Page 8 of 32
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:50 am
by walker
Colonel Sanders wrote:There will be very little left of the original RM1999 the way it is going!
The element of replacing existing parts of the bass stops at the top body wing and the reblocking of the neck wood through the body, so there's really no "way it is going." Plus, given how many incorrect hardware & electronic parts it had when I got it, it's actually much closer to it's original condition with the period correct parts I've added to it.
Just for funzies (or because I'm OCD, whatever) here's the RM broken down into it's parts.
top body wing
bottom body wing
neck & headstock plank
fretboard
frets (considered one item)
nut
nameplate
truss rods (2)
headstock wings (2)
tuners (4)
ferules (4)
pickups (2) (calling the 4 piece horseshoe pickup one item for simplicity)
tailpiece
bridge
saddles (4)
mute
mute pins (2)
horseshoe pickup surround
pickguard
thumbrest
jackplate
jack
vol/tone knobs (4)
vol/tone pots (4)
tone capacitors (2)
low-cut capacitor
pickup selector switch
cloth wiring
strap pins (2)
Fireglo color finish
OHSC
= 52 parts
So, if you subtract the original top wing, the original paint, and give a demerit for the neck being comprised of partially new wood
= 49 correct vintage parts
which would come to about 97% "legit RM vintage."
I think I can hang with that.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:55 am
by walker
s4001 wrote:True story about George Washington. I was there, I heard it.
Cool. Good to know that someone else can back up what I learned in school.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:42 pm
by Colonel Sanders
walker wrote:Colonel Sanders wrote:There will be very little left of the original RM1999 the way it is going!
The element of replacing existing parts of the bass stops at the top body wing and the reblocking of the neck wood through the body, so there's really no "way it is going." Plus, given how many incorrect hardware & electronic parts it had when I got it, it's actually much closer to it's original condition with the period correct parts I've added to it.
Just for funzies (or because I'm OCD, whatever) here's the RM broken down into it's parts.
top body wing
bottom body wing
neck & headstock plank
fretboard
frets (considered one item)
nut
nameplateh
truss rods (2)
headstock wings (2)
tuners (4)
ferules (4)
pickups (2) (calling the 4 piece horseshoe pickup one item for simplicity)
tailpiece
bridge
saddles (4)
mute
mute pins (2)
horseshoe pickup surround
pickguard
thumbrest
jackplate
jack
vol/tone knobs (4)
vol/tone pots (4)
tone capacitors (2)
low-cut capacitor
pickup selector switch
cloth wiring
strap pins (2)
Fireglo color finish
OHSC
= 52 parts
So, if you subtract the original top wing, the original paint, and give a demerit for the neck being comprised of partially new wood
= 49 correct vintage parts
which would come to about 97% "legit RM vintage."
I think I can hang with that.
You forgot the dot markers! 53 parts...
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:13 pm
by walker
Colonel Sanders wrote:You forgot the dot markers! 53 parts...
I know, right? And I forgot all the screws for the PG, HS surround, toaster, jackplate, and tuners. So yeah. More math to do there.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:28 am
by Colonel Sanders
walker wrote:Colonel Sanders wrote:You forgot the dot markers! 53 parts...
I know, right? And I forgot all the screws for the PG, HS surround, toaster, jackplate, and tuners. So yeah. More math to do there.
Now do the ratio with regards to the mass instead of the part count
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:46 pm
by walker
HA HA! OK, you can think of as many ways to dissect my little project here as you need to; meanwhile I'll be working on my RM1999!
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:43 am
by teeder
Looks good, Mark!
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:49 am
by T.A.R.
walker wrote:HA HA! OK, you can think of as many ways to dissect my little project here as you need to; meanwhile I'll be working on my RM1999!
I think it's a great project and still a "Grail" bass Best of luck Mark!
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:29 am
by RickyBubba
Looking really good, but I probably would have gone overkill and got some super fancy AAA+ wood.
The final result will be really nice I'm sure!
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:37 pm
by walker
Thanks, guys. As tempting as it is to go fancy with the wood, I'm being mindful of what the best match is for the bottom wing, which means this 'A' piece might actually be too nice. Will have to see how the 'B' piece compares once I get it cut down.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 6:30 pm
by wints
It's an interesting project without doubt.
Let's be honest here however...
Replacing a whole top wing, even if for the practical purposes stated here, (and fully valid in this case) is going to significantly compromise originality. There's no way around that no matter how you dress it up. A vintage instrument's body and finish remain the cornerstone to most, especially when considering the validity of such an instrument, and although practical use should obviously trump aesthetic, let's not be in any way be thinking that losing half of the original wood is a minor tinkering.
The end result is going to be a working, great looking bass. But, for many, how much of an RM1999 it is, is going to be very much a subjective
interpretation.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:00 pm
by walker
Whatever suits you Wints. You make the call for yourself, but challenging me on "being honest" isn't in your jurisdiction.
It's an RM 1999. It was in terrible condition when I got it, and it's going to be in much better condition when I'm done with it. So much so that anyone outside of this thread is going to be hard pressed to be able to tell that anything was ever wrong with it, or that any part of it is "invalid." I'm proud of the job I'm doing here, and there's really not much that anyone can do to change that in spite of their best efforts.
Spare me the "reality check." You'd think I was completely deluded, trying desperately to convince myself that my plate of dried out onions is actually a bowl of sweet strawberries. I can't stress enough how little use I have for this opinionated perspective being passed off as an authoritative final say in the matter.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:26 pm
by walker
And as long as we're "being honest", I'll gladly take this any day of the week:
over whatever that disfigured thing is that occupies the top half of that Green monster of yours.
Oh... did I invalidate something you're proud of? Shoot... drag when that happens.
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 8:46 pm
by bassduke49
Now, boys . . . .
Re: (We now join this RM 1999 restoration already in progres
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:18 pm
by walker
No, that whole opinion-presented-as-fact bit is manipulative nonsense that can take a flying leap as far as I'm concerned. An opinion belongs to one person and is equal to all other opinions. It's not something that can hold hierarchal precedent that someone else should bow down to.
"Let's be honest."
Yeah.