'Bulbous' headstock question.

aceonbass · Post by **aceonbass** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:58 am

I prefer this approach.

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:07 am

Luv that bass!

aceonbass · Post by **aceonbass** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:11 am

It luvs you too Scott. I told it that it would see you in August and it got so excited

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:47 am

Yeah, I prefer the Dane approach as well. I pulled out my S/8 a couple days ago. Its way neck-heavy compared to Dane's because the S4 tuners are heavier. Plus I like the idea of having small tuners for the octave strings. The only problem is that you can't reverse the octave strings like you can on an S/8.

And yes Mark, the S/8 headstock is a little busy looking. It reminds me of the underside of a pregnant dog.

aceonbass · Post by **aceonbass** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:03 am

I'm sure someone like Ted could do a potato head conversion on an S8. You could even get walnut wings. It'd definitely be easier than mine was since mine had to be lengthened first. There are a number of benefits to having the octave string first too such as lower, more consistent action.

gearhed289 · Post by **gearhed289** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:03 am

Jeff, you KNOW a V63 will cure that neck-heavy feeling....

hieronymous · Post by **hieronymous** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:17 am

Anyone ever hear the expression, "If you don't have something nice to say, then don't say anything at all"?

I guess I'm getting too thin-skinned. I'm outta here. Please don't use my pictures of my basses without my permission.

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:30 am

Why yes it would, Tom!

I agree Dane. But I don't play mine enough (yet) to warrant anything so drastic. If I was way into playing my 8 banger, I'd have an easier time justifying the mods.

I like potatoheads!

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:38 am

WOOT!!! Me gets to play the magic 8-string again!!!

aceonbass · Post by **aceonbass** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:49 am

Unless something was deleted, no one said anything negative about Harry's bass.

teeder · Post by **teeder** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:55 am

Did I miss something here?

Anyway, I really like that 5-ply potatohead!

seabass · Post by **seabass** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:00 am

Question for Sean - did you reshape the headstock yourself? Refin as well? Either way, nice job!

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:24 am

Well...I guess I said the S/8 headstock looks like the underside of a pregnant dog, and that could be taken as an insult.

So sorry if I offended you Harry. As with all Ricks, they're great basses. Great tone, well-made, comfortable, reliable, etc. And many people prefer the S/8 headstock to the potatohead. It is nice that the strings can be reversed too.

hieronymous · Post by **hieronymous** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:20 am

It's cool, I probably overreacted. If my pictures hadn't been used I probably wouldn't have gotten upset. I read it as, "I thought my bass looked funny until I saw this one!" You can say whatever you want, just please don't use my pictures of a bass that I love to illustrate your point.

In my own life I try and stay positive, but I can be just as critical and sarcastic as anyone else. I know that you all love Rickenbackers, so carry on. I just need a break.

P.S. the "underside of a pregnant dog" remark was funny.

charlyg · Post by **charlyg** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:33 am

What I have found on this forum is, the chances are, MOST "offenses" are innocent, and really not meant to put someone down. I call it the RR factor. It helps......