HI guys,
Some of the guys in Luthiers corner suggested that I post here, as you guys are way more knowledgeable about all things DB. I appreciate that most traditionalists will find my bass an affront to the genre, but any help you can give will be much appreciated.
First I need to say that I built this bass more than 10 or 15 years ago. At the time DB's here were stupidly expensive. I saw a new Asian one in a shop with the back separating from the sides, massively discounted to about $2.5k. So I decided to build one. I knew NOTHING but the scale length, and my skills with plastics were much stronger than with wood at the time. This was the result so please don't judge to harshly.
My question is this. I get reasonable tone out of the A D & G, but the E is lacking in "definition", if that's the right word, it somehow just seems to lack presence in comparison to the other strings.
I few weeks ago a friend's wife who plays violin, looked at the bridge and said why don't you get a decent bridge? This got me thinking, Does any one think that It would be worthwhile? What does a "decent "bridge look like and what are they made of? The current one is a lump of hard maple that I shaped into what I thought a bridge should look like. I am pretty sure that the string spacing and FB radius are so far from standard that I will have to make something from scratch.
The top is around 3mm thick. It is a laminate of .5mm carbon skin, 2mm honey comb core .5mm carbon, there are no ribs of any kind. It is SUPER stiff and resonates really well, far better than my expectations at the time. Inside the body (from the front) there is an alloy tube that runs from top to bottom, the spike runs inside this and it goes into the neck heal, then a horizontal alloy tube around the bridge area, forming a crucifix with the spike tube, tying the sides together about 2" bellow the body/top joint. Neither of these tubes come into contact with the top They are there because at the time I was worried about compression on the top forcing the sides apart and causing the top to fail. I shouldn't have bothered the top is rock solid. After its initial tuning to pitch it stayed in tune for a couple of months.
The back of the body is a woven drapable glass mat but laid up using the same Hi-Tech (read very expensive) epoxy. The neck, heal and head stock are oak. I have no idea about the make of strings that are on the bass they are rounds, at the time I had a choice of one. (and they were REALLY expensive)
There is no bass bar or sound post.(I only discovered what a bass bar and a sound post were from answers to the OP). It would be possible to post fit both.
Like I said I knew nothing when I built this bass, I decided in the confidence of youth that my Hi-tech materials and bowl back design would allow me to get away with a smaller body for ease of transport.
The body volume is halfway between a cello and a DB. So I suppose its no surprise that the frequency response is deeper than a cello but not as deep as a DB. Sounds like a no brainer, but a 25 year old is a 25 year old, and what do hundreds of years of luthiers really know, right. Thankfully, I am not young enough to know everything anymore.
The smaller than standard body is my first call to blame for the dead E. But, I am stuck with it. So I know that really I am looking for a band-aid for a gunshot wound. I would just like to see if I can make some small improvements to the tone, really not expecting miracles.
Some of the guys in Luthiers corner suggested that I post here, as you guys are way more knowledgeable about all things DB. I appreciate that most traditionalists will find my bass an affront to the genre, but any help you can give will be much appreciated.
First I need to say that I built this bass more than 10 or 15 years ago. At the time DB's here were stupidly expensive. I saw a new Asian one in a shop with the back separating from the sides, massively discounted to about $2.5k. So I decided to build one. I knew NOTHING but the scale length, and my skills with plastics were much stronger than with wood at the time. This was the result so please don't judge to harshly.
My question is this. I get reasonable tone out of the A D & G, but the E is lacking in "definition", if that's the right word, it somehow just seems to lack presence in comparison to the other strings.
I few weeks ago a friend's wife who plays violin, looked at the bridge and said why don't you get a decent bridge? This got me thinking, Does any one think that It would be worthwhile? What does a "decent "bridge look like and what are they made of? The current one is a lump of hard maple that I shaped into what I thought a bridge should look like. I am pretty sure that the string spacing and FB radius are so far from standard that I will have to make something from scratch.
The top is around 3mm thick. It is a laminate of .5mm carbon skin, 2mm honey comb core .5mm carbon, there are no ribs of any kind. It is SUPER stiff and resonates really well, far better than my expectations at the time. Inside the body (from the front) there is an alloy tube that runs from top to bottom, the spike runs inside this and it goes into the neck heal, then a horizontal alloy tube around the bridge area, forming a crucifix with the spike tube, tying the sides together about 2" bellow the body/top joint. Neither of these tubes come into contact with the top They are there because at the time I was worried about compression on the top forcing the sides apart and causing the top to fail. I shouldn't have bothered the top is rock solid. After its initial tuning to pitch it stayed in tune for a couple of months.
The back of the body is a woven drapable glass mat but laid up using the same Hi-Tech (read very expensive) epoxy. The neck, heal and head stock are oak. I have no idea about the make of strings that are on the bass they are rounds, at the time I had a choice of one. (and they were REALLY expensive)
There is no bass bar or sound post.(I only discovered what a bass bar and a sound post were from answers to the OP). It would be possible to post fit both.
Like I said I knew nothing when I built this bass, I decided in the confidence of youth that my Hi-tech materials and bowl back design would allow me to get away with a smaller body for ease of transport.
The body volume is halfway between a cello and a DB. So I suppose its no surprise that the frequency response is deeper than a cello but not as deep as a DB. Sounds like a no brainer, but a 25 year old is a 25 year old, and what do hundreds of years of luthiers really know, right. Thankfully, I am not young enough to know everything anymore.
The smaller than standard body is my first call to blame for the dead E. But, I am stuck with it. So I know that really I am looking for a band-aid for a gunshot wound. I would just like to see if I can make some small improvements to the tone, really not expecting miracles.
