• 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 Kay DB - Excess Neck Bow from Loose FB

#41
Exactly. Cold and hard when used for a complete neck. Some people do love them though. And my observation has been that graphite rods do add some "hardness" to the sound. That isn't always bad, or good. But it is. Could be effected by the quality of the graphite material used as well. One thing is for sure like it or not, the addition of graphite rods to upright bass necks is still in the experimental phase in the scope of the history of the instrument.
 
#43
MR PC said:
Exactly. Cold and hard when used for a complete neck. Some people do love them though. And my observation has been that graphite rods do add some "hardness" to the sound. That isn't always bad, or good. But it is. Could be effected by the quality of the graphite material used as well. One thing is for sure like it or not, the addition of graphite rods to upright bass necks is still in the experimental phase in the scope of the history of the instrument.
Click to expand...

It's certainly a matter of taste and the kind of music you play. Being a classical guy and acoustic jazzer on the side, if I pick up a slab, I want an old Fender sound. I imagine there also are those out there who prefer the sound of an old Kay without neck/FB upgrades to anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR PC
#44
MR PC said:
...It lost some of the warmth rosewood added to the initial attack...I had a nice carved bass which had graphite added when the new board was installed. Not so lucky with that one.
Click to expand...
Given that a number of changes were made to each bass on each occasion, I don't understand how you can, logically, assign the reported effects to any one of them in either case.
Greg Clinkingbeard said:
...People with lots of experience with Kays know how to get the most out of them, so I'd follow their advice.
Click to expand...
Amen! Here's how I see it. It's virtually impossible to perform scientific tests regarding any of the changes discussed. There are simply too many variables which cannot, practically, be controlled. IMO, the best approach is to trust the professionals who have made the modifications many, many times. Given the large sample-size they have, they are in the best position to evaluate the effects of a given modification because they have made that modification across many different exemplars. A sample of "1" is hardly informative unless no other change was made, save for the one being evaluated. That's rarely the case. Even then, one cannot meaningfully generalize the effect to other basses. So, again, the most useful information comes from reputable luthiers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JoeyNaeger
#45
Well, I think it's good to consider that this is more subjective than scientific, that whatever scientific method you feel should apply doesn't have any bearing at all on my subjective experience..they are my instruments. I know them well. I've used graphite in basses enough over the years to recognize he effect it has on sound and performance. If you don't understand it, don't worry, I'm not losing sleep. :)

I own both graphite and wood bows. Love them both, they are both quality instruments for different applications. Actually, my Coda bow is heavier than my wood bow. I'm not anti graphite. The differences in the way they both perform is subjective. They make the same bass sound different, feel different.

Graphite is about the stiffness to weight ratio, and the fact that it doesn't change it's shape over time under stress like other trad materials. That's my understanding. Structurally, a smaller piece of graphite will do the job of a much larger heavier piece of wood in reinforcing the neck. Frankly, if a larger piece of wood can do the job, that's what I'd prefer. In the case of my Kay bass neck, this was another benefit of the shim. Deeper profile, taller bridge, and more neck rigidity. And I did listen to my luthier who recommended going without the graphite.

So a bass with a graphite rod takes a dive and the neck is knocked off, it needs to be reset. Unfortunately, this happens all the time. After the neck reset the bass is restrung. There is a funny sound, maybe a buzzing on certain notes, a new dead spot/wolf tone, just something annoying that wasn't happening before the accident. The tuners are ruled out as the source. Could it have something to do with the rod glue joint integrity, or did the luthier botch the reset? One thing is for sure, either way the operation was a success, but the patient died.
 
#46
robobass said:
It's certainly a matter of taste and the kind of music you play. Being a classical guy and acoustic jazzer on the side, if I pick up a slab, I want an old Fender sound. I imagine there also are those out there who prefer the sound of an old Kay without neck/FB upgrades to anything else.
Click to expand...

True. Hard to imagine for many, but true.
 
#47
I have installed at least a hundred carbon fiber inserts in bass necks, including every one of my handmade basses. Not once have I gotten a comment that the insert changed the sound for the worse. And not once has a problem occurred such as rattling, buzzing or loss of tone. Every single retrofit has resulted in a bass that has better stability and resists seasonal changes to the neck. Of course it is important that the installing luthier do a good job of fitting, installing and capping the insert (with wood). Maple is not the most stable of woods, and considering the size of, and tension on a bass' neck, to my mind the well-made and well-installed carbon fiber insert is a game changer for the better. But if a player has a negative mind-set toward this sort of thing, then don't do it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: james condino, SAlcott and Jake deVilliers
#48
MR PC said:
Well, I think it's good to consider that this is more subjective than scientific, that whatever scientific method you feel should apply doesn't have any bearing at all on my subjective experience..they are my instruments. I know them well. I've used graphite in basses enough over the years to recognize he effect it has on sound and performance. If you don't understand it, don't worry, I'm not losing sleep. :)
Click to expand...

The point is that one cannot be completely scientific about it. That's just not practical. You only mentioned experience with a single bass to which multiple changes were made. In such a case, considering that experience alone, I said I don't understand how you can, logically, attribute an effect you hear to any single change. In fact, I don't believe you or anyone else can. Notice that your answer relies upon your experience with a larger sample! Now, with the benefit of a large sample someone with expertise and who is perceptive can, reasonably, assign an effect to a specific physical change-- just as a luthier does. That is, if you have amassed a large sample of exemplars over the years such that you can, in effect, average across them and deduce the effects attributable to the addition of carbon fiber, then you are reinforcing the point I made about large samples. So, please tell us about your large sample over the years.

As to subjective experience, I would not deny the perceptual effects you report. The question is which one or combination of physical changes-- all made simultaneously-- produced those effects. That is not a subjective question.
arnoldschnitzer said:
I have installed at least a hundred carbon fiber inserts in bass necks, including every one of my handmade basses. Not once have I gotten a comment that the insert changed the sound for the worse. And not once has a problem occurred such as rattling, buzzing or loss of tone.
Click to expand...

...and there you go. A large sample that includes many different basses. That's exactly the type of experience that allows for meaningful conclusions and exactly the type of experience to trust.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: arnoldschnitzer
#51
drurb said:
The point is that one cannot be completely scientific about it. That's just not practical. You only mentioned experience with a single bass to which multiple changes were made. In such a case, considering that experience alone, I said I don't understand how you can, logically, attribute an effect you hear to any single change. In fact, I don't believe you or anyone else can. Notice that your answer relies upon your experience with a larger sample! Now, with the benefit of a large sample someone with expertise and who is perceptive can, reasonably, assign an effect to a specific physical change-- just as a luthier does. That is, if you have amassed a large sample of exemplars over the years such that you can, in effect, average across them and deduce the effects attributable to the addition of carbon fiber, then you are reinforcing the point I made about large samples. So, please tell us about your large sample over the years.

As to subjective experience, I would not deny the perceptual effects you report. The question is which one or combination of physical changes-- all made simultaneously-- produced those effects. That is not a subjective question.


...and there you go. A large sample that includes many different basses. That's exactly the type of experience that allows for meaningful conclusions and exactly the type of experience to trust.
Click to expand...
Uh-huh. Its relatively easy to change just one thing at a time if you truly want to hear what that one change sounds like.

I had a client who was really interested and asked me to do a re-fret, neck reset, new nut, new saddle and complete set up on his vintage Martin one step at a time so that he could hear the difference each one made. That guy learned a lot about the role that different systems play in tone production.

I'm a little obsessive about this myself and have performed many experiments involving single alterations - there's no other way to gather reliable data! :thumbsup:
 
#52
Hey, I didn't say that anyone else has had the experience I've had..again, I won't lose sleep over any of the experts opinions here, they are very important, I 'm not here to argue with professional luthiers. Just to share my own experience as a player. Consider that someday you will be presented with a repair that involves the failure of a graphite rod installed by someone who read here that it's the best thing since sliced bread and didn't know crap about doing the job right.
 
#54
MR PC said:
Hey, I didn't say that anyone else has had the experience I've had..again, I won't lose sleep over any of the experts opinions here, they are very important, I 'm not here to argue with professional luthiers. Just to share my own experience as a player. Consider that someday you will be presented with a repair that involves the failure of a graphite rod installed by someone who read here that it's the best thing since sliced bread and didn't know crap about doing the job right.
Click to expand...

Let me re-purpose a famous pro-choice bumper sticker:
"If you're against CF neck inlays, then don't get one."
 
  • Like
Reactions: james condino, Jake deVilliers and JoeyNaeger
#55
MR PC said:
Tell us about your personal experience with graphite rods used in bass necks, drub.
Click to expand...
I'm not making claims about CF! Quite the opposite. I'm suggesting that when deciding whether one should go forward with a specific modification, the best way to predict the success of that change would be to rely on information amassed by expert luthiers. Does that guarantee success? No, it doesn't, but I believe it's the best one can do. You claim to have a large enough sample to determine what sonic effects issue from the installation of CF, yet you haven't described that sample. So far, we know about a single bass for which the addition of CF was one of several modifications.

If one has a bass for which a reputable, highly-experienced, luthier suggests that addition of CF would be beneficial, he/she be wise to go with that judgment before basing the decision on the experience of someone who has only a small sample and who could not separate the effect from several others.

This, of course, doesn't only apply to basses. A highly-skilled specialist physician looks at your medical history and recommends Drug X for your condition. You can bet that there will be someone on the internet who will tell you that while taking Drugs Y, V, P, A, and B, he visited a physician's assistant and tried Drug X and it just didn't work. Gee, who you gonna go with? :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: james condino and arnoldschnitzer
#57
Jake deVilliers said:
Mmm, not quite. He's had two basses that had many changes made at once. Post #28
Click to expand...
Yes, but his Kay did not receive the CF insert. So, other than this:
MR PC said:
...I've used graphite in basses enough over the years to recognize he effect it has on sound and performance...
Click to expand...
we know of only one. I'm happy to consider his purported experience with a larger sample but we just don't know what that is. Even if you don't make one change at a time, as I've said, a really large sample plus experienced hands and ears can allow an expert to discern the effect of a given change.
 
#58
drurb said:
Yes, but his Kay did not receive the CF insert. So, other than this:

we know of only one. I'm happy to consider his purported experience with a larger sample but we just don't know what that is. Even if you don't make one change at a time, as I've said, a really large sample plus experienced hands and ears can allow an expert to discern the effect of a given change.
Click to expand...
Oh, that's right. Either way, that's no scenario to learn anything specific unless its about the luthier. :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: drurb
#59
Okay. All the talk is about carbon fiber rods, which initially were used by makers of electric basses as neck reinforcements but primarily in an attempt to reduce or eliminate dead spots in the neck. Dead spots on DB necks hardly ever come up in discussion, so it looks like reinforcement is the objective here.

But why carbon fiber? Why *just* carbon fiber? There are no alternative materials?

And why a solid rod, when any hollow tube, whether round or square, will have much more resistance to bending pressure?
 
#60

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back