• 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.

To dual or not to dual ?

MrArose13

MrArose13

Guest
Commercial User
Aug 15, 2011
571
171
Atlanta Georgia
www.rosebudbasses.com
Disclosures
Owner/Luthier:RoseBud Basses & Guitars LLC
#1
Hello to all:

Long time listener, first time caller... ha ha. So here's the topic (should be a fun one) 5 string bass.. two truss rods or one and why. I got to thinking and thats when it all went wrong. It's all about stablizeing the wood with adjustability for optimal playing, right. This is not my first build, but it is my sceond 5 string and what I do here will be my standard. Now the over analyzetion, my necks are no less than five pices and go through the body. This in it self makes a nice stable neck (paying attention to grain direction). My first 5 string with a 7 pice neck, (due to money available for the bild) only has one. I wanted two, cuse that's what you do for highend 5's, but why? I don't rember my reasoning, but I did parallel the truss rod with two graphite beams. It has been compleat now for over a year, the neck is good and I don't think I could ever part with it. I've got more but I feal I'm rambling, so give me some feedback.
Today is a shop day trying to finish a 4 string prototype but I'll be looking for coments. When this 4 is done I'll do a build thread for the 5 in question and more. (I try to do more than one at a time). On topic, dual or not to dual, let me have it.

(my spell check won't work sorry)
 
#4
I've never needed a second trussrod, even on the fretless 6-string bass necks I've built

maybe if you were to have a dual TR design where the TR's are aligned with the edge of the fretboard instead of parallel to the neck centerline you just might realize a miniscule amount of adjustment benefit, but would it be significant enough to justify the added weight, work, and expense? IMO the answer is no, but YMMV based on your design, construction methods, wood selection/orientation, and neck shape

all the best,

R
 
#8
It's no more a gimmick than carbon fiber is a gimmick. Strictly speaking, it's not a necessity, as you say, and as Rod has remarked. You can build ERBs with one rod and perhaps never have a problem.

Personally, if I send out a 6 string and the customer decides to go low F# and puts a .165 on it, I don't want to get it back if he maxxes a single rod out trying to get a setup. Two rods can give you more correction with more headroom, and they can give you subtle setup tweaks though I would guess most of the time both rods are adjusted the same amount since that is the simplest way to use them. Tweaking dual rods can be a bit more arcane than a single rod. I have built an 8.5lb six string with two rods, so I am not worried about the extra weight.

I would say most builders who use two either have had an experience where a single rod had been maxxed out, or they foresee such an experience and put an additional rod in there just in case.

I'd say it's neither a gimmick nor a necessity. Like carbon fiber, individual builders will conclude whether they think it's providing a benefit in their basses or not -- and that opinion may change over time.
 
#10
Wait.. Same thing, right. It's good to have a safty net when you can't replace the neck. How about the be for mentioned aliment?

"TR design where the TR's are aligned with the edge of the fretboard instead of parallel to the neck centerline"


Sorry to all regulars still trying to figure out how to work the forum. If ther's a tutorial I could use one, and my spelling sucks. Enjoying every min. though.
 
#11
I think I am comfortable with one truss rod in a 5 string neck so I don't do two there. There I think you run up against the rod being too close to the edge and not being able to carve away as much in the neck shape. I believe Rickenbacker uses 2 even in a 4 string so there is precedent for that.

As for parallel to centerline versus edges, you need to consider where the forces are being applied to figure out what they will do to the geometry of the neck w.r.t. the strings. Rod's insight (I believe) is that putting rods aligned with the edge will give you a different force profile, perhaps allowing you to get a slightly different setup for the bass and treble sides of the neck. This may be desirable in really tweaking a setup. I have done them both ways. The edge parallel rods did not make a noticeable difference in the necks I built them with.
 
#12
MrArose13 said:
Thank you FBB, well said. So we'r talking it's more of a safty net, if you will, and mare a 6 string thing. What about a 5?
Click to expand...

My old Tobias 5 mounts 2 tr and yet it resents climate changes quite a bit. My Wal mk3 5er mounts only one tr and no cf spars. Yet said neck doesn't even blink in the same conditions.

If stability is what you're after IMO proper neck construction plays a bigger role than the number of truss rods and cf used.
 
#13
FBB Custom said:
Rod's insight (I believe) is that putting rods aligned with the edge will give you a different force profile, perhaps allowing you to get a slightly different setup for the bass and treble sides of the neck.
Click to expand...

that is what I was thinking while writing

similarly, there's those that prefer the stiffening bars to be parallel to the TR, and those who prefer them to be parallel to the neck edge. my suggestion would be to build a few necks each way and discover which method you prefer, or in the case there is no perceived difference ... which method is more time/labor effective to install


the great part of building your own is that you can experiment and discover what your hands and ears tell you works best for you, and then duplicate that on future builds. you're set free from the limitations of what various builders offer.

all the best,

R
 
#14
FBB Custom said:
Rod's insight (I believe) is that putting rods aligned with the edge will give you a different force profile, perhaps allowing you to get a slightly different setup for the bass and treble sides of the neck. This may be desirable in really tweaking a setup.
Click to expand...

I have before run into a situation with a 6-string fretless where this would have been nice, simply because the string travel during vibration is larger for the heavier strings than it is for the treble strings. So in theory a little more forward bow on the bass side would have helped.

Not sure this would be the case on a fretted.
 
#15
If you are building with "nice stable neck (paying attention to grain direction)". Then I would say 1 and no CF needed.

Personally my 6 string builds (including fan fret) only ever do dual action and no CF, and after several years not had a problem yet. But I do use Wenge, Purpleheart and Hard Maple in my necks, so to me the qualities and cured nature of the wood are an important consideration.

Good luck,
Dirk
 
#18
Thanks Bob C I was still trying to figure that out. Purpleheart and, or, wenge are in every one of my necks, I love everything about these woods, except the splinters:). I feel they do the same job as CF. Yeah I’m still not sure why I did that. Except trying to compensate for not having another TR, but I had to buy the CF so I could have bought another TR. I’m sure I’ll remember one day but it is what it is and plays great. I haven’t really made my own opinion yet on dual truss rods, so let’s hear some more of yours

I may have double posted this trying to quote myself. I really need a tutorial if there is one... But I’ll keep at it and drive everyone crazy :)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back