New Ibanez (headless, multiscale)

[HalfManHalfBass]

I love the idea of these new basses, especially the solid coloured ones. Basswood is usually very light and despite being a bit fragile to receiving dents, is a pretty good tonewood.

The only worries I have is that these bridge tuner units look unnecessarily complicated and I would be interested to see if they can be directly swapped out with the similar looking, but much simpler, individual Hipshot tuner / tailpiece units. The more movable parts the less tone / sustain transfer IMHO and the more chance of screws turning due to vibrations while playing hard. In close up photos, some of the tuner unit mounting screws look a bit chewed up which is a personal pet peeve too...

The fact that these units offer variable string spacing is also a waste of time IMHO because widening the string spacing puts strings slipping off the end of frets at even higher a risk. I have owned may Ibanez gu!t@r$ that already had their outer strings dangerously close to the end of the frets.

The final thing I'd like to say is that studying a close up of the fingerboard edges on the Thomann site reveals fret ends that look terrible. Stainless steel frets are great when done correctly but at these prices the level of finishing doesn't look to be all that and I wouldn't want to have to file them all smoother.

Oh well, I'll have to see if I feel brave enough to pull the trigger on one of these in a few months as I will have to buy online....

 

[Les Fret]

See... ^



@LordHar also calculated the same 17.6 mm result. And prior to your question, @skeeler answered similar question from @gscroggin with also the same result on post #175.

No need for us to read this from somewhere. The calculation is all a matter of logic.

Just doesn't make much sense to me to just have that 0.6mm difference. That's very little room for adjustment.

 

[Aidil]

I guess I was getting more at the actual tuning system. I seem to remember reading about some headless tuning systems that were problematic because they could twist the string, or something like that? Just curious how exactly Ibanez has it worked out and whether their system could have the potential to be problematic at all.

I have no idea which headless tuning systems that had a twist string problem. But my Steinberger headless bridge/tuning system on my electric guitar doesn't have twist string problem. The way it works which only in longitudinal movements when tuning/detuning, and probably also due to the usage of double ball end strings, have never caused the string to twist, at all.

I imagined Ibanez Headless Mono Rail Bridge will also work the same.

Just doesn't make much sense to me to just have that 0.6mm difference. That's very little room for adjustment.

You wouldn't know unless you've tried it.

Coming from 22+ years of playing my one and only 5-string bass with 18 mm string spacing, few years back I devoted my self playing 6-string basses for the whole year or so... During the period, I bought and sold few 6-ers, which all had 16 mm string spacing, thus I became familiar with the tight spacing. So obsessed to master the 6 string bass, made me sold my 22+ years 5er when later I got my Ibanez 6er which has 16.5 mm string spacing. How absurd it may seem, I actually could sense the 0.5 mm difference, which later became one of factors led me to sell all my other 16 mm string spacing 6ers.

 

[Les Fret]

I have no idea which headless tuning systems that had a twist string problem. But my Steinberger headless bridge/tuning system on my electric guitar doesn't have twist string problem. The way it works which only in longitudinal movements when tuning/detuning, and probably also due to the usage of double ball end strings, have never caused the string to twist, at all.

I imagined Ibanez Headless Mono Rail Bridge will also work the same.


You wouldn't know unless you've tried it.

Coming from 22+ years of playing my one and only 5-string bass with 18 mm string spacing, few years back I devoted my self playing 6-string basses for the whole year or so... During the period, I bought and sold few 6-ers, which all had 16 mm string spacing, thus I became familiar with the tight spacing. So obsessed to master the 6 string bass, made me sold my 22+ years 5er when later I got my Ibanez 6er which has 16.5 mm string spacing. How absurd it may seem, I actually could sense the 0.5 mm difference, which later became one of factors led me to sell all my other 16 mm string spacing 6ers.

I have tried many 6 strings. I play a 14mm one now. Love it. Just don't like wider spacing than say 16.5mm. Just having 0.6mm difference is just very little room for adjustment.

 

[Aidil]

I have tried many 6 strings. I play a 14mm one now. Love it. Just don't like wider spacing than say 16.5mm. Just having 0.6mm difference is just very little room for adjustment.

Aahh... One of Gerald Veasley siggy basses I presumed?

 

[skeeler]

Just doesn't make much sense to me to just have that 0.6mm difference. That's very little room for adjustment.

The total adjustment range is +/-1.5*2/(n-1), where n is the number of strings. On the 5-string, you get +/-0.75 mm. On the 4, you get +/-1.0. mm.

Keep in mind that the mechanism has to fit into the width of an individual bridge (probably 14 mm wide, just like the other Ibanez single-string bridges) while still holding the individual saddle securely. While more that 3 mm of range is possible, it would be difficult.

 

[Koshchei]

Good for Ibanez bringing these to mass production! The instrument looks to be well designed, with a proper neutral fret and a not-too-extreme fan. I'm not besotted with the instrument's appearance, but it looks like a very competent cheaper alternative to a Kiesel or Strandberg.

 

[skeeler]

@HalfManHalfBass

If you find that the screws are chewed up, you can likely replace all of them with ones made from harder steel for 15 or 20 dollars from Bolt Depot or McMaster-Carr.

 

[skeeler]

The fact that these units offer variable string spacing is also a waste of time IMHO because widening the string spacing puts strings slipping off the end of frets at even higher a risk. I have owned may Ibanez gu!t@r$ that already had their outer strings dangerously close to the end of the frets.

The adjustable spacing would let you move the strings in just a bit to mitigate that danger.

 

[skeeler]

I have tried many 6 strings. I play a 14mm one now. Love it. Just don't like wider spacing than say 16.5mm. Just having 0.6mm difference is just very little room for adjustment.

These bridges will let you take the 6-string down to 16.4 mm.

 

[skeeler]

The instrument looks to be well designed, with a proper neutral fret and a not-too-extreme fan.

Can you help me understand the (dis)advantages to different positions for the neutral fret? Why is this position--it looks like the 7th or 8th--proper in your opinion?

 

[Koshchei]

Can you help me understand the (dis)advantages to different positions for the neutral fret? Why is this position--it looks like the 7th or 8th--proper in your opinion?

Here's the conventional wisdom surrounding it:

A fanned fret instrument is primarily designed to balance tension across the range of strings, to that the instrument both sounds and feels more consistent. That being said, there are ergonomic considerations as well. When your hand moves up and down the neck, it rotates a little, like a car's windshield washer blade. It doesn't move a huge amount, but the rotation is definitely there. In choosing a neutral fret, the goal is to have the fan exactly match the natural rotation of the hand up the neck.

The "Goldilocks zone" for this is the 7th-9th fret area (depending on how many frets the instrument has). If the neutral fret is too high, for instance the 12th fret, you're forced to over-rotate your hand when playing in the lower positions, which is feels awful, makes it quite hard to play a reading gig, and causes fatigue to set in pretty quickly. Similarly, if it's too low, then you're forced to over-rotate in the upper registers.

Ultimately, a multi-scale neck is based around a series of compromises, which, if done correctly, will yield ergonomic and tonal improvements over a simple scale. It's not an earth-shattering improvement, like switching from nickel to stainless frets, but your wrists will definitely thank you if you get a well-designed one, especially if you play an extended range instrument.

 

[5StringPocket]

The reason for the very deep lower cut is because the leg cut is further back, and that is because the Centre Of Mass is further back with a headless design (which is what makes it balance better on a strap). The leg cut has to be below the COM at playing angle to make it balance on the leg.
There have been many poorly designed headless basses that use a standard body shape, and they fall off your leg backwards, they do not balance on the leg at all.

With the leg cut further back the bass is left-shifted when on the leg and closer to the horizontal positioning when on a strap (as they state).
Also saves weight and helps to redistribute weight towards the rear.

I like how Ibanez is being mindful of ergonomics with this headless multi-scale. Most of my practice time is in the seated position so proper balance on the leg while seated and on the strap while standing is important. I like the more even tension and string voicing with multi-scale but find the 3" difference between low B and high G on a fiver a bit much. I have owned Dingwall ABZ and NG2 models and currently own a SPJ5. I also have a SRMS805 upgraded with Nordstrand Zen Blades and find the 1.5" span difference more comfortable to play. I think the 2" B/G span difference, good instrument balance, 18mm string spacing, and reasonable pricing will find a sweet spot with quite a few players. That EBH1505MS really checks the boxes for me...
EHB1505MS | EHB | ELECTRIC BASSES | PRODUCTS | Ibanez guitars

 

[BioWeapon]

I have tried many 6 strings. I play a 14mm one now. Love it. Just don't like wider spacing than say 16.5mm. Just having 0.6mm difference is just very little room for adjustment.

It's not a 0.6mm difference - it's twice that. You can adjust 0.6mm wider or narrower overall. Not to mention this means you can have variable string spacing across the board, meaning you can account for how wide the actual string is and make your gaps even rather than having even spacing center-to-center.

 

[bjelkeman]

I am seeing quite a lot of interest around these local to me. What I like about them is that they are trying something relatively new for a mainstream manufacturer. I also know generally the build quality instruments, which is attractive to me.

 

[Les Fret]

It's not a 0.6mm difference - it's twice that. You can adjust 0.6mm wider or narrower overall. Not to mention this means you can have variable string spacing across the board, meaning you can account for how wide the actual string is and make your gaps even rather than having even spacing center-to-center.

It's 0.6mm because you only want it either narrower or wider. So you most likely will adjust it only in one direction.

 

[BioWeapon]

For the Canadians in here, just heard back from my local L&M and it seems the EHB-1506MS shows up in their inventory system. Not sure if that's just for this store but sounds like we'll be getting most if not the whole range up North!

 

[srayb]

For the Canadians in here, just heard back from my local L&M and it seems the EHB-1506MS shows up in their inventory system. Not sure if that's just for this store but sounds like we'll be getting most if not the whole range up North!

Did they say what that one will sell for?

 

[BioWeapon]

Did they say what that one will sell for?

They didn't specify, but I didn't ask either - not sure they even have a price yet as they don't have them listed online or available. Cheapest I've seen the 1506 so far is 2069$ CAD on Thomann but it's safe to assume L&Ms price will be a couple hundred higher as MAP is around the 2300$ mark.

 

[Solarmist]

Just doesn't make much sense to me to just have that 0.6mm difference. That's very little room for adjustment.

I thought it was kind of gimmicky myself for that very reason.