Nordstrand Headless bass :D

[cnltb]

?

The part of my post you did not quote gives you more of an idea of what I mean.

Most Nordstrand basses I have played were not far short of 'GREAT'.
They also looked the part.
In terms of looks this one simply doesn't to me.
I have nothing against headless basses per sè either.

 

[maurilio]

Good luck to nordstrand with this.
As is, I'd put this one back one the drawing table and do some serious and thorough work on it.

To my eye many builders do much, much better than that.
So can Carey Nordstrand, I would guess.

of course it is your eye like Carey says, this is very polarizing!

I personally think it is very well designed, first and foremost playability is #1, than esthetics, which in this case IMO are very elegant without being on your face kinda look.
Carey has used some very interesting technical choices here… I like and respect his creativity (one of the reasons he came up with his "unique" pickups design and got well famous for!)

M

 

[Chef]

Of course, it's a free country, and you're welcome to do better.

You're also welcome to your opinion.
The headless thing probably isn't for me, but, I sure respect Carey's ability to visualize something cool, and execute on that at a really high level.

Good luck to nordstrand with this.
As is, I'd put this one back one the drawing table and do some serious and thorough work on it.

To my eye many builders do much, much better than that.
So can Carey Nordstrand, I would guess.

 

[GRoberts]

.....but, I sure respect Carey's ability to visualize something cool, and execute on that at a really high level.

Heck Yeah! + 1,000,000,000

 

[Carey]

Good luck to nordstrand with this.
As is, I'd put this one back one the drawing table and do some serious and thorough work on it.

To my eye many builders do much, much better than that.
So can Carey Nordstrand, I would guess.

I'm curious what you'd change and make "much, much better". It seems you have some idea of how I should design and build basses and I wonder how that would work.

Not trying to be combative at all, I just don't understand how your reasoning works here.

 

[CinneaghBass]

Awesome looking bass!

 

[cnltb]

Of course, it's a free country, and you're welcome to do better.

You're also welcome to your opinion.
The headless thing probably isn't for me, but, I sure respect Carey's ability to visualize something cool, and execute on that at a really high level.

I didn't say he has not executed it at a very high level.
I am in fact quite sure he has; From what I have seen, he usually does.
I just find that this one reminds me too much of other builders' designs.
Playability goes without saying these days and when talking about headlesses and I would have guessed he might have come up with something a little more original. That's all. I didn't even say that I don't think it looks good. I think it looks perfectly alright.

As to "and you're welcome to do better...". That's not my department. I write and play music.

When designing basses I'll keep it to headed ones for now and for my own use, rather than pursuing any business ideas with it.

 

[cnltb]

I'm curious what you'd change and make "much, much better". It seems you have some idea of how I should design and build basses and I wonder how that would work.

Not trying to be combative at all, I just don't understand how your reasoning works here.

'Better' here stands for 'original' or 'interesting'.
I suppose 'better' may not have been the best word to use but I just can't see the 'USP' on this bass. when looking at offerings from marleaux, lefay, seibass,steinberger, kingbass, status, basslab etc. by comparison.
Granted...I haven't tried it out yet.

 

[Chef]

So: what would you have done that would make it better for you?
I'm genuinely curious, and not trying to "start something."

Again, that bass is probably not my thing either, I'm pretty much squarely in the "Fender J" camp, and Carey does that quite well already; I do have one of those.

What's a "USP?"

 

[Carey]

'Better' here stands for 'original' or 'interesting'.
I suppose 'better' may not have been the best word to use but I just can't see the 'USP' on this bass. when looking at offerings from marleaux, lefay, seibass,steinberger, kingbass, status, basslab etc. by comparison.
Granted...I haven't tried it out yet.

Ok cool. Thanks for the reply.

The trick with "original" is how do you do it while maintaining functionality? The upper horn needs to be where it is for balance reasons. The bass needs to sit on your leg comfortably and not dig into the chest. The access needs to be where it is for the 24 frets. The pickups are placed in a relatively traditional place. The bridge needs to have access to the tuners. There's no headstock to use as a canvas. So, given all these constraints, how do you make a shape that is original?

To me, there are very solid reasons so many basses look so alike these days and they are tightly related to the reasons I mention above.

I did exercise what I perceive as originality in a few places on this design. I put the truss rod in from the front with a contrasting stripe to cover it up. I put my logo in front of the first fret in another piece of contrasting wood (actually got the idea from my best friend). I've not seen either of these things done before. Maybe they have been done, but I'm not aware of it. I'm not trying to claim anything of import here. I just used creativity to solve some issues with how to make the bass conform to my intent (solid woods) and make it simple and efficient to build.

I should also mention that the shape is very much based on one of my earlier designs - the NJ. The only thing that's any different is the upper horn and the cutout for the bridge.

Is it possible to look at the shape and say it's derivitave of other designs already out there? Sure. And I have no interest in denying that. But this bass came from my eyes and my creative mind. All the decisions were made so that it made sense to ME aesthetically and functionally.

I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel. I just want to make a bass that I like. If others like it then great. If not, that's cool too. Depending on how much of either of these responses I get I will either make a buch of them or not many. It's cool either way and I am incredibly fortunate to have the opportunity to follow my bass muse and try things like this. I hope that I can continue to play in this game and see what else wants to come into being through my eyes and hands.

 

[cnltb]

So: what would you have done that would make it better for you?
I'm genuinely curious, and not trying to "start something."

Again, that bass is probably not my thing either, I'm pretty much squarely in the "Fender J" camp, and Carey does that quite well already; I do have one of those.

What's a "USP?"

What would make it better for me?
Interesting question!
The look just doesn't interest me whatsoever.
To me it doesn't have that certain something. Some may call it "x-factor"

When I first saw a Lefay headless I went like "That looks really interesting and unique, yet every tiniest detail makes complete sense. I want to try it out".
When I first played one, I thought " this sounds really good and feels excellent".
When I first saw a marleaux I though " This is a marleaux".
Same with Seibass, Bogart or Basslab.
With this one I think" Who made it? Is this a colab between Schack and Steinberger? Nice looking but what is special about it?"( or something like this).
At the moment I only have the looks to go on.

Sorry but that's the best I can do, trying to answer your question.
'USP'- unique selling point.


I might add at this point that I never played a Jazz 5 that I liked as much as a nordy Jazz 5, owned by a friend..
That one was absolutely "I want!".

 

[Chef]

Keep on keepin' on.

I completely respect you doing what suits you.
How wonderful to be able to do so!

My VJ5 still completely and totally rocks.

Ok cool. Thanks for the reply.

this bass came from my eyes and my creative mind. All the decisions were made so that it made sense to ME aesthetically and functionally.

I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel. I just want to make a bass that I like. If others like it then great. If not, that's cool too. Depending on how much of either of these responses I get I will either make a buch of them or not many. It's cool either way and I am incredibly fortunate to have the opportunity to follow my bass muse and try things like this. I hope that I can continue to play in this game and see what else wants to come into being through my eyes and hands.

 

[dcr]

I'd buy one!dcr

 

[nostatic]

I wish I'd gotten to play this at BPL. I love this bass and I may have to ping Carey about building one. A 24 fret, 33" scale compound radius 4-banger would be a sick stunt bass.

Hmm...

Also, great talking with you at BPL, Mo. Going to check out the restaurant suggestion soon.

 

[Jimmy Stump]

I like it.

 

[roadkill2309]

So: what would you have done that would make it better for you?
I'm genuinely curious, and not trying to "start something."

Again, that bass is probably not my thing either, I'm pretty much squarely in the "Fender J" camp, and Carey does that quite well already; I do have one of those.

What's a "USP?"

I think he's referring to the Unique Selling Point. I can't see it either, aside from the usual TalkBass rampant consumerism, but I *do* think that there's legit, non-TB-inspired market space for this bass anyway. Otherwise, why would Ned Steinberger be getting back into headless bass guitars?

I'm 'meh' on this because I don't like headless basses, but I respect the design and the man who done it. This one's got a whole lot of nice touches--The placement of that N being one of them. I'd like to try the axe out. Be interesting to see if that damned dead spot is still hanging around on a headless bass.

The skunk stripe on the front of the fretboard kind of makes my head spin, but the more I look at it, the more I'm starting to like it. It probably only works in very specific contexts, though. Like this one.

EDIT: I see I got beaten to the USP punch.

 

[maurilio]

I wish I'd gotten to play this at BPL. I love this bass and I may have to ping Carey about building one. A 24 fret, 33" scale compound radius 4-banger would be a sick stunt bass.

Hmm...

Also, great talking with you at BPL, Mo. Going to check out the restaurant suggestion soon.

Hey Todd, thank you!

http://www.viaveneto.us/#/home

I don't know if Fabrizio still remember me, it's been quite a while (I used to go with one of my best friend Gingio - he might remember him).



M

 

[Chef]

USP: got it.

There are plenty of people doing more standard this and that, including Carey.

 

[cnltb]

USP: got it.

There are plenty of people doing more standard this and that, including Carey.

Absolutely!

 

[Smilodon]

Discussing the look of an instrument is like discussing what musical genre is the "best". People have different opinions.

Myself I don't really like headless instruments. (I am building a headless bass at the moment, though. Yes, i'm weird.. ) They look sort of lopsided, except for the offerings from Steinberger.

Having that said, I really like this one. Not for the overall look, but because there is some new ideas in there. The first fret logo/different wood thing works very well. Especially on a headless. Nothing beats good ideas and good craftsmanship!