13 6 (he asks on behalf of everyone else who will be wondering the same thing)? I get the VI, but not the XIII.
13 6 (he asks on behalf of everyone else who will be wondering the same thing)? I get the VI, but not the XIII.
Hah, well, 13 is one of those numbers that keeps coming up in my life (anniversary, son's birthday, and more). So it's become something of a lucky number. So when I was trying to think what to call this one... I thought some other roman numeral would be cool, since I definitely wanted the "VI". I then realised it was my 13th guitar currently. So it was a no-brainer.Originally Posted by Simon Barden
I discovered something interesting. The post holes for the TOM bridge are the same width apart as the posts on my Squier Bass VI bridge (I have a StayTrem on my Bass VI, so the original bridge for it is spare).
The only problem with just using it is that the holes are far too deep, so there is no way to adjust the height.
As I see it, I have 2 options:
1. use washers or something to lift the height generally, then make finer height adjustments with the saddle adjustment screws
2. find "something" to put in the holes to make them more shallow. Either short grub screws the right size to actually screw down into the post holes, or just something that will "fit" but stay steady inside the hole for the offset bridge posts to sit on.
The reason I would even consider this effort is that I really don't like TOM bridges, especially on offsets... plus... having something with saddles with individual height adjustment might be invaluable to getting it to play nicely. Also, the saddles slots are already set up for Bass VI strings.
All this will be academic if I can't get the E string to work with the incredibly short distance between nut and tuner.
There is someone on a Bass VI facebook group that apparently has one of these set up as a Bass VI totally stock (except for he routed and changed the pickup spacing and added a custom pick guard). This gives me hope, but I just don't know how, heh.
I know it looks super weird with no pick guards or electronics...
But even with only like 15 minutes spent on adjustments, it plays pretty dang nice already!!
I didn't even have to use the smaller .084 strings... I went straight to the Fender .100's.
heh, it's pretty hard to turn the low E tuner, so I might need to invest in some better quality tuners. Maybe even something locking.
I can't wait to get the electronics soldered up and see what this is capable of.
It's looking very likely that this will be worth spending some money on the pickups and electronics.
----------
OK, so actual question time:
With the copper shielding, I have seen some where it's just on the pick guard, and some where it's all through the cavities as well.
Is that needed? I don't think I got anywhere enough copper with the kit when I ordered it (I ticked the add on) to do the cavities...
I think it depends a lot on what pickups you go with. I tend to play it safe and shield everything. A role of copper tape is not that expensive (I also use it when welding stainless). It's pretty easy to find on uncle ebay. As I understand it, aluminium tape is just as effective.
To shield, you need to shield everything fully, so you create a 'Faraday cage' with the smallest gaps in it possible. The shielding all needs to be grounded, or it has almost no affect. Copper on the underside of the pickguard will be grounded by contact with the grounded pots. Run the copper up over the edges of the control/pickup cavities so that it comes into contact with the copper on the underside of the pickguard to ground it.
Whilst you can use copper or aluminium, it's best not to mix the two if possible, as dissimilar metals can corrode each other if they get damp. You won't be dipping the guitar in water, but sweat and humidity could creep in over time and start to eat away at the shielding.
As Colin said, copper tape is cheap and easy to buy.
I'm wondering if you have any of the thick winding of the bottom E string going on to the post (that would definitely make it hard to wind) or whether it's just the thickness of the central core that's doing that. The 0.084"s would be easier to use.
It's not the quality of the tuners that's an issue, as they are pretty decent tuners that come with the kit, but to make it easier, you'd need tuners with a higher gear ratio. You can check the ration on yours, but on a kit tuner I have, it takes 15 turns of the peg to rotate the post once. 15:1 is already pretty good. To make turning the tuner easier, you'd need to go up to 18:1 tuners (16:1 isn't going to be enough of a step to make a difference). You can get 18:1 tuners, but most aren't cheap. You'd get a 20% increase in mechanical advantage using them.
You could probably still get the locking Grover 406Cs at low cost from Pitbull as you've bought the kit, but I'm not sure how well the locking mechanism would grip the thicker bass string cores, especially the low E. The locking pin in the middle of the post is supposed to deform the string into a 'U' shape. If the central core of the string is much thicker than a standard low E, then I don't know how much the pin could deform the string by, and it may slip.
A wider tuning peg would also help, as you get more leverage, but the six-in-line style tuner holes normally haven't got the spacing for larger 3+3 style tuning pegs (you can normally find replacement tuning pegs in different shapes, so you don't have to make up a 6-in-line set from two 3+3 sets). But you could measure the spacing and see if wider tuner pegs would fit.
What about shielding paint for the cavities, then copper for the pick guard? Does that combo work?
Yeah, there is for sure a little of the thickest part of the winding on the peg.
The other strings are fine, but that E...
The problem with the .084s is that one of the first changes you really need to make on a Squier Bass VI is to up the string gauge as the .084s it comes with, the E is just too... floppy.
Last edited by tommycarlos; 26-08-2021 at 05:30 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote