Teiscobird projects

[JIO]

99% there - need to wire it up and decide on the pu rings. Below is the 3 options; no rings (like modern T-birds), lower ring only (like late 60's T-birds) or both rings (like the gen1 T-bird) Right now I'm leaning toward the lower ring only - oh.., it weighs 7lbs/5oz.

 

[rwkeating]

No rings makes it look very unique and brings out the smoothness of the design. It is a looker no matter what you choose though.

 

[I-Am-The-Slime]

agreed (with Jio) lower only

 

[Jon Clegg]

Gorgeous in any config. I lean towards both or lower only. Lower only is a bit reminiscent of a 4001, which may be why it looks right to me.

 

[Matt Liebenau]

My thought is no rings or bridge pickup only. Looking great whichever option you choose.

 

[Novarocker]

I like no rings or lower only as well. No rings just looks slick and clean IMO.

 

[jhb138]

I like both rings the best, no rings is second.

 

[JIO]

And the winner is ... (I need 2 more tiny flat-head screws) It's alive and sounds like an angry piano! (favorite T-bird thread sound/tone reference) Translation - it sounds awesome!

 

[Jon Clegg]

And the winner is ... (I need 2 more tiny flat-head screws) It's alive and sounds like an angry piano! (favorite T-bird thread sound/tone reference) Translation - it sounds awesome!

View attachment 3141478

Well if it sounds as good as it looks, that's pretty awesome!

 

[JIO]

Well if it sounds as good as it looks, that's pretty awesome!

Thanks! There's always a moment before plugging in where I hope it does (sound good) but my track record has been pretty good so far and this bass is no exception. I played it unplugged for a while and it sounded pretty good so I figured there was a good chance it would rock. The T-bird pu's I got on eBay sound really good and the price was right. (bonus)

 

[JJR58]

99% there - need to wire it up and decide on the pu rings. Below is the 3 options; no rings (like modern T-birds), lower ring only (like late 60's T-birds) or both rings (like the gen1 T-bird) Right now I'm leaning toward the lower ring only - oh.., it weighs 7lbs/5oz.

View attachment 3141361

View attachment 3141362

View attachment 3141363

View attachment 3141364

Man, that's wicked JIO, very nice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JIO]

Man, that's wicked JIO, very nice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks man! I'm well pleased with the way it came out.

 

[bound'n'blocked]

Man that thing looks awesome. Retro and futuristic at the same time. It looks like a guitar you would see somebody playing in a show like "Lost in Space", you know what I mean? A show from the past that is about the future. Great job man!

BnB

 

[Beej]

Wow, another one smacked right out of the park.

We're going to have to start calling you "The Babe"...

 

[JIO]

Wow, another one smacked right out of the park.

We're going to have to start calling you "The Babe"...

 

[bound'n'blocked]

Now get to work on that fenderbird. I want to see what kind of crazy ish you do on that thing!

BnB

 

[Novarocker]

Now get to work on that fenderbird. I want to see what kind of crazy ish you do on that thing!

BnB

Agreed!

 

[JIO]

Now get to work on that fenderbird. I want to see what kind of crazy ish you do on that thing!

BnB

Agreed!

I'm on it! I got the (black) Hipshot KA bridge for it and screwed it to the body. I'm gauging it from my '64 T-bird II - the G-string nut-to-saddle length is 34-1/4". There's a few tryed-and-true pu formulas that you can't go wrong on; P-bass, J-bass, MM, T-bird, a Ric 4000 series, and maybe a Hofner but that's specific to a hollow-body. Get things aligned with those specs and you're "in like Flint". As I suspected, if I'm going to use a Darkstar/Bi-Sonics set of pu's, they will have to be Curtis Novak's ($$$) due to the Fender neck spacing. (1-1/4" E pole-G pole) Novak offers both spacing and the P-bass spacing is the only one that will work. (Guild spacing is 2") I'm no authority and haven't done an A/B test (as I've installed/used both) but they both sound really good. I have one Guild in my Teiscobird and love the tone it delivers. It's my mainstay bass playing with The Sean Conneries - it goes from warm vintage plunk to in-your-face punch. (love it!)

So the progress on this bass may be something that happens as it becomes affordable - but frankly, the result will be worth the wait. I know what one sounded like, but two... seriously - head for cover! On the T-bird Club thread here on tb, the single pu Gen 1 T-bird II is the "holy grail". I hear them but my '64 is a II and after owning/playing it for 10 years I installed a 2nd pu (in the exact location as a IV) with a Seymour Duncan "Hawkbucker", which he made expressly for T-birds. (Hawk = bird...) I liked what it originally did (the 1 pu II) but longed for more (treble mostly) and back in the 80's there wasn't the "vintage" hysteria that would condemn an owner for modding their non-new bass (like today). I've never regretted doing so as it made an already great sounding bass even greater sounding! (and I have no interest in ever selling it so the whole "devalue" thing is a mute point) Anyway - point being.., if you get 2 awesome sounding pu's positioned in the optimal location - fasten your seat-belts! I pulled if off with the TeiscoBluebird and likewise it will be my goal for this Fenderbird project! The rest will fall under that "kind of crazy-ish thing I do" category...

 

[Muddslide]

99% there ...

View attachment 3141361

[View attachment 3141363

Great Holy Freakin Crap-- that is so tough looking I can't hardly stand it!

Gorgeous. Incredible work. If I saw someone playing that onstage I'd accost them after the show with a thousand questions.

 

[JIO]

Great Holy Freakin Crap-- that is so tough looking I can't hardly stand it!

Gorgeous. Incredible work. If I saw someone playing that onstage I'd accost them after the show with a thousand questions.

Thanks! So far the pics I've taken aren't doing it justice - it looks much better in person.