Bah. Double basses used to be so much fun. Now they're all complicated.
I'm switching to ukulele.
I'm switching to ukulele.
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.
Double Bass The Traeger Bass Book Is Here
- Thread starter Bob Branstetter
- Start date
- May 6, 2003
- 5,272
- 160
- 64
- Disclosures
- Proprietor Fifth Avenue Fret Shop. Technical Editor Bass Gear Magazine
jneuman said:
More or less: The upper part of the body block (all those angled bits) are removed, then new mortise-wood (spruce, poplar) is chalk-fitted and glued. The dovetailed neck (maple) is now ready to be chalk-fitted into the new mortise and glued. Requires a few chisels, a ruler, and patience. No bolts.
This is also assuming that the button is intact and sound.
Eric Jackson said:
Last night I posted something to talkbass, a little bit in exasperation. Well, it didnt start out that way, but it got to be that way. Then I thought better of it and deleted it. Not because I was afraid to ruffle any feathers, but because some of it was written in anger, and didnt really reflect the kind of person I am, or at least want to be. Also I just wasnt sure I wanted to wade in here and get involved at all. But I got caught, no sense running away. Heres my (now edited) post:
Hi.
Yet another "classic" thread on Talkbass.com. I have read the book, most of it, anyway. I'd like to offer a bit of a different take on this book, that maybe hasn't been discussed yet here. Reading the book, I think it's written as a history, a document of his work, ideas, and solutions in luthierie. While its being marketed as a guide, even as a bible or whatever, I think he wrote it out of a desire to have his work and ideas documented more than anything else. The narrative style of the book is really that of some old guy recounting stories. Hes telling stories of the challenges he faced as a luthier, and the solutions he came up with. At least once he clearly states that I no longer use this repair method, but it worked well for that time. (I couldnt find the exact quote, but Im pretty sure thats very close) Why include something like that in a repair manual? It makes no sense. But in a history of your work, it makes perfect sense.
For an additional example, theres a picture of a broken neck on page 123. If that happened to my good bass, it would be an obvious neck graft situation. If it happened to my road bass, I think I would go for a replacement neck. And nowadays CNC replacement necks from China are so cheap, that usually would seem like the best solution, even for a cheap bass. But if the bassist needs a repair and hasnt the money for either, this kind of repair can be done. Probably Traeger came up with this solution (using a bolt), and found it the best solution at the time, under the circumstances. So he wants to document it for his book. He went to great lengths to explain why it was better than other repairs he could have done instead. He cant be saying that its better than a neck graft, since he devotes 2 chapters to 4 different approaches to grafts. And in that section he suggests that less valuable basses would be just as well served by replacing the neck wholesale. So although he doesnt say so explicitly, this is a solution to the problem of what to do for a broken scroll when for whatever reason, a graft or new neck isnt an option. For some, putting metal in a bass like that seems ridiculous, but Jeff pointed out that there can be times when its the best solution. There are also some cases where theyre a bad idea. As far as I can tell, Traegers book doesnt mention the exact neck block repair Jeff was talking about. Perhaps this is a repair he wasnt too proud of in the end Anyway, he does describe a similar repair on page 118, Neck wont stay in. In this case (using a lag bolt), he seems to be saying that if the neck wont stay in, usually because of the presence of white glue, you may have to take unusual measures. The description assumes you have already tried to glue in the neck in the traditional way, and it just wont stay. So its a you gotta do what you gotta do kind of situation. Perhaps now (or even then ) there are better ways to deal with this problem, if were trying to avoid a new neck and neck block, but this was his solution.
Im no luthier, but Ive been interested in basses themselves as a sort of hobby for many years, and Im familiar with many of the repair and setup issues discussed in the book. I think that Arnold really hits it on the head, the book offers some really good advice, some things that are just a bit of a different point of view, some are outdated, and some things that I think are just really too out there. Since CT states that these are just his methods in the book, well, at least theres a disclaimer. The danger I see is that if you dont know much about basses and bass repair, itll be hard to know which of these things are the good, accepted advice, which are less accepted, and which are out there. So I think that a more valuable way to discuss this book on Talkbass would be to go through some of these repairs, and discuss his solutions, and see what other options might be available, their costs, and relative merits. THAT could really help someone who is trying to learn about these things, without another book having to be written. Since there are several folks here who seem to have an axe to grind with Traeger, and some of our better-mannered luthiers would be understandably hesitant to start/lead a thread criticizing another luthier, Ill try to write an intial post that can serve to start that kind of a discussion, if you can give me a couple of days. Ill try to offer a few thoughts, and ask the right questions.
If it's alright for me to offer this opinion, Talkbass is now the best source for current news and information about the double bass on the internet, but I think that the atmosphere here keeps a lot of folks, including some fine bassists who might have much to contribute, away.
Sincerely,
Brent
PS- in the end, another reason to delete my post was that Im not sure Im up for the discussion of the contents of the book. It might involve posting his ideas in significant detail, which I could see the publisher and author both objecting to (what if you wrote/published a book and then someone posted it's contents on line?). Also, while Im sure its possible to have a calm discussion of the contents of the book, Im just not sure its gonna happen here .
Nice post Brent. I would like to add my $0.02 here too. Simply put, the Traeger book is great because there are just not that many books out there like it. Writing a book and having it published is a huge task and therefore Traeger and his buddies need to be congratulated for simply doing that. I've done it myself and I have colleagues that have done it and are doing it, and my wife is writing a book at the moment. It's a great accomplishment to write a book when you have your hands full of every day things to do. And believe me, there is no money in writing books - unless you're Tom Clancy or someone like that. I don't see anyone making a blockbuster film about the Traeger book 
The book is great because it is a collection of knowledge that is otherwise quite hard to come by unless you have access to a lot of luthiers brains to pick and even then it's not always the same - sometimes better, sometimes not. Like anything, you have to decide what's interesting and applicable for you.
As for some of the behaviour in this thread well none of it is surprising to me. You'll find much of the same behaviour by the same guys elsewhere through the forums but that's OK. Like any community, there are always jerks and smartasses and know-it-alls and the trick is to make your own decisions about what is interesting and applicable to you - just like you should with the book.
The book is great because it is a collection of knowledge that is otherwise quite hard to come by unless you have access to a lot of luthiers brains to pick and even then it's not always the same - sometimes better, sometimes not. Like anything, you have to decide what's interesting and applicable for you.
As for some of the behaviour in this thread well none of it is surprising to me. You'll find much of the same behaviour by the same guys elsewhere through the forums but that's OK. Like any community, there are always jerks and smartasses and know-it-alls and the trick is to make your own decisions about what is interesting and applicable to you - just like you should with the book.
Brent and Adrian,
THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN, for this return to reason and civility. I hope we can now procede to discuss luthiery here.
THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN, for this return to reason and civility. I hope we can now procede to discuss luthiery here.
Jeff Bollbach
Jeff Bollbach Luthier, Inc.
Jeff Bollbach
Jeff Bollbach Luthier, Inc.
Jeff, I am aware that there others but there really aren't that many are there? I'm talking about bass-specific books. It would actually be interesting to know of others that you might recommend. My understanding is that the Traeger book has been eagerly awaited for a very long time now.
Jeff Bollbach said:
Oh, I agree with you. That's just the way it is. There's no "adjustment" that could be made that would be satisfying, people should be free to say what they want. I cringe a lot more when I see a moderated post than an obnoxious one. I guess I just put that in there because I've been thinking it so long. Just venting a bit.
Brent
[QUOTE - Ken Smith] ....I am entitled to my opinion about the Man and can criticize the man and his Book all I like....
Ken, you can criticize the book all you like. But please consider that your criticism might be carry some weight -- and, perhaps, be welcome -- if you had actually read the book.
As Brent (and someone else, earlier, have) pointed out, Traeger apparently issues several disclaimers, qualifications and background throughout the book regarding his choices. Your having not read these disqualifies you as a credible "book reviewer," IMHO. Do you criticize films you haven't seen? Resturants at which you've not eaten?
Ken, you can criticize the book all you like. But please consider that your criticism might be carry some weight -- and, perhaps, be welcome -- if you had actually read the book.
As Brent (and someone else, earlier, have) pointed out, Traeger apparently issues several disclaimers, qualifications and background throughout the book regarding his choices. Your having not read these disqualifies you as a credible "book reviewer," IMHO. Do you criticize films you haven't seen? Resturants at which you've not eaten?
At the risk of stirring up more controversy on this - I personally don't find Traeger's claim about replacing bridges to be that bizarre. Additionally, any effort to negate the validity of the claim by extending the analogy to other parts of the bass does not necessarily make sense to me. Is the bridge not the primary driver of vibrations from the strings to the rest of the instrument and therefore does it not vibrate more so than any other part?
There's a lot to be said for being open to new and other ideas no matter what your experience. History supports this. There was a time when people scoffed at the idea that the world was round.
As many have said here, considering more makes one more informed to make your own decision.
There's a lot to be said for being open to new and other ideas no matter what your experience. History supports this. There was a time when people scoffed at the idea that the world was round.
As many have said here, considering more makes one more informed to make your own decision.
Jeff Bollbach
Jeff Bollbach Luthier, Inc.
Actually, I wrote that statement too late last night and should have clarified it more. I am not stating that the Traegar book is not great, just that the mere fact of it being "the only one" doesn't make it so. In addition, Bob B. has been preaching for a long time that CT was "pioneering" bass luthiery before guys like Arnold and I were a gleam in our parents eyes. According to Bob, Traegar laid the groundwork for us. No way. CT was around t a time when few people wanted to work on basses and even fewer had the chops. Someone choosing to work on basses prolly had little resource to learn in traditional ways from good people. So Chuck no doubt had to create and improvise bass repair in somewhat of a vacuum. Likely he was great at that-my impression is that he is bright and has great talent. As Brent said, the book may be more of a testament to a man's journey at a certain time and place in luthierys' history than an actual Biblic resource for future bass luthiers.Eric Jackson said:
Jeff Bollbach
Jeff Bollbach Luthier, Inc.
Adrian Cho said:
Years ago I remember reading in the Strad magazine a reprint of an old late 1800's article about violin repair. They were talking about the controversy of "springing" a bass bar or not.FYI-some put tension in a bar with the thought that the energy therin helps support the top and also helps it vibrate. Most who subscribe to this say that the bar wears out with time and has to be replaced periodically. The article went on with the opinion that this was the work of charlatans and mainly capitalized on the concept by the selling of more work. This is the opinion of which I have come to have over the years as well. I have noted many instances of this "wearing out concept" of bassbars, bridges, soundposts, etc. All generally purveyed by persons I would charactarize as being gifted salesman first, luthiers second. All of us have to have some salesmanship in us but I guess I am talking degree. You could know my percent if I revealed my workload and then my bank account. There is a direct mathamatical relationship.
uptonbass
Proprietor, Upton Bass String Instrument Co.
Adrian Cho said:
Primary driver, yes
Adrian Cho said:
Depends on your point of view, but I would say no, the bridge does not have the largest peak and valley (physical) movement, this is left to the top of the instrument. But yes it does carry the most vibrational energy.....if that makes any sense.
For the same reason Treager states that a bridge would need to be replaced, few luthiers would say that the bass bar becomes tired and also should be replaced....
I don't think I have to say how I feel about this again.
I agree. But I don't fully understand...Adrian Cho said:
The bridge is not part of the 'body proper', it's more a consumable like the fingerboard. The body parts- plates, ribs, blocks, linings, etc., are all glued together, they support each other, they work together as a system. The body is varnished, which will slow the rate of moisture gain/ loss on the outside surfaces. The bridge is unfinished on all surfaces and is held in place only by friction and string tension. The strings exert a tremendous compression force downward on the bridge. If the fit of the feet deteriorates due to top sinkage or bridge leg splay, the bridge needs to be refit or replaced. Does the bridge increase in density or change in flexibility over time under this compression? I don't know. There is also a component of the string load that tries to bend or tip the bridge toward the fingerboard. Does this change the bridge's stiffness characteristics over time? I don't know that either. We know a bent bridge must be replaced, that will certainly change the way it transfers vibrations to the rest of the instrument.
The contention that bridges must be changed according to the calendar makes me scratch my head. A bridge will dry out more in ten years in an arid climate than a humid one. What quality was the blank to start with? How much has the instrument been played? What type of strings? Steel exert more force that gut. If the bridge is more brittle due to dryness, it may affect the sound of the bass in a positive way, to the ear of some players and listeners. I'd be curious to know what, in Mr. Traeger's experience, led him to conclude bridges should be replaced after ten years.
