• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Thunderbird Club

OK, it's "fuzzy". Wuddya want from a flip phone. Happy Thunderbird(s)Thursday!
0509182326-00.jpg
 
I'll be interested in your experience with these. My personal inclination is that fingerboard timber has no real effect on tone, as the string is vibrating between the nut/fret and bridge saddle. The only differences are in the 'feel' under the fingers, ie the grain and whether or not it is lacquered.
I don't know if I agree but I don't think the average player could hear the difference either so I'm not disagreeing either. I'm one of those people who strongly believe in the wood you make a guitar out of does affect the sound (to a very small degree). The strings don't vibrate in isolation they interact with the neck as a whole which in turn vibrates and affects how the strings themselves vibrate as part of the whole system. Possibly the fact that a fingerboard had been glued on has more affect than the type of timber it's made from?

Glueing adds a little to the stiffness of the neck which was one of the concerns I have about carbon rods in them which @godofthunder59 instantly confirmed. It would be interesting to try a range of necks on the same body and measure the output to see how much of a difference it does or doesn't make.

Juxtaposition on this might be hifi stands, I like my Hifi and spend too much on it (or did spend). There's a big and long standing argument on whether or not the stand it's sat on makes a difference to it's sound, I'm in the yes camp because I can or could hear it albeit very slightly but it is there. When I was in Liverpool Uni I asked the doc who was teaching us Electricity and Magmatism his thoughts. He eventually got back to me with the theory that micro vibrations running through the stand made the individual components vibrate which in turn made micro changes to the magnetic field around them, which in turn affected the overall sound. Only a theory and the only thing he could think of to explain it but it's plausible I think
 
I'll be interested in your experience with these.

Interesting! How does the price compare to that of the real thing?
The price for the Rosewood is slightly more expensive than real Rosewood but it doesn't come under the CITES regulations and no tropical rain forest was harmed in their making.

There's a thread on it in the Luthier forum which is well worth a read if you're interested Rocklite: The Latest Synthetic Ebony For Fingerboards
 
Last edited:
I hate dual truss rods, they really weaken a headstock joint, I think they create more problems than they solve. My necks are usually 5 laminates of straight grained quarter sawn which should be stable as a single piece.

Again out of interest I received two fret boards this morning, tell me what you think of the quality and more importantly what they are

View attachment 3011522

View attachment 3011523

View attachment 3011524
Are you staining the one in the last pic?
 
More thinking about the tower of jank. I already have a ToneHammer, which is a preamp. I don't see any reason I can't hijack a 100 watt or so Class D power amp from a stereo or even a car stereo to power the tower. If it costs more than about $50, I may as well just spend the money and get a used real bass head, though.
What kind of power are you looking at?
 
I don't know if I agree but I don't think the average player could hear the difference either so I'm not disagreeing either. I'm one of those people who strongly believe in the wood you make a guitar out of does affect the sound (to a very small degree). The strings don't vibrate in isolation they interact with the neck as a whole which in turn vibrates and affects how the strings themselves vibrate as part of the whole system. Possibly the fact that a fingerboard had been glued on has more affect than the type of timber it's made from?

I think the neck material has some influence, but that's about as far as it goes.
 
I would actually suspect the anesthesia. The explanation is way too sciencey for here. (And I am rarely reluctant to provide a sciencey answer)

I work in an anesthesia department, and seriously doubt that...

Most modern anestetic drugs used today are metabolised very fast and don't give such a late allergic response. Since most anestetic drugs are either administered iv or inhaled (except nerve blocks, which are local), you will see an allergic reaction almost immediately. If a drug was accidentially administered subcutaneous you might see a local reaction - But then you wouldn't be administering an iv line on the arm having surgery.

Some local anestetic drugs used for nerve blocks may give an allergic reaction - But I've never seen this occur that late after surgery, as it usually occurs shortly after the block.
 
I work in an anesthesia department, and seriously doubt that...

Most modern anestetic drugs used today are metabolised very fast and don't give such a late allergic response. Since most anestetic drugs are either administered iv or inhaled (except nerve blocks, which are local), you will see an allergic reaction almost immediately. If a drug was accidentially administered subcutaneous you might see a local reaction - But then you wouldn't be administering an iv line on the arm having surgery.

Some local anestetic drugs used for nerve blocks may give an allergic reaction - But I've never seen this occur that late after surgery, as it usually occurs shortly after the block.

We actually ended up back in A&E on Tuesday night when her arm started swelling badly. We eventually ended up back in the fracture clinic to get her cast sorted and the surgeon who operated was there. He said that the rash had started to appear during the time she was in the recovery room. Why they did nothing about it is another thing altogether!