Author Topic: Continuing the tailpiece centering discussion. (Read 1539 times)

jtussing · « **on:** March 11, 2007, 10:54:09 AM »

I thought I'd start a thread here so that we stop dirtying up Shim's FTC thread. The question to discuss here is: Why do some (most?) Alembics have a tailpiece that appears not to be centered against the neck laminates?

Some examples:

Pierre's stunning Stanley Clark

Mica has offered on several occasions that the tailpieces themselves are not perfectl symmetrical to begin with and the tailpieces are mounted in the optimum place for setup and playability, not where they will look the best aesthetically.

While I'm sure there has been an error somewhere in the past with a tailpiece, in most cases her explanation completely satisfies me. It has not satisfied everyone, so let's discuss here!

Regards,
Jim

crgaston · « **Reply #1 on:** March 11, 2007, 11:36:24 AM »

Mine looks like it's going to be off center a little bit, just based on the holes. What the final product will be, I have no idea. I am of two minds about it...on one hand, we have come to expect symmetry in manufactured items, and something being off-center like this can be percieved as a sign of shoddy attention to detail. On the other, I think it is evident that Alembic is NOT lax when it comes to craftsmanship. I mean, do we imagine that the elves spend countless hours on every other aspect of the instrument, then blindfold themselves and play a drunken game of pin-the-tailpiece-on-the-Series as a finishing touch? Of course not.

In all honesty, I never noticed any other tailpiece being off-center until it was pointed out to me. A small part of me will be occasionally annoyed by the fact that something is off-center, but for the most part it won't bother me.

What I am curious about is an explanation of the effects an off-center bridge has on playability vs. one that is centered. I can't see how it would make much difference, but I don't build instruments, either. The only thing I can think of is that with the wide variety of string spacings available, there will be slight amounts of human error in the hand-filed slots of both the bridge saddles and the tailpiece. Therefore, the location of the bridge, after filing, should be in the place with the least amount of average deviance from straight for ALL the strings. Other than that possibility, I have no clue.

What's yours look like, Jim?

mica · « **Reply #2 on:** March 11, 2007, 12:24:22 PM »

Thanks Jim. It is much more appropriate to keep the general discussion about tailpieces in the gereral discussions area.

I have more than once explained that the tailpiece is not a decorative part of the instrument. It serves an important function. The better aligned the strings are from the tailpiece to the bridge, the better the sound and sustain from the strings. The striaght line from the future string is easy to determine for tailpiece placement.

There is too much focus here on the tailpiece itself. It isn't a part floating in space, unrelated to the rest of the instrument. Take a look at a bass with tailpiece that is not centered compared to the neck laminates. Notice that if the tailpiece were centered according to the neck laminates, the strings would pull to one side, and they themsleves would cease to be centered. This would be visually much more disturbing than the tailpiece location.

So what you are noticing by virtue of the tailpiece placement is the very slight variation from the center of the neck laminates to the actual center of the bass, spread out over a typically 48 length. We do not consider this variation a defect.

As for Pierre-Yves' bass, he posted his bass on November 14 on a Showcase thread. It seemed he was enjoying his bass, until December 6, when he posted about the tailpiece being off center. The next day I responded to him, even offering that I felt his was more off center than usual and I offered the have a new assymetrical tailpiece made to improve the look. I haven't had any communication from Pierre-Yves regarding this offer, except for in his thread where he stated, Well, it's not so important, for me the sound is perfect, the tailpiece can wait, as the heaven !!!

Pierre-Yves' statement we are waiting for an objective and honnest answer from Mica seems strange to me, language barriers aside, because I felt I have addressed the matter not only objectively and honestly, but rather timely as well.

Charles, I was hoping you would see in the photo I posted after our tailpiece centering telephone discussion that indeed, the center mounting hole is farther to the treble side compard to the point of the tailpiece, so the amount of off-center viewing you should be anticipating is very little.

Although the instruments we make are expensive, they will never be perfect. You could pay twice or thrice the cost we charge now, and still they would not be perfect.

mica · « **Reply #3 on:** March 11, 2007, 12:33:59 PM »

Another important point: the tailpiece is installed with wood screws. If you prefer the look of skewed strings from the bridge to the tailpiece with a centered tailpiece, simply move the tailpiece slightly. I'll be happy to offer any advice for this procedure if you need assistance.

lidon2001 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 11, 2007, 01:05:44 PM »

I ask this only for the sake of discussion and because it's in my head:

In the wonderful video posted recently here, it was stated that building guitars is actually done with/by numbers. The tendency here is that the tail piece is towards the treble. What in the numbers causes this, and can they, the numbers, be checked/manipulated in the process to help minimize this offset?

I try to go through the process, neck blank, fingerboard attached, body wings in place, routed, then setup. What in numbers, and where, cause this?

Just curious,
T

(edit for spelling: i before e, except after c...)

(Message edited by lidon2001 on March 11, 2007)

crgaston · « **Reply #5 on:** March 11, 2007, 01:22:04 PM »

Yes, Mica, I do see that, now that you point it out. It is indeed going to be minimal, and will in no way detract from the instrument, in my opinion. I was initially a little concerned when I called you, but you have more than set my mind at ease. This is starting to become a bit of a tempest in a teacup, I think. Y'all do great work. Keep it up.

P.S. Did you get my email about the strings?
Charles

keith_h · « **Reply #6 on:** March 11, 2007, 01:50:47 PM »

I'm sure I will be corrected but I don't think it is the tail piece itself. You are dealing with a hand carved neck. This means there can be some variation from the original center line when the laminates are glued and the final center line after carving is complete. The bridge and tail piece are centered to the post carving center line if I understand things correctly.

Keith

dannobasso · « **Reply #7 on:** March 11, 2007, 02:18:37 PM »

Perhaps those who are concerned will move their tails and then live with a bass that performs with less ease than built?
I will confidently leave well enough alone and take Charles's teacup reference and get me some right now.

pierreyves · « **Reply #8 on:** March 11, 2007, 03:08:29 PM »

Mica: in fact, it's not absolutly important, I would just to say...you know what I mean. For me, (it's the last time I write this), if I paid several tousand of dollars, I'm waiting for perfection. I never read the answer of Mica or I don't remember, but I don't want to touch the tailpiece. I'm very happy with my SC deluxe wich sound like my old series I and best.

Bradley Young · « **Reply #9 on:** March 11, 2007, 04:04:30 PM »

Tom,

Might be a trick of the angle, but http://www3.alembic.com/img/inst/valval_tailpieceL.jpg

Looks to be off center to the bass side.

I think that the biggest issue is that the bird tailpiece fairly shouts, Here's the exact center!!!

Bradley

jtussing · « **Reply #10 on:** March 11, 2007, 05:40:24 PM »

crgaston wrote: What does yours look like, Jim.

Assuming that you're talking about my tailpiece :-D, it's not built yet so I don't know! But if my strings line up with the bridge straight and if that lines up with the fingerboard within the specifications I made, then I couldn't care less whether the tailpiece looks centered next to the neck laminates.

Thanks!

jtussing · « **Reply #11 on:** March 11, 2007, 05:44:09 PM »

byoung. I agree with the bird tailpiece shouting. I'd also guess this is largely angle. If you look you can see the inside edge of the tailpiece at the top of the pic and the outside edge of the tailpiece at the bottom - that means the pic wasn't taking from directly overhead.

Regards, Jim

jtussing · « **Reply #12 on:** March 11, 2007, 05:52:11 PM »

Mica, you WERE honest. I'm an optimist when it comes to people (even the French)

flaxattack · « **Reply #13 on:** March 11, 2007, 08:38:16 PM »

seems to me that we pay for custom basses that SOUND better than all the rest. The fact that man makes them by hand and not machine means that no 2 are alike even if they were matched wood for wood etc,
To assume that one is paying for perfection is totally between pierre;s ears.
I dont think there should be any whining on this if the strngs line up correctly- das it!
thats the important thing
which stamps have more value? the ones that are not like all the others.
it is better to sound good than let a microscopic difference burn ones gut.
id be happy to either of these basses.
but one thing for sure- alembic does the best work i have seen and they stand behind the product
my cotm had to be repaired due to a finish problem
one phone call- one photo and a please send it back to us and it took 7 months to stabilize before they felt confident to send it back to me.
my second custom had a major unfortunate booboo. one phone call,a check of the work order, please send it back-we will make you another.most importantly, i kept this between almebic, myself and 3 other club friends who agreed to not go public until all were ready.
im grateful to have an awesome bass in direwolf and i could care less if the tailpiece didnt line up-

bob · « **Reply #14 on:** March 11, 2007, 10:20:03 PM »

Wow, I just can't believe the discussion this has generated, and in my opinion it is much ado about nothing (perchance someone said that before...). What an incredible waste of time and energy.

There simply is no way to achieve perfect visual symmetry, with the instruments under discussion.

I happen to have a Rogue with a bar tailpiece. No little bird point to line up with the neck lams, but yes, the screw holes can be used as a reference to decide that the tailpiece is shifted a little off center.

So I cover the tailpiece with my hand or something, and you know what I notice next? The strings themselves don't line up with the laminates.

On my 5 string, the E is pretty nicely centered over one, but the D is almost off the edge of the corresponding one. Without even looking at the tailpiece, this is grossly asymmetrical - and that's exactly as it should be, given that I want even spacing of the strings across the width of the neck, and some of these are a lot fatter than the others.

Sure, you could make the tailpiece itself asymmetric. Then, what you would end up with is the point of the bird neatly centered on the neck lams, but the center string (on a 5) would sit in a tailpiece slot that no longer lines up with the point of the bird.

Which would look really stupid.

Even with the simplistic bar, you could shave a little off one end so that the overall bar appeared centered, but then you have to make a choice between having the screw holes evenly positioned between the strings, or lined up with the laminates.

The strings themselves are not going to line up with the laminates. Therefore the slots in the tailpiece are also not going to be aligned with them (unless you want all the strings to bend coming of the bridge, which would also look really stupid).

This has nothing to do with manufacturing quality, or even the fact that these are handmade instruments, and no apology from Alembic should be necessary.

It simply is not possible.