Lightweight headstock
- slowlearner
- Blackwood
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:43 pm
- Location: Western Sydney
- Contact:
Lightweight headstock
I'm always looking for crazy new ways of reducing weight. What I'm thinking about doing is using a core of kauri pine as a headstock. This is going on a 32" scale 5 string bass. So string tension is a little lower than your regular bass.
The timber is 50yo, well dried and extremely stable. It'll be scarf jointed on the neck with a died maple veneer on the back and a face veneer of liquidambar (as hard as rock maple). I'll then add another veneer to the back of the headstock/joint once the scarf joint is finished. What I'm concerned about is whether I'm substantially weakening the neck by doing this?
Thoughts? Concerns?
The timber is 50yo, well dried and extremely stable. It'll be scarf jointed on the neck with a died maple veneer on the back and a face veneer of liquidambar (as hard as rock maple). I'll then add another veneer to the back of the headstock/joint once the scarf joint is finished. What I'm concerned about is whether I'm substantially weakening the neck by doing this?
Thoughts? Concerns?
Pete
Re: Lightweight headstock
Why do you want to reduce headstock weight? Keep in the mind the effect it will have on sustain.
Martin
- slowlearner
- Blackwood
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:43 pm
- Location: Western Sydney
- Contact:
- DarwinStrings
- Blackwood
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:27 pm
- Location: Darwin
Re: Lightweight headstock
Google Ken Parker. There are a few bits and pieces of info and interviews out there on his light weight construction for electrics and you may be able to take something from that, he does do a bit of CF though to bring the stiffness up as well, something about raising the neck and body modes to higher frequencies.
Jim
Jim
Life is good when you are amongst the wood.
Jim Schofield
Jim Schofield
Re: Lightweight headstock
I have some issues with lightening the headstock too much.
If the material is light, this is indicative of using a soft wood, when using a soft wood, there is allowance for things to move (oscillate / vibrate) under tension, when things move under tension they introduce new harmonics, whether this be good or bad is the unknown.
If the material is light, this is indicative of using a soft wood, when using a soft wood, there is allowance for things to move (oscillate / vibrate) under tension, when things move under tension they introduce new harmonics, whether this be good or bad is the unknown.
Re: Lightweight headstock
Do a bit of research on Steinberger guitars......note that while they are headless instruments there's alot of carbon fibre and other modern materials also used in these guitars.
Martin
Re: Lightweight headstock
I tend to think of the neck and headstock as a dirty big energy sink. If the neck and headstock are free to vibrate then they're going to soak up string energy....something which on a guitar is generally in short supply.simso wrote:I have some issues with lightening the headstock too much.
If the material is light, this is indicative of using a soft wood, when using a soft wood, there is allowance for things to move (oscillate / vibrate) under tension, when things move under tension they introduce new harmonics, whether this be good or bad is the unknown.
Martin
- Bob Connor
- Admin
- Posts: 3132
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:43 pm
- Location: Geelong, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Lightweight headstock
I agree totally Martin.
A lead neck and headstock would be perfect if it wasn't so heavy.
regards
A lead neck and headstock would be perfect if it wasn't so heavy.
regards
Re: Lightweight headstock
Absolutley correct, and I do not disagree, I do not understand why gibson uses mahogany for necks rather than maple for that exact reasonkiwigeo wrote:I tend to think of the neck and headstock as a dirty big energy sink. If the neck and headstock are free to vibrate then they're going to soak up string energy....something which on a guitar is generally in short supply.
- Bob Connor
- Admin
- Posts: 3132
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:43 pm
- Location: Geelong, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Lightweight headstock
Another reason why ebony is such a good fingerboard.
-
- Kauri
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:04 pm
- Location: Montreal, Qc, Canada
- Contact:
Re: Lightweight headstock
kiwigeo wrote:Why do you want to reduce headstock weight? Keep in the mind the effect it will have on sustain.
Yep ! I am actually adding weigth to my headstock !
I have studies to prove it
You want the energy to go back into your guitar neck and body, not to let it go in a lightweight headstock.
- slowlearner
- Blackwood
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:43 pm
- Location: Western Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Lightweight headstock
I'm sure that's true on acoustic instruments... but electric bass is a whole nother kettle of ferrets.kiwigeo wrote:I tend to think of the neck and headstock as a dirty big energy sink. If the neck and headstock are free to vibrate then they're going to soak up string energy....something which on a guitar is generally in short supply.simso wrote:I have some issues with lightening the headstock too much.
If the material is light, this is indicative of using a soft wood, when using a soft wood, there is allowance for things to move (oscillate / vibrate) under tension, when things move under tension they introduce new harmonics, whether this be good or bad is the unknown.
If ever there was an instrument that had enough sustain or in the immortal words of my mother... "cut it out, that's enough!". Ie. too much sustain. Added to that, we can go put enormous, fat, rod-core strings on em and we could go on holidays and come back and it'd still be ringing. Bass players spend their lives trying to damp the strings.
A bigger issue for us bass players is shoulder pain, balance and neck dive. Adding weight to the headstock exacerbates all these problems. Hence my desire to lessen the weight of the headstock.
Pete
Re: Lightweight headstock
One of the heaviest things in a bass head stock is the tuners themselves. Switch to the Hipshot Ultralite tuners. Two versions at the bottom of the page. They are the ones I use on my U-Bass.
- needsmorecowbel
- Blackwood
- Posts: 974
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 7:48 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Lightweight headstock
One of my favourite basses of all time is the Gibson Ripper... Had never really thought about the Maple construction of the ones up until 1977 until now; thanks Steve.simso wrote:I do not understand why gibson uses mahogany for necks rather than maple for that exact reason
Allen's on the ball with hipshot ultralites. Nothing worse than super heavy tuners to tip the balance of the bass....
Stu
Re: Lightweight headstock
Gotoh also make a range of light bass tuners in traditional styles. Perhaps consider ditching the headstock altogether, my own bass is a 30" headless, perfect balance even when seated, a great lounge bass. I am a metal worker so the hardware wasn't a problem but parts are available. Lighter woods in bass necks are certainly different, I made several necks for the same instrument (acoustic bass) from different woods. Rock maple, Brazilian mahogany, New Guinea rosewood and kwila. The kwila won for me, the solid sound of maple with complexity in tone of mahogany, it is dense, stiff and very stable but may prove too heavy dependent on design. Just something else to think about, good luck.
Garry.
Garry.
- slowlearner
- Blackwood
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:43 pm
- Location: Western Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Lightweight headstock
Actually I'm using rotomatic style guitar tuners. They're more than strong enough for a medium/short scale bass. I find them to be slightly lighter than an ultralight and about 5% of the price.Allen wrote:One of the heaviest things in a bass head stock is the tuners themselves. Switch to the Hipshot Ultralite tuners. Two versions at the bottom of the page. They are the ones I use on my U-Bass.
But yeah, lighter tuners was right where I started. I'm trying to move beyond that now into even lighter stuff. As for neck timber, I use vic ash... although I might do something crazy with the next build that isn't vic ash.
Pete
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 133 guests