I was recently watching a Carl Thompson video where Carl remarked on basses with no neck angle. His perception was that such basses made him feel like his fretting hand was "out in front" of his plucking hand (like he was having to "reach" his fretting hand forward). Maybe some of you have seen the video and know of his remarks. Thus, he felt that he wanted a bass with some degree of back-angle to the neck, in order to have his fretting hand properly "behind" his plucking hand. So, as a result, he began building his basses with back-angle. Simple enough. So I started brainstorming my next build and how I was going to follow the path of the master and start building back-angle into my basses. However, it didn't take long for me to come to a simple realization: because the strings are always straight, the relationship between one's fretting hand and one's plucking hand will always be on the same plane to one another. Until we figure out a way to curve our strings into a "back-angle" (which of course is a joke, that cannot happen), we can never truly realize a situation where our fretting hand is "behind" our plucking hand. To whatever degree you angle the nut "back", you must elevate the bridge saddle(s) to compensate. The entire bridge, fingerboard, nut relationship to the strings (along with one's hands) can only be optimized one way. So, then I thought that the whole back-angle question could go into the myth pile along with "straight pull strings to the tuners" etc. And then I had a new idea that could produce a practical solution to the challenge of getting that fretting hand "behind" the plucking hand . . . which will be central to my next build. That thread will follow soon. But, any opinions on the whole subject? The floor is open . . .