New build experiment

mark5009

mark5009

Feb 17, 2018
375
689
4,551
Sydney, Oz
#1
Hi, all.

I thought I'd push the envelope a little for my next build. The basic idea is to make a 5-string, make it headless, ergonomic, and make it from as much reclaimed stuff as I can. I looked at the prices of the ABM and Hipshot systems and decided to have a go at making my own bridge and headpiece (how hard can it be? I have some 3mm brass, somewhere...) and use some off-the-shelf tuners. So one thing led to another and here is an initial design concept. It is multilayered and I'm going to have to do something interesting to make the tuners accessible, but that's the challenge, right?

The design basics are:

Scale: 864mm (34mm)
Frets: 24
Pups: 2x JBass actives with preamp
Bridge: shopmade

All comments welcome!

.. mark.

draft-v2.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gord_oh, fjbass78, gepettus and 3 others
#3
Ergonomic is a funny beast. Making an ergonomic design implies having a solid idea of "a better way that's more comfortable/less stressful than the usual" and a lot of would-be "ergo" turns out to be interesting-looking, but not that comfortable. Multiple prototypes might be required to really make progress on that front.

Sharp bends at both ends of the strings may be a practical problem. The short upper horn may also cause a balance issue, even with it being headless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BooDoggie, Blue_Whistle88 and Beej
#4
Ergonomic tends to be so personal as well. I like where this is going, but if you really want ergonomics, may be worth a few prototypes. :)

For me, the longer upper horn is about the distance to the nut that my arm has to reach. I also find that a 34" scale instrument in my lap that goes over the top apex of my knee at the 24th fret is most comfortable. I also get fussy around the point where my arm hangs over the body.

I recently designed a bass body that incorporated all of my comfort condiderations, and found the result to be hideous. Currently shelved while I think about it. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobro, Mister Boh, ctmullins and 1 other person
#6
Looks like you might have to use short screws that are on the centerline for securing the neck. You stand a good chance of having those neck screws hit the truss rod
 
#7
T_Bone_TL said:
... a lot of would-be "ergo" turns out to be interesting-looking, but not that comfortable. Multiple prototypes might be required to really make progress on that front.

Sharp bends at both ends of the strings may be a practical problem. The short upper horn may also cause a balance issue, even with it being headless.
Click to expand...

Very true re. the ergo. And I tend to make prototypes as a rule. I'm not convinced by this design, particularly the lower edge.

On the sharp bends for the strings, I suspect you are right, certainly for the head-end. I think I can get away with it at the tuners (there is this 3D model in my head that seems to work but I'll have to mock it up). Are you seeing the bending as a kink issue? A tuning issue? Wear? Or all of these? :)

As for the balance, I suspect that sort itself out with material choices, though again I'm going to need to mock it up. My idea is to have most of the weight in the center of the body, with some brass in the head to act as something of a counter-weight. That's the theory...

Thanks, for the feedback!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobro
#8
Beej said:
Ergonomic tends to be so personal as well. I like where this is going, but if you really want ergonomics, may be worth a few prototypes. :)

I recently designed a bass body that incorporated all of my comfort condiderations, and found the result to be hideous. Currently shelved while I think about it. :D
Click to expand...

I love that! Everything is a trade-off -- lighter weight = more comfort = less mass = different sustain properties -- and looks are such a subjective thing. Personally I'm not sure where my happy-spot lies. Curves, I like curves, but they have to be the right sort, not too much, not too little, but just right.

But I'm already thinking about changing design. Again :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beej
#9
mark5009 said:
On the sharp bends for the strings, I suspect you are right, certainly for the head-end. I think I can get away with it at the tuners (there is this 3D model in my head that seems to work but I'll have to mock it up). Are you seeing the bending as a kink issue? A tuning issue? Wear? Or all of these? :)
Click to expand...
Tuning and kinking (or kinking and tuning) top the list. I get the visual appear of the arc layout, but I tend towards thinking the musical function has got to be the priority. Wear is not much on my radar as I use tapewounds and don't particularly like roundwounds.
 
#10
Scoops said:
Looks like you might have to use short screws that are on the centerline for securing the neck. You stand a good chance of having those neck screws hit the truss rod
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads-up. I just checked the parts bin and the truss rod I'm going to use is 580mm, which overlaps with the first of the two in-line neck screws. I'm going to have to watch that!
 
#11
T_Bone_TL said:
Tuning and kinking (or kinking and tuning) top the list. I get the visual appear of the arc layout, but I tend towards thinking the musical function has got to be the priority. Wear is not much on my radar as I use tapewounds and don't particularly like roundwounds.
Click to expand...

Right. With this design the greatest angle for the strings are the outside string (B/G) at the bridge, both at 18deg (the head angle is 16deg as drawn). My thinking is a "standard" for headstock angles is 10-15deg so sneaking an extra degree or two wouldn't be too bad. I might have to rethink that a little...
 
#12
Pros: You are creative, confident and independent enough to conceive and build this instrument.
Cons: Tuning pegs must be turned by my right hand. That leaves a left hand to strike the strings while tuning.
In my opinion it resembles a canoe paddle. But subjective beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BooDoggie
#14
|||||||||||| <- evidently what my cat typed was autosaved last night....
mark5009 said:
Right. With this design the greatest angle for the strings are the outside string (B/G) at the bridge, both at 18deg (the head angle is 16deg as drawn). My thinking is a "standard" for headstock angles is 10-15deg so sneaking an extra degree or two wouldn't be too bad. I might have to rethink that a little...
Click to expand...
It's additive/compound, or you're really off into more interesting things that may cause trouble, or engineering/ergonomic challenges. That is, you are still going to need some drop in the vertical plane (in part to keep them from popping out sideways) to which you are adding the sideways / horizontal bend aspect. Vertical and horizontal being for the "instrument lying flat on a table" perspective.
 
#17
bassliner50 said:
Pros: You are creative, confident and independent enough to conceive and build this instrument.
Cons: Tuning pegs must be turned by my right hand. That leaves a left hand to strike the strings while tuning.
In my opinion it resembles a canoe paddle. But subjective beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Click to expand...

I love the canoe paddle! Given the Canadian in my life, probably something from my sub-concious floating to the surface, but I can see where you're coming from.

As for the con, isn't that the case with all headless designs? Seems to be the price you pay for entry
 
#20
Bill Whitehurst said:
Not to rain on your parade, but even headless, it will want more upper horn
to balance and the top tuner may end up under your forearm, at times.
Click to expand...

It's raining here, Bill, so I'm getting used to being wet :) You're not the first to mention the upper horn/balance issue so I'm thinking I really should change that.

And you may be right about the tuner, but I think it'll work in 3D. My inner model tells me it's okay, but I'm going to have to mock it up to be sure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back