Page 3 of 7
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:13 am
by jingle_jangle
Back a couple of years ago, I remember trying to define the term in real terms, and I posted to one of Dale's threads (in complimentary fashion)that a person should not call himself a luthier until he's built a professional-quality hollowbody instrument with good tone. At that time, Dale was a luthier, and I hadn't made it yet.
That may be a bit extreme and perhaps too traditional, based upon European guild practices, but it does give us a perspective, I think.
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:17 am
by Lost Coyotes
You da man, Paul. Humility is a very endearing personality trait.
I'm no way even close to a luthier, and wouldn't put big round head screws in my bass, much less anyone elses.
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:38 am
by Tylendal
lol, you guys crack me up
I had bought the bass on ebay, and the seller wouldn't sell it internationally, so i had my friend in seattle pick it up for me, and he told me about the bridge lift, and said he knew a guy who could fix it, so I found out how much, and asked him to go ahead, these are the pictures he sent me, and
Paul, I had the same reaction at first, esp since I had told my friend to show the guy the thread about how to do the 2 screw fix,
but then after i got over my initial shock at the sheer overkill of it, they kinda grew on me, besides, what's done is done, at least it isn't going to go anywhere near liftsville -_^,
i think 3 is a pretty cool number, the screws fit between the strings, after seeing what he'd done, i was just happy that they sat flush on the tail piece
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:59 am
by jingle_jangle
OK, Devin, now just replace them with countersunk ones and you're out of "Transformer" territory...
C'mon, c'mon...
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:09 am
by lyle_from_minneapolis
Or...
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:38 am
by jingle_jangle
Now we're in roofer territory.
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:04 am
by geddeeee
LOL!!!
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:05 pm
by mfb
Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:15 pm
by beatlefreak
That's great one! Ha!
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:51 am
by jwr2
I can't believe they only put 3 screws in the c64 basses ... the 5 screw models pull up fast enough ... and they charge extra for those basses ...
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:03 am
by ilan
"I can't believe they only put 3 screws in the c64 basses ... the 5 screw models pull up fast enough ... and they charge extra for those basses ..."
Three screws is vintage correct for '64. If they'd put 5 bolt tailpiece we'd all be whining that it's incorrect. Actually I'm surprised no one complains about the post-'85 compression truss rods
By the way, the
3 screws tailpiece on the real 1964 Ric currently on eBay is showing
no lift at all after 43 years.
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:18 am
by jwr2
then Ric should use a 3 hole tailpiece that doesn't pull up ... DUH!!!
why would anybody pay several hundred extra for a ric bass that is more likely to have a critical part fail?
I had an old 68 with a 3 hole tailpiece that did not pull up at all ... so a REAL re-issue bass should come with a tailpiece that does not pull up ... Right?
instead of making fun of those who add extra screws we should make fun of those who just let the tailpiece pull up ...
or why does Ric continue to make basses that have a critical part that is prone to failure?
Perhaps the consumers are blinded by the "We want vintage" vision?
as for me I put big strong screws in the tailpiece ...
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:31 am
by ilan
"... why does Ric continue to make basses that have a critical part that is prone to failure?"
Because some of us are willing to pay more for it?
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:37 am
by jingle_jangle
"...instead of making fun of those who add extra screws we should make fun of those who just let the tailpiece pull up ..."
Not making fun of the people or the concept, Jeff.
It's the execution that's abysmal.
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:55 am
by jwr2
ya ... I was ranting again ...
