Author Topic: Buckeye burl vs walnut (Read 763 times)

bigbadbill · « **on:** November 21, 2008, 06:02:07 PM »

I was wondering, how much difference in weight (if any) would buckeye burl facings (full front and normal rear) make compared to normal (i.e. not full) walnut front and rear on a Triple Omega? I know buckeye is very light weight but was wondering if it's lighter than walnut? Also, would the full facing make much of a difference (I guess there'd be a little less maple and purpleheart)?

rami · « **Reply #1 on:** November 22, 2008, 08:29:19 AM »

Bill, The top laminates are mainly decorative. The natual sound of a neck-through instrument comes from the neck itself and the fingerboard wood (I notice that). Perhaps a different main body wood would affect the tone, but the top laminate would be marginal. You would have to do an A - B test, but I don't think you would notice much difference. Walnut is a harder, denser woood than Buckeye Burl, so the Walnut Essence may sound slightly brighter. And again, any difference however slight may only be noticed if you bookmatch the top to center, since the strings would be directly anchored to the top.

I personally love the look of Buckeye Burl,

bigbadbill · « **Reply #2 on:** November 22, 2008, 09:48:13 AM »

Lovely bass Rami! I was actually wondering about the weight though, not the tone. With back problems every little helps!

rami · « **Reply #3 on:** November 22, 2008, 10:13:09 AM »

They're both relatively light. And the top laminate makes up a small enough percentage of the Bass that you wouldn't notice the difference in weight. Buckeye Burl is the lighter of the two though.

bigbadbill · « **Reply #4 on:** November 22, 2008, 11:22:53 AM »

Hi Rami

That's pretty much what I thought. Given my back problems it's surprising how tiny a difference I notice though. My Alembic is probably half a pound heavier than my Rick 4001CS but it's far, far harder on my back. Half a pound when there's spinal compression causing nerve root irritation can make all the difference in the world, and I imagine that depending on the different woods half a pound could easily be made up by both top and back laminates, particularly when the top is bookmatched to centre. Of course whether there'd be that much difference between walnut & buckeye I have no idea, hence the question.

mica · « **Reply #5 on:** November 26, 2008, 11:00:55 AM »

Lighter weight than Buckeye Burl (which fills up with a bit of dense polyester finish) would be Lacewood or Koa. Lower density means a more mellow, rounder tone.

The biggest difference you can make in the weight is the choice of neck woods. Using Mahogany as a primary neck wood will certainly shave an amount of weight away that anyone, even without a compression injury, could appreciate. Again, you're looking at a more mellow, rounder tone compared to Maple. To brighten it up some, you could counter with stainless steel strings, and we could tune the filters higher so you can get a more extreme upper end (maybe 8K or so).

Walnut's unique characteristic is to impart a quick attack, at least when used as a top on an Alembic bass with a primarily Maple neck. Some of that attack is preserved on a Brown Bass, which uses a Mahogany primary neck wood, but it's not as dramatic as with a Maple neck.

It might be useful to get opinions of some folks that have used both Brown Basses and other Alembic basses with Maple necks to see if it's something that would suit you.

One other way to save weight --- reduce the scale length.

bigbadbill · « **Reply #6 on:** November 27, 2008, 05:55:40 AM »

Thanks Mica, that's really interesting. I once played a Brown Bass and was amazed by how light it was (I assume it must also have been hollow); compared to the SC Deluxe I had at the time it was a real featherweight. I was also struck at the time how different it sounded to my SC, although admittedly it was through a different rig and the action was much higher (way too high for me) which obviously had a profound effect on the tone.

Scale length is something else I've thought about. Ironically I considered a 32 scale when ordering my Triple O but decided against it. I can't help wishing I'd gone for it now as I think it may have made a significant difference.

Ah well, all things to consider for the future, and many thanks for your input. BTW, Rami's Essence gets more gorgeous each day I look at it...

rami · « **Reply #7 on:** November 27, 2008, 07:26:16 AM »

Thanks Bill, I recently started playing it again but I'm actually getting more pleasure out of staring at it! It has a kind of hypnotic effect...

Buckeye Burl is a purely decorative wood. Unlike Walnut, it's not suitable as a structural (neck) or body wood. It was interesting that you mentioned it. You can always add it as a top wood to any project, perhaps a Walnut/Mahogany Brown Bass. I also really like the sound of a Mahogany neck. I would also describe it as round, mellow and deep. Very light weight compared to Maple.

boogieman145 · « **Reply #8 on:** November 27, 2008, 08:58:33 AM »

Whooo! Nice wood!

bigbadbill · « **Reply #9 on:** November 27, 2008, 02:53:00 PM »

Hi Rami. I had a custom Sei bass built with buckeye burl facings a few years back; unfortunately I don't still have it, but I chose the timbers personally and was amazed how light and almost cork-like the raw buckeye was. Compared to equivalent pieces of cocobolo the buckeye weighed nothing.

The mahogany neck sounds like an interesting option; I can get all the top end I could ever wish for out of my maple-necked bass so I'm sure a mahogany-necked bass would still have sufficient top end (although Mica's idea about the filters sounds interesting). In addition, round, mellow and deep sound like rather complimentary options.

I can't help wondering what a short (or at most medium) scale Brown Bass with the JPJ version Triple O body shape and knobby peghead would be like; I think it may capture many of my favourite Alembic elements in a rather lighter and more manageable (and superbly playable; the Brown Bass I played had probably the most amazing neck I've ever held) package. Failing that there's always the Balance K, Rogue, or Essence...

(Message edited by bigbadbill on November 27, 2008)

deburgh · « **Reply #10 on:** December 04, 2008, 12:34:39 PM »

I find that my custom series II (Buckeye BTC on the front and back) is pretty light, certainly lighter than my Tobias or Spector basses. Unfortunaly I don't have any other Alembics to compare the tone to, but it sounds fantastic. And visually, I don't think any other wood can compare

http://www.alembic.com/info/fc_leapoffaith.html

rami · « **Reply #11 on:** December 05, 2008, 06:14:31 AM »

Wow! That's just beautiful. I would have ordered my Essence to have been BTC top and back as well, but it was a dealer order that I happened upon. Just a spectacular wood.

bigbadbill · « **Reply #12 on:** December 05, 2008, 03:51:49 PM »

I totally agree with Rami; just stunning!!! One day I WILL get a buckeye Alembic....

Deburgh, any idea of the actual weight?

mario_farufyno · « **Reply #13 on:** December 13, 2008, 03:38:33 PM »

Hey Shaun, are you considering the ergonomics?

I was wondering if the way Instrument balances on your shoulder wouldn't be more relevant to keep your back safe... May be an extra long upper horn could be helpfull on this issue.

bigbadbill · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2008, 02:17:59 PM »

Given the distance the neck sticks out on a 34 scale Triple O, an extra long horn would help, but the weight is definitely an issue too. The problem with an extra long horn is getting it to look right with the body shape; I drew out several possibilities before giving up and ordering the normal pistol grip on my Triple O. The ironic thing is my current bass balances perfectly, but I think simply because there's so much wood over my left shoulder there's a fair bit of downforce there.