Friday April 20 Lunch Report - Today is BASS Day!!!

[bassman]

Lunch: I am going to eat salad for lunch. Nothing special, Lettuce, onion and tomato, clean and cold.

Report: Thanks again for all of the replies. I know I don't respond individually, but don't be offended. I have been very busy at work this week. The Garage band post is one tool that is available to get music heard although I do miss the feel of a live band's performance.

I am declaring today to be BASS day because I am a bass player and I want to discuss some bass technology that has been left behind in the years since it was developed. Namely the innovation of the headless Steinberger bass back in 1981.
Here is a stock picture from the internet. Its not my bass but I do own one of these basses:


The big question that I have is why didn't this technology take off? They made a whole line of guitars too.
There are inherent advantages to these instruments in tuning and stability but what was the reason for them disappearing from the performing arena?

I use mine in playing situations that are exposed to weather. The Steinberger is a graphite composite and it supposedly will not warp from rain or temperature changes.
I like the sound of it but it is not a G&L. I do miss the resonance of wood and the look of the bass is sometimes "off-putting" so to speak.
I like the EMG pickups but I do wonder what it would sound like if it had a set of MFD pickups!

Would you think that G&L should ever explore the idea of a headless guitar?

It is often pointed out that bass players are more open to new technology than guitarists, but most bassists I see on TV have gone back to playing traditional Fender type bass designs. Whether they are Fender, Sadowsky or Mike Lull instruments ,they are all doing the same thing tone wise.

Here are some great sounding G&L basses:


I think that the MFDs are the best bass pickups that I have ever heard.
I use a G&L when I want to insure that I get a great tone live and one that will cut through on Youtube!

Thanks,
bassman

[darwinohm]

Bassman, I have really enjoyed you reports this week. The headless bass is a good question but I have never used one. I would be curious about the restringing and the tuning ease. I like the graphite concept and my Parker has a fiberglass or CF covered neck and it is the most stable neck of all my guitars but I'm not sure that is why. I have an Adamas Acoustic which is composite except for the neck. I like the sound of it. It would be fun to try a super light bass as I imagine the Steinberger would be. Guitar owners tend to be very traditional and so are the builders. I'm not sure about a headless guitar. How would it affect the balance?

You have a nice group of basses. Good photo.

I am just leaving to set up for our gig this weekend. Being it is bass day I would like to mention something I have recently observed. I recently purchased a used, as new, Carvin R-1000 bass amp combo with two tens. I also use a Goliath-II 4x10 and a SWR 15 single on this rig. The cleanness and definition is incredible at low volumes, much more than I was getting with my smaller amps. I posted on the bass forum and Ken Baker described it as "Headroom". I think he it right and I love this setup. A bit heavy to carry and setup but worth the effort. There is an advantage to power and moving air in my opinion. Have a great weekend-- Darwin

[louis cyfer]

i have one with the regular body, i don't like the little body, not comfortable to play. i think the availability of strings and bands like kajagoogoo making it popular were the downfall. a lot of people still use them, although the full size body is more popular now. even floyd made a trem system with drop in strings, balls on both end, didn't take of. the strings were in tune as soon as you put them in. very clever, but something is missing, and most stores don't stock the strings.

[louis cyfer]

happened again, i posted, and it was gone. i know i pushed the submit, and it took me to the thread like it always does. hmm. the post above is the reposting.

[bassman]

About restringing a Steinberger type bass; It is the easiest restring possible. I at first thought that strings would be hard to find , but with the internet, you can find them quite easily. There is no slack in the string and they tune up very quickly.
One of the big complaints with old Steinbergers is that the string claws (the part that grips the ball end) separate over time.
there are a number of aftermarket companies making replacement bridge claws out of more robust metal alloys.
The only way that I could see this happening is if you use the wrong ball end in the claw. The string balls are different sizes, with the larger intended for the bridge claw. I have one of the earlier Brooklyn made Steinbergers and it has a head fitting that will accommodate regular bass strings that you clamp down with a set screw and cut off the extra length. I have never tried regular strings on my Steinberger and soon after mine was made (1983) they went to the ball end only design for the head piece.

[willross]

The Steinberger's are great, undervalued instruments. I draw the line at Keytars... As for weather resistance, I'd go for a G&L with a toasted/chocolate neck. Apparently, they don't absorb water.


Cheers,

Will

[KenC]

The big question that I have is why didn't this technology take off?

Because the L-2000 came out the same year and made everything else sound lousy in comparison?

I was actuaully out looking for a Steinberger on the day I found my SB-1. The SB-1 had the lightness I needed (due to back problems) and felt better than any Steinberger I had played, so I went with the G&L.

What year and body wood are the L-1000 on the left in the picture? The middle of the sunburst looks a lot lighter than my 1980 'hog.

Ken

[Kit]

I think all it is with the Steinbergers is that it is very much associated with the 80s synth pop music period, and no one wants to be viewed as fixated on the 1980s. I think it has very little to do with the merit of the instrument itself, much like any number of decent inventions that went nowhere.

[yowhatsshakin]

I think all it is with the Steinbergers is that it is very much associated with the 80s synth pop music period, and no one wants to be viewed as fixated on the 1980s. I think it has very little to do with the merit of the instrument itself, much like any number of decent inventions that went nowhere.

That might be. But I remember none other than Bill Wyman playing one on the Stones' '82 Still Life European Tour and you'd be hard pressed to call the Stones synth pop ....

- Jos

[bassman]

What year and body wood are the L-1000 on the left in the picture? The middle of the sunburst looks a lot lighter than my 1980 'hog.

They are both Mahogany bodies on my L-1000s. They were made about 6 months apart in 1980. I actually swapped the neck of the L1k on the right(original neck is maple)with the black '83 L-2000 on the far right so I could play the L2k. It's original L2k neck has a bad truss rod.

I think all it is with the Steinbergers is that it is very much associated with the 80s synth pop music period, and no one wants to be viewed as fixated on the 1980s. I think it has very little to do with the merit of the instrument itself, much like any number of decent inventions that went nowhere.

That is very true. The look of the Steinberger screams 1980s! I get a few comments when I play it, but most people are fascinated by it because they have never seen anything like it. The look was ahead of its time. They no longer make the solid composite basses because it was more expensive to make them that way than to make a wood and graphite combination bass which is what the Synapse model is today.

-bassman

[Ken Baker]

It is often pointed out that bass players are more open to new technology than guitarists, but most bassists I see on TV have gone back to playing traditional Fender type bass designs. Whether they are Fender, Sadowsky or Mike Lull instruments ,they are all doing the same thing tone wise.

There's your answer. Traditional bass designs and tones are coming back into vogue.

Bass players, I think, do tend to embrace new technologies more easily that guitarists. By technologies I mean things like active onboard systems and knobs & switches & stuff. Just don't mess with the basic shape of thing. So we end up with the general shape of a Precision, Jazz, and the odd single-cut Tele. Sonically we do tend to push the folded paper wrapper, we just don't want to look the part.

Ken...

[RickT]

It is often pointed out that bass players are more open to new technology than guitarists ...

Hey now, I play guitar and I'm always open to new technology, as long as it's a faithful reproduction of vintage gear

RickT