• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Lets all try to find a criteria for perfect bass neck without any dead spots (4-String only) !!!

Kinetic Bass

Supporting Member
Dec 8, 2025
51
22
Can we try an experiment to see if a clear and defined pattern will develop or not and we wasted time here.

For those of us shopping online or looking for that perfect sounding J or P or PJ bass with a neck without any dead spots on it and balanced sustain. The only thing to look for is the wood grain of the neck if we can't play it, maybe there is a specific grain pattern that is bullet proof on neck without any dead spots and balanced sustain.

Lets narrow down the criteria to these only:


1) Fender 34” 4-string, must be one-piece neck only, maple neck only, could be quarter or flat sewn, head stock shape must be Fender or Fenderish with inline tuning matching Fender dimensions only.

2) 4-Bolt square classic heel pattern only.

3) Carbon fiber or metal rods are optional, since vintage stuff never had any.

4) Anything painted where we can’t see the grain even the head stock does not apply we need to see pictures of grain head to toe on all 4 sides.

5) Fat finger does not apply, lets leave it out.

6) Tuning pegs do apply, if you found a specific grain pattern that has dead spots but each time you change to heavier or lighter ones or different alloy tuners adn no more dead spots then it’s an optional component to look for that grain, but not a deal breaker, we are still focusing on grain orientation as primary pattern.

7) Truss rod in the heel or head stock does apply for sure 100%.

8) Fingerboard: Ebony, Maple, some version of Rosewood all apply, no exotics, and no flames or curly woods.

9) Thickness of fingerboard does apply as secondary component, so lets make the standard at 5mm, if it’s thicker, lets see if a pattern will develop with thicker fingerboards vs. neck grain.

10) Neck shape, thickness or radius does not apply, even though it does have a huge effect, we’ll focus on neck shape later and only if we arrive at any specific grain as bullet proof.

11) Neck dive does not apply.

12) No boutique basses either except Fender Custom Shop, must be mass-produced where they don't sit on perfect wood blanks for 10 - 20 years,

13) Lawsuit years do apply, kits under license from Warmoth…etc.. Do apply as well if they match all criteria.


No scientific discussions please, it will steer us into wrong direction in arguing too much what does effect dead spots, lets only focus on people posting their perfect necks with at least 4 pictures of each side with enough close ups on all 4 sides from head to toe, mounted or un-mounted necks, so we can breeze thru many pages of pictures to see if we can narrow it down to some type of grain pattern or not.

Please post pictures only if your neck is well balanced tonally and not even a single sign of dead spots, or even half dead spot, lets keep the threshold very high on this exercise.

As a side bet, I would start with two possible soft targets that we might find useful as reference point, one with straight line grain, very hard to find those unless it’s Fender Custom shop, and second soft target is one with zig-zag tree pattern in the middle, much easier to find especially with vintage stuff. Both examples are attached.

Lets also focus a bit more on grain orientation around D & G string portion of the neck since it’s the most common area for dead spots.
 

Attachments

  • straight.png
    straight.png
    730.8 KB · Views: 19
  • straight line.png
    straight line.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 22
  • zigzag 1.jpeg
    zigzag 1.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 10
There is not a single neck in the universe that doesn't have areas of reduced sustain. If you know what to listen for, every neck has variations. The thing you can talk about is how bad those variations are - what is bad enough to be called a "dead spot".

The biggest undefined variable in your criteria is neck width. On wider and/or thicker necks (usually P's), the areas of reduced sustain tend to be less obvious.

My recipe for a neck without a bothersome dead spot (I'm an acoustical Physicist and a bassist, so I've though a LOT about this) is:

P width, thick front to back - thicker necks are stiffer, which raises the resonant frequencies. My 5 string necks, being thicker, are even better than P necks.

Roasted maple - this makes the neck stiffer and lighter, which also raises the resonant frequencies.

Hipshot ultralite tuners - less mass loading on the end of the neck...(say it with me) raises the resonant frequencies of the neck.

Doing all those things (driving the resonant frequencies up as much as possible) gives me necks that are not bothersome to my ear - I've made a couple dozen basses with this formula, and it always works. Are they perfect? No - every bass has areas where the sustain is reduced. The point is the effects are minimized enough that I can play music without being distracted by them.
 
Last edited:
Interesting but rather ambitious, too many variables, and not sure how we'd correlate or summarize the results. I'd like to see someone address a single neck, isolate & identify the resonant frequency, and determine whether this correlates with a measurable dead-spot once subjected to the duress of compression (tuned-to-pitch). As suggested by an engineer much smarter than I, we should view the neck structure more like a tuned marimba tone bar then add or subtract mass to move these nulls to a less conspicuous area. Side note: Phil Kubicki used a different route, specifically the 37 lam, to compensate for the lack of headstock mass...not sure if it really worked. Maybe I watch too many videos of folks including Carl Thompson and Susan Lipkins tap-tap-tapping on seasoned stock but it gave me an idea which I'll never pursue.

*Bolt a loaded neck on the workbench. Isolate as best as possible with a rubber block.

*Strike the headstock with a padded percussion mallet and ID the resulting pitch.

*Add (clamp & quarters) or remove (a single machine head, perhaps) and re-evaluate.

Riis
 
Like @micguy , I’ve done a fair amount of testing, and echo his results.

Increased rigidity, increased mass, and dryness of the wood all help reduce dead spots.

There are many ways to increase rigidity… wood types, wood dryness, graphite or titanium rods, laminated construction, etc will all increase rigidity and build a more stable neck with more “liveliness” and reduced dead spots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LanciaY10
You guys missed the point, history is full of discoveries where no scientific approach was taken and inventors just threw crap at the wall to see what sticks.

We already know from construction point of view how to minimize it, it’s not trivial, fat finger is a perfect example of scientific correction, no one is interested in that since the criteria is narrow, it’s narrow because we have more people with J or P then any other bass, so we can possibly get a pattern going to 3-4 grain patterns with less dead spots if enough data came in.
 
Like @micguy , I’ve done a fair amount of testing, and echo his results.

Increased rigidity, increased mass, and dryness of the wood all help reduce dead spots.

There are many ways to increase rigidity… wood types, wood dryness, graphite or titanium rods, laminated construction, etc will all increase rigidity and build a more stable neck with more “liveliness” and reduced dead spots.
Increased rigidity and increased mass fight each other - if you increase or decrease both by the same amount, the resonance frequencies don't move at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LanciaY10
Increased rigidity and increased mass fight each other - if you increase or decrease both by the same amount, the resonance frequencies don't move at all.

By mass I was referring to physical size and how that size is laid out more than weight. In other words “front to back” size vs “side to side” size. I probably used the wrong term by saying “mass”.

“Front to back”(depth) being thicker increases rigidity more than “side to side”(wideness) on a neck… places more resistance against string tension.
 
“Front to back”(depth) being thicker increases rigidity more than “side to side”(wideness) on a neck… places more resistance against string tension.
Resisting string tension and the acoustics are different things. Stiffness against vertical forces and vibrations does indeed go up faster with increased neck thickness (third power) than with width, but strings don't vibrate in just one plane - they vibrate elliptically; both axes are important when we're talking about vibrational phenomena.
 
Resisting string tension and the acoustics are different things. Stiffness against vertical forces and vibrations does indeed go up faster with increased neck thickness (third power) than with width, but strings don't vibrate in just one plane - they vibrate elliptically; both axes are important when we're talking about vibrational phenomena.


Like i say, im probably using wrong terms. I’m sometimes not good at explaining things these days after all the chemo and my head injury.

I’ll just bow out now. I attempted (poorly) to explain my thoughts and experiences.
 
Can we try an experiment to see if a clear and defined pattern will develop or not and we wasted time here.

For those of us shopping online or looking for that perfect sounding J or P or PJ bass with a neck without any dead spots on it and balanced sustain. The only thing to look for is the wood grain of the neck if we can't play it, maybe there is a specific grain pattern that is bullet proof on neck without any dead spots and balanced sustain.

Lets narrow down the criteria to these only:


1) Fender 34” 4-string, must be one-piece neck only, maple neck only, could be quarter or flat sewn, head stock shape must be Fender or Fenderish with inline tuning matching Fender dimensions only.

2) 4-Bolt square classic heel pattern only.

3) Carbon fiber or metal rods are optional, since vintage stuff never had any.

4) Anything painted where we can’t see the grain even the head stock does not apply we need to see pictures of grain head to toe on all 4 sides.

5) Fat finger does not apply, lets leave it out.

6) Tuning pegs do apply, if you found a specific grain pattern that has dead spots but each time you change to heavier or lighter ones or different alloy tuners adn no more dead spots then it’s an optional component to look for that grain, but not a deal breaker, we are still focusing on grain orientation as primary pattern.

7) Truss rod in the heel or head stock does apply for sure 100%.

8) Fingerboard: Ebony, Maple, some version of Rosewood all apply, no exotics, and no flames or curly woods.

9) Thickness of fingerboard does apply as secondary component, so lets make the standard at 5mm, if it’s thicker, lets see if a pattern will develop with thicker fingerboards vs. neck grain.

10) Neck shape, thickness or radius does not apply, even though it does have a huge effect, we’ll focus on neck shape later and only if we arrive at any specific grain as bullet proof.

11) Neck dive does not apply.

12) No boutique basses either except Fender Custom Shop, must be mass-produced where they don't sit on perfect wood blanks for 10 - 20 years,

13) Lawsuit years do apply, kits under license from Warmoth…etc.. Do apply as well if they match all criteria.


No scientific discussions please, it will steer us into wrong direction in arguing too much what does effect dead spots, lets only focus on people posting their perfect necks with at least 4 pictures of each side with enough close ups on all 4 sides from head to toe, mounted or un-mounted necks, so we can breeze thru many pages of pictures to see if we can narrow it down to some type of grain pattern or not.

Please post pictures only if your neck is well balanced tonally and not even a single sign of dead spots, or even half dead spot, lets keep the threshold very high on this exercise.

As a side bet, I would start with two possible soft targets that we might find useful as reference point, one with straight line grain, very hard to find those unless it’s Fender Custom shop, and second soft target is one with zig-zag tree pattern in the middle, much easier to find especially with vintage stuff. Both examples are attached.

Lets also focus a bit more on grain orientation around D & G string portion of the neck since it’s the most common area for dead spots.
I know you said you don't want to talk science, but what you are proposing is a scientific approach. Unfortunately, as you have listed, there are a lot of variables at play here and not all can be controlled. Assuming we could all even agree on what is a significant dead spot, you need to deal with these variables in the data you collect. A multivariate analysis is doable, but you would need many, many data points to get a final statistically sound conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gopherbassist
The end condition of a neck mounted to a body is very different from a floating end (the rubber block). You're better off hard clamping the neck to the table, as that is much more representative of the situation in an instrument.

I was kinda torn on this as I'm not sure whether we should be isolating the neck from the mounting surface. Point taken, though!

Riis
 
I was kinda torn on this as I'm not sure whether we should be isolating the neck from the mounting surface. Point taken, though!

Riis
A vibrating bar vibrates very differently when the ends are both free than it does when one end is clamped - the series of resonant frequencies and how they vibrate are quite different if you change end conditions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zooberwerx
Scientific measures and arguments must come after we collect data points, I’m not ignoring science, 99% of participants have no background on this subject matter nor they should have, all we need is to find matches, if 5-10 people post images with good necks and we see some close resembles on grain pattern it's already enough to get the ball rolling and shift to second phase looking at neck shape and thickness of these matches. The key is not to get scientific too early in the process., because people are impatient and no one wants to read thru 10 pages of scientific arguments before hand, leave them to the later stages.


This is an experiment nothing more then that, so treat it with simplicity that’s why I narrowed it down to more simple data points.
 
Frankly I've never given it much thought and I've never had 'dead spots' cause any sort of issues rehearsing, playing live and recording over many, many years. WADR, one less thing to be concerned with. :)

This is, I think, one of the problems with the OP's approach. Some people are more sensitive to dead spots than others, so how can you even be sure that a neck that's submitted actually has no dead spots?
 
This is, I think, one of the problems with the OP's approach. Some people are more sensitive to dead spots than others, so how can you even be sure that a neck that's submitted actually has no dead spots?
And I don't mean to be contentious. Most likely if I started looking for 'dead spots' on my basses, I would find them. Like any player, I'm critical about all things related to bass, just not that particular one. :bassist: