Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
The importance of design...
- Thread starter Bebo2020
- Start date
Rojo and JRA, thanks for this discussion. I'm new to making truss rod adjustments, and my two main basses disagree on this: one has headstock access (and a cover that needs to be unscrewed), and the other it's at the heel. The heel sure seems easier to me (it's as Rojo described: channel, just takes an allen wrench), so I'm interested in the pros and cons.
i get it.....now!
actually, i think you/others have mentioned this before, but it's just now sinking in, rojo412! that was a great rationale/explanation --- i'm convinced! i'm fairly over-stocked with the other necks, however, at the moment. 
thanks for taking the time to respond with those two posts. good stuff for all to read/consider!
Now if they'd all just make the truss rod threaded parts an even finer thread, always ruggedly mount the fixed end, and put in a life-long-lasting lubricant so it never binds up even when tuned...
Maybe perhaps the OP could design a bass that exemplifies what a great bass design should look like
fwiw, the typical truss rod is threaded 10-32 UNF and in the #10 size, taps and dies aren't made any finer. also, there's a fail point with too fine a thread in that it will be striped pretty quick which is a liability for a volume mfg.
a superior system would be a differential thread. i knew of one acoustic builder who made his own da t-rods out of titanium that did this. i understand how he did it, but he was trying to get the system patented and that needs to be respected. otoh, kinematic stands used in the lab for laser alignments often have this feature and i've designed more than one myself.
lubricant wise there are many long life choices. non are "life-long-lasting" unless the mating materials are impregnated with the substance or have it a significant part of their make up like graphite or teflon, etc.. going with a bronze alloy could be helpful but at the risk of stripping the threads. another option is a conversion coating like molykote, or a plating, etc.. not something i suspect a large mfg would take up. again, this is where boutique builders have an advantage.
My original comment was intendent as a diplomatic nod towards certain manufactures that, to my understanding, have been unable to synthesize a well designed instrument, but also aesthetically pleasing, to my eye at least. Since it has been previously mentioned, I was precisely thinking of Kiesel instruments. They are consistently good, functional players, but nevertheless, have a very weird notion of aesthetics, again, to my eye. My comment goes to companies like them, in the sense that they should hire some consultant to increase their sales just by changing the appearance of their instruments. Someone has to say that I guess... no offense please.
Good counterpoints. I just hate that initial snap when old threaded parts start moving under a lot of effort, I'm always afraid that it's going to be the wrong kind of snap. Too fine of a thread may strip more easily, but I suppose one could make up somewhat for that with a longer "nut" portion.
For lubrication, besides the threads themselves maybe something could be better with the load bearing contact area that the force is against; perhaps a thin Kynar-coated washer or the like.
I wasn't familiar with the differential screw jacks, and I found some interesting information on them. A real Aha thing! So simple, yet... Thanks!
Last edited:
- Jun 30, 2010
- 49,622
- 222,163
- Disclosures
- musician/artist/owner - Gildaxe
Design is paramount, and good design rules. However, taste is subjective so even if something is well designed - there will always be people who don't "get" it. This is why there are P-basses and a few others (abet being well designed) which a majority of players have a favoritive aesthetic response to.
Totally understand were you're coming from and agree the PRS headstock is not athetically a thing of beauty. That said however, the PRS headstock has an ingenious design as it eliminates any harsh angling of the strings across the nut. Makes for much better tuning stability...and it does this well.
Walking in blind with no resources or predefined parameters is a fundamental aspect of stick learning. Most of us purchase an instrument before we have even held one in our hands. I understand the point that you are trying to make and it is interesting and valid, however I was more alluding to the actual feel of the instrument.
It was a complete redesign of the existing Stick but to me it felt cold and the full metal construction was doing strange things to my joints (although perhaps imagined?). It was also heavy. I came to it from a polycarbonate version from the 80's. When I settled on my current maple one, it made a huge difference, lightweight, resonant, nice smooth feel etc.
Steinberger, on the other hand, I can't go past. The instruments that I use are a marvel of engineering and forward thinking. The traditionalists STILL can't get past the aesthetics (where's the headstock... derrr... ).
JeezyMcNuggles
Inactive
- Feb 23, 2018
- 14,723
- 20,970
- Disclosures
- I suck, but nobody really notices
And, one that no part of looks like a derivation of any other bass that has ever been on the market.................
- Jun 30, 2010
- 49,622
- 222,163
- Disclosures
- musician/artist/owner - Gildaxe
A luthier/bass builder can incorporate the appropriate functional elements needed to create a playable and good sounding instrument but... without a keen sense of visual aesthetics related specifically to its 'design' - I personally feel it can fall short of an exceptional bass, one that 'checks all the boxes'. It is a point that separates an artist from a competent bass builder.
