Short, Dark and Handsome

[somatic]

Hi All,
 
I'll be coming into a bit of money soon, and am contemplating ordering a new bass. This is what I'm thinking about, and I have a few questions and opinions I'd like from everyone (tageed with *) before I ring and make enquiries about how to do it most cost effectively.
 
Body Small Standard
Body Woods Undecided, but tilting towards Walnut core, maple accents (pinstripe thickness) and either a wenge (preferred) or figured walnut top/rear. Not sure of the finish.
 
Neck Ebony laminates, 7 piece, with maple or purpleheart, 1.5 nut, ebony board, no inlays/dots, std al side markers. Satin finish.
Scale 30.75
Headstock Cone, bit smaller than std if possible. Standard Alembic logo
 
Tuners Hipshot Ultralites, black
Bridge Black, 17mm spacing, bird tail piece
 
Electronics I'd ideally like Series pickups and Hx, but only with a volume and balance. From other threads I've read, this isn't really an option, so maybe Fatboys and vol/bal. Pickups spaced like the Series, with the neck one up near the trussrod plate. I don't use the onboard tone controls much as I have a heap of versatility in my preamp.
Knobs Matching the top wood, either THG or a friend could turn them up here.
 
The sound I'm looking for, is the biggest possible out of a short scale instrument, especially in terms of fundamental tones, but without an unnaturally low-end balance, if that makes sense. I still want the rich midrange and top end, so I've been leaning towards the maple. Would the purpleheart neck lams be a bonus, a negative or just a waste of money d'ya reckon? What about the body woods? I know that have a much lesser contribution to the overall sound.
 
Any other comments or opinions? I want to keep it simple, not flashy, but still get the biggest return on my money soundwise, I like the look of dark basses and prefer the short scales.

[adriaan]

Here are my two cone headstocks, one regular (Epic) and one narrow cut (Spoiler). Both pictures are taken from the same photo, with the basses fairly close together, I just removed the excess stuff.  

   

  Ah, the Spoiler was closer to the camera, so the headstock appears to be bigger, and it's a medium scale as opposed to the long scale Epic. The string spacing is just about the same on both in reality. The tuners on the Spoiler are Schallers, and the point of the headstock is not wide enough to hold the logo.  (Message edited by adriaan on October 07, 2004)

[adriaan]

Just found another picture where the camera was aiming between the basses, so you get a better impression of what it looks like from the front:    

   

  (Message edited by adriaan on October 07, 2004)

[adriaan]

And for posterity's sake, here's the flipside of the headstock. You can see what they had to do to the A and D tuners ...
 

 
Apologies for the poor blurred image.

[malthumb]

Darn.....thought this thread was about me.  Oh well.....Carry on.
 

[bracheen]

James, I was having a long dreary day til now. Thanks for the laugh.
 
Sam

[adriaan]

Well, it sure isn't me. But then I'm not tall, blonde and ugly either. Well, I'm not tall. And I'm not blonde.
 
Good call, James.

[palembic]

wide, blonde and ugly?
hehehehehehehe
PTBO

[bob]

Thanks, James, I really needed that (really).

[kmh364]

I'm still laughing, James! And it's been days, LOL! You forgot ...and modest LOL!

[somatic]

Wow, I've really been tardy replying to this thread. I showed the spec to a luthier I know locally, and he's going to make one to similar spec (with wenge neck lams).  
 
However, looks like I'll be visiting the US next year, so I'll drop in and visit the factory and discuss specs in detail and place an order (via D. Burgess). I'll also drop off the Series 1 for a refinish and maybe the new PF7 electronics.
 
Adriaan, thanks for posting the pix. I see the difference in the headstocks and prefer the one on the right.
 
Malthumb, thanks for the laugh.  Paul (Palembic) almost summed me up too, but wide, blonde and ugly? should be wide, bald and ugly!!!!