying around...:)
 
Last edited:
#92
NG51 said:
Anyone who is willing to weather that controversy in an effort to try(and possibly fail at) something new deserves our respect,at least.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it wasn't that. It's not only the price. In fact it's not the price. It's the "rationale behind it" that stating and comparing headless basses (of mostly 34" inch scale) fails when compared to "full size siblings"! What?! Are those full size at 36"? They're still 34". And then trying to state that a 30 somewhat inch scale was the solution for all headless 34"s that doesn't really cut it? Comparing apples and oranges really. In a statement of both anchoring (economics) and some rationale behind it, they had to go out and make up some incentive that doesn't really hold up. Some kind of smokes and mirrors to shade things. I would have no problem if they said something in the vein of "30" scale with a sound of 34" scale...headless". As for now, it's a 30.25 scale that even tries to hold a low B, that is compared to 34" headless siblings. While this is debateable whether this is actually a headless or not - it's something in between - I think they're out on a bit too thin ice this time around.

It's still the notion that "most - if not all - headless lacks tonal response" whether they are 30", 34" or longer or even fanned frets, regardless of graphite or wood, set neck, neck through or bolt on, that actually makes me cringe big itme. Basses like these, and the rest of Foderas basses, are geared towards the cognoscenti, and thus, you'll have to expect that we'll chime in with whatever we have in mind. Inquiring minds, impertintent questions! For one, the "travel bass" of my wishes, would be, the cheaper, the more I would like to travel with it. Say, I've yet to see a 30" headless made of graphite. While somewhat more expensive than wood, I would definitely prefer having graphite to travel with, than any kind of wood.

It's that, not that the actual bass, plays, sounds beautifully, and better than the rest out there. For MG. It's the reason behind it. They could've come up with almost anything else, that wouldn't cause such a stir.

It's just for MG. It's the perfect bass for him no doubt. But, for the rest of us? I wouldn't in my wildest imagination force my designs on my "signature bass" upon someone else. In fact I think that no one else would've thought anything of it was good, or of importance. Neck dives, dead spots, control placement, pickup adjustments you name it. No one seems to care about these things these days. Or ever had. I dig in, and lean in heavier than any low B on a 30 inch scale can take. The pitch will go sharp initially and sound out of tune. I do not wan't to baby my strings all of the time. I'll whack the **** out of them from time to time. Dynamics is it called.

Still no one has come back, if there's anyone who needs B-A-D-G-C tuning. But MG.

Also, we compare this to the competition. It's not all that innovative. Kubicki, Rick Toone, .Strandberg guitarworks has been doing some pretty avant garde stuff for quite some time too. Especially note of the little added weight of their "headstocks" in a similar vein. NS design too. I would love to hear Ned Steinbergers views on the statement "most headless lacks tonal response". But as he has business going on himself he refrains from mudslinging fellow luthiers endeavors.

You know what? I'll bet this one neck dives. Show that it doesn't in your next YT demo video.
 
#93
Honch said:
Yes, but it wasn't that. It's not only the price. In fact it's not the price. It's the "rationale behind it" that stating and comparing headless basses (of mostly 34" inch scale) fails when compared to "full size siblings"! What?! Are those full size at 36"? They're still 34". And then trying to state that a 30 somewhat inch scale was the solution for all headless 34"s that doesn't really cut it? Comparing apples and oranges really. In a statement of both anchoring (economics) and some rationale behind it, they had to go out and make up some incentive that doesn't really hold up. Some kind of smokes and mirrors to shade things. I would have no problem if they said something in the vein of "30" scale with a sound of 34" scale...headless". As for now, it's a 30.25 scale that even tries to hold a low B, that is compared to 34" headless siblings. While this is debateable whether this is actually a headless or not - it's something in between - I think they're out on a bit too thin ice this time around.

It's still the notion that "most - if not all - headless lacks tonal response" whether they are 30", 34" or longer or even fanned frets, regardless of graphite or wood, set neck, neck through or bolt on, that actually makes me cringe big itme. Basses like these, and the rest of Foderas basses, are geared towards the cognoscenti, and thus, you'll have to expect that we'll chime in with whatever we have in mind. Inquiring minds, impertintent questions! For one, the "travel bass" of my wishes, would be, the cheaper, the more I would like to travel with it. Say, I've yet to see a 30" headless made of graphite. While somewhat more expensive than wood, I would definitely prefer having graphite to travel with, than any kind of wood.

It's that, not that the actual bass, plays, sounds beautifully, and better than the rest out there. For MG. It's the reason behind it. They could've come up with almost anything else, that wouldn't cause such a stir.

It's just for MG. It's the perfect bass for him no doubt. But, for the rest of us? I wouldn't in my wildest imagination force my designs on my "signature bass" upon someone else. In fact I think that no one else would've thought anything of it was good, or of importance. Neck dives, dead spots, control placement, pickup adjustments you name it. No one seems to care about these things these days. Or ever had. I dig in, and lean in heavier than any low B on a 30 inch scale can take. The pitch will go sharp initially and sound out of tune. I do not wan't to baby my strings all of the time. I'll whack the **** out of them from time to time. Dynamics is it called.

Still no one has come back, if there's anyone who needs B-A-D-G-C tuning. But MG.

Also, we compare this to the competition. It's not all that innovative. Kubicki, Rick Toone, .Strandberg guitarworks has been doing some pretty avant garde stuff for quite some time too. Especially note of the little added weight of their "headstocks" in a similar vein. NS design too. I would love to hear Ned Steinbergers views on the statement "most headless lacks tonal response". But as he has business going on himself he refrains from mudslinging fellow luthiers endeavors.

You know what? I'll bet this one neck dives. Show that it doesn't in your next YT demo video.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is forcing anything onto anyone at all; They are making an offer and not more than that.
The statement that headless basses are lacking in comparison to headed basses...was that meant in general terms or just in the Fodera context- as in; they have thus far not built a headless bass that would have stood up against their headed ones?
That would make more sense to me. After; all they are new at the headless thing.
Innovative?-Not in the least, I think, but new in the Fodera context. Fair enough, I think.
If you want graphite; Lefay make a short headless bass that has graphite in the neck at least-amazingly well made it is too and well thought out.

'The rest of us'?...that doesn't figure into it really, as it is specifically built for MG and priced to deter many if not most of us from asking them to make another.

All fair enough I recon.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NG51
#94
I've tried LeFays and they're really something. Wish I had the dough (even for them).
And as in everything else: You can't please them all.

Here's their Piccolo bass, even giving it its appropriate name (still just carbon stripes inside the neck, not totally):

Invalid Link Removed

piccolo_red_big.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NG51
#95
Honch said:
I've tried LeFays and they're really something. Wish I had the dough (even for them).
And as in everything else: You can't please them all.

Here's their Piccolo bass, even giving it its appropriate name (still just carbon stripes inside the neck, not totally):

Invalid Link Removed

piccolo_red_big.png
Click to expand...
That's the bass I had in mind when mentioning Lefay.
They also make their own Bridges and pickups(not sure about this particular pickup...)-nothing done overseas.
(I think overseas manufacturing came up somewhere above?).

It's a taste thing too though-oviously.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Honch
#96
Honch said:
If I would sit next to one on an airplane see him stow it away under or on top of my things, I would feel very tempted to "accidentally slam" my bags or "accidentally drop" (whatever they contain) upon this thing. And go "oooops...so sorry...hope it's insured". As I now know what the case contains.
Click to expand...
Is there a hall of fame for the worst post ever? This has to be in the running.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Hamilton and Chaosreigns
#97
Honch said:
If I would sit next to one on an airplane see him stow it away under or on top of my things, I would feel very tempted to "accidentally slam" my bags or "accidentally drop" (whatever they contain) upon this thing. And go "oooops...so sorry...hope it's insured". As I now know what the case contains.
Click to expand...
Why?
...bit jealous?
 
#98
Stunning! I look forward to hearing Matt Garrison play the hell out of that bass! Separately, to Vin, Joey, Jason and the Fodera Team: Well done! That is a aesthetically and sonically beautiful instrument! I hope to try one.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back