Guitar technology breakthrough.

[rdepelteau]

The most advanced guitar technology in the world is right here. The system I developped is by far the best and most modern guitar making system in the world today. This is a drawing of the next bass I'll make. A resonating structure made with aircraft aluminum or thin stainless steel ribs, and cross members to support the pups and electronics, ebony fretboard, perhaps with a composite neck, for weight, with an exotic wood face on the front, and a composite back. The idea is to shape and tune the the resonator to make it sound like a stand up bass, or other machine like sounds. I suppose that a very wide variety of sounds can be created for the resonator, using various metals, shapes and arrangments. I have in mind to float the piezo-pup/bridge over a thin spring steel ribbon connected to the side braces to amplify the string's vibrations. The piezo being microphonic should pick this up, but perhaps the electric will also pick up some of the surrounding e/m vibrations of the frame.... who knows.

 

That will be bass 7.

 

[Thomas Wilburn]

Could you make one out of spam?

[rdepelteau]

You can call it spam if technology is spam to you.

[rumpelstiltskin.]

can i place an order? how much will it cost?

 

robb.

[rdepelteau]

Yes you can, my earlier ones are around $1000.

 

This one, will run a little more than that. But I have to build it first and experiment a bit for sound. If you want to e-mail me, we can talk.

 

rdepelteau@yahoo.com

[jeremy c]

Mr. rdepelteau:

 

The reason why you have been accused of spam is because you only seem to post in order to promote your products.

 

Of course we bass players are interested in bass technology, but we are more likely to be interested in yours if we perceived you as a colleague who participated in conversations rather than as someone trying to drum up some business.

 

The only reason your previous posts stayed on the forum was that someone asked a question about one of your designs before you posted.

 

Maybe that question was planted so that you could "answer".

 

Now I don't know you, and I admire anyone who can design and built something, but you might make more friends if you hung around and answered some of the questions around here...plenty of people ask questions which could be answered by a bass builder.

[rumpelstiltskin.]

Originally posted by rdepelteau:

Yes you can, my earlier ones are around $1000.

 

This one, will run a little more than that. But I have to build it first and experiment a bit for sound. If you want to e-mail me, we can talk.

 

rdepelteau@yahoo.com

that was quick. it only took you 13 minutes to reply.

 

robb.

[rdepelteau]

I can certainly answer questions, but I don't know too much about electronics, as I buy off the shelf electronics, standard pups and pots. Regular basses are nice yes, but I am an inventor and I'm not all that familiar with what's been going on in the past. So I'm into building wacky and original basses, and that's what interest me the most. Fixing up other people's basses is not something I do, I prefer to leave that to the pros. I might add a comment here and there.

 

I talk about my basses, because they are original and innovative. As a forum for bass players and tekkies, I assume that new technologies would stir up interest. The fact that Steinberger has a synapse bass very similar to mine, indicates that my research is not too far from mainstream. As much as I like to play my basses, I am an entrepreneur, I realise that having the most advanced bass technology on the planet today may generate interest. I love to play my basses, and they sound great, and I do want others to enjoy them as much as I do. Yes I promote. But not without giving `this' forum exclusive and first knowledge of this technology.

 

If I can make money at it, I will be able to create even more extraordinary basses using state of the art material and processes. Building basses is fun, but that doesn't come cheap. I'm not a rich man, so my source of income has to be the product itself. That's the bottom line. Developping a new product is time consuming and expensive, without revenues it takes more time. I have plenty of ideas, and to develop them takes time and money. A bit of both would do me good.

[Thomas Wilburn]

Do you have sound samples?

[Rocky McDougall]

I would certainly be interested in hearing the sound from your bass. I would expect it to be very unique. I have a hard time envisioning a metal bass producing a pleasing tone. Can you post some audio samples?

[Dave Brown]

Originally posted by rdepelteau:

I can certainly answer questions, but I don't know too much about electronics, as I buy off the shelf electronics, standard pups and pots. Regular basses are nice yes, but I am an inventor and I'm not all that familiar with what's been going on in the past. So I'm into building wacky and original basses, and that's what interest me the most. Fixing up other people's basses is not something I do, I prefer to leave that to the pros. I might add a comment here and there.

 

I talk about my basses, because they are original and innovative. As a forum for bass players and tekkies, I assume that new technologies would stir up interest. The fact that Steinberger has a synapse bass very similar to mine, indicates that my research is not too far from mainstream. As much as I like to play my basses, I am an entrepreneur, I realise that having the most advanced bass technology on the planet today may generate interest. I love to play my basses, and they sound great, and I do want others to enjoy them as much as I do. Yes I promote. But not without giving `this' forum exclusive and first knowledge of this technology.

 

If I can make money at it, I will be able to create even more extraordinary basses using state of the art material and processes. Building basses is fun, but that doesn't come cheap. I'm not a rich man, so my source of income has to be the product itself. That's the bottom line. Developping a new product is time consuming and expensive, without revenues it takes more time. I have plenty of ideas, and to develop them takes time and money. A bit of both would do me good.

It's a very thin line, rdepelteau.

 

When you speak as an innovator, that's within the bounds of forum ettiquette.

 

When you speak as an entrepreneur, you open yourself to being accused of spam.

 

I have not eliminated this thread because you didn't actually offer to sell something. Remember, this board, being sponsored by Bass Player Magazine, has to remain more or less free from member advertisement. Of course, some people make contacts with other members and they might even buy some used gear. Actually, though, I've seen more stuff given away here than sold.

 

There are members who have strong vested interests in particular merchandise. One member is an engineer who (at least used to) work for Peavey. Another member is the owner and developer of AccuGroove cabs. There are others as well.

 

Each of these members carefully word their posts to avoid any appearance of marketing. I think that's what our members here are advising you to do.

 

You're not one to mince words. You have "the most advanced bass technology on the planet today?" I don't know how advanced technology is really useful in the bass world. The Chapman stick was certainly a development, as was the Steinberger use of carbon fiber. They each made a bit of a mark, but the vast majority of great music is made without their innovations.

 

Also, you claim to give this forum "exclusive and first knowlege of this technology." That could be interpreted as you've found a group of very nice and helpful bassists. It could also be interpreted that you've found a captive, target audience to fund your research.

 

We love to be helpful. We can not allow our members to be exploited.

 

Keep us posted on the steps you make. You might just put a link in your signature; that way the tech guys around here can keep current with what you do.

[bikertrash]

Being from the deep south, I may not have the intelligence or education of most people however, I know an outhouse when I smell it and I know spam when I read it.

[rdepelteau]

Thanks for the response, I'll have to make some sound clips, maybe from the Tranzac jam I play at every Saturday. I'm not too computer savvy, not too organised, I've been thinking of making good sound clips, but I don't know the easiest way to produce clips, and where to put them for access to a link. Hey, I can't even post a picture on this board. I can record with my web cam microphone, but that would be just the bass without a band.

 

I'll work on it, when I have the clip, I'll ask for advise about how to put it in a link.

 

As for a metal body, the sound may be altered using thin strips of metal, and I can dampen the highs using wood faces. Someone suggested to me that I could make the resonator assembly with hard wood laminate, and that may be another avenue of exploration.

[jeremy c]

I would suggest that you find someone interested in design who could help you come up with a better looking instrument.

 

Many people will not even try an instrument that isn't beautiful to look at.

 

And builders whose instruments are prized, such as Carey Nordstrand who occasionally has posted here, are some of the best-looking instruments around. I walked around NAMM, pretty impervious to the thousands of instruments that I saw, but couldn't help but to pick up one of Carey's. And then when you hear it, the wow factor goes up even further.

[rdepelteau]

Perhaps the pictures don't do them justice, because just today, a player said it looked fantastic when I showed one to him. I get mostly positive reviews when I play them. Mind you I am not too concerned with the finishing since in the early days, I was just trying to havea decent looking piece, with a good sound, and building I am making an instrument that is first small, light and powerful sounding. I use exotic woods, so the look is also very good.

 

As I said, perhaps the pictures are not giving them justice, but thanks for your opinion. I'm concerned with making technological improvements at this time, not so much appearances.

[getz out]

Sorry, not my style.

 

http://static.flickr.com/50/135986766_fddb67c9bf.jpg?v=0

 

And I like low action. I think I could fit my fist under the strings...

[davio]

You know, I've mentioned it before to knuckle_head (one of our other resident innovators) but maybe you could try it too...how 'bout a Mooninite Marauders version?

[jeremy c]

What is up with those numbers?

[rdepelteau]

The action is very low, I played electric guitar for 35 years before getting on the bass, I build my bass with very low action. As low as I can make it without buzzing. It looks high because the fingerboard is very curved. More like a classical style fingerboard than electric. The neck is very easily adjusted on the fly anyway. One screw sets up the the action, as well as holds the whole guitar together.

 

I put numbers on the fret positions on two of them, it's called the Nashville system, 8 is the octave, in the picture, I have two octaves plus two, that makes it 26 frets or half notes since it's fretless.

 

I have to agree with you guys that my finishing needs to be improved. However, I like to use exotic woods, and I don't want to paint these. Ebony is too nice to the touch to have any kind of finish on it. I guess if I ever go into production, the finishing will definitely need to be brought up to spec. But for now, I don't want to spend a lot of time buffing and painting, I'd rather concentrate on the next one, so I finish them a bit raw. I did buy a router and an edger, and that helped rounding off the edges on the ebony, and the future ones I make, should I do another with a wood body.

[ATM]

Originally posted by Dave Brown:

There are members who have strong vested interests in particular merchandise. One member is an engineer who (at least used to) work for Peavey. Another member is the owner and developer of AccuGroove cabs. There are others as well.

Ahem, t-Shirts.

 

ATM

[dcr]

Originally posted by rdepelteau:

The most advanced guitar technology in the world is right here.

No, it isn't, for the simple reason that there is NO technology here, yet. There is a plan...actually, there are only some fairly loose ideas that may, perhaps, in time, become a plan. And the difference makes a difference, because whether something is technology or merely something that once seemed like a good idea, all comes down to the making. Not saying these ideas won't lead to a plan that will work. But let's be honest with each other; that's all that "is right here," just some ideas.

[getz out]

Unless that is some trick photography, that action is very, very high.

 

Originally posted by rdepelteau:

The neck is very easily adjusted on the fly anyway. One screw sets up the the action, as well as holds the whole guitar together.

It is impossible to adjust action on the fly and maintain the intonation on a traditional instrument. How is that overcome in your design?

[Graham Jacobs]

Quote: "Regular basses are nice yes, but I am an inventor and I'm not all that familiar with what's been going on in the past"

-------------------------------------------

 

Surely, in order to innovate, its essential to have a good knowledge what has gone on in the past, even if only to ensure you don't try to reinvent the wheel!

[thanny XIII]

Dude I'm sorry your basses look like shite. There are no curves.They look ike stuff in my math book. And if you have found the paramount bass technology why aren't big names in a bidding war for it? And by the way metal has a very treblely sound and it is you know a bass....

Please no more spam.

[jeremy c]

Nashville number system? Maybe they're from a different part of Nashville than I'm familiar with.

 

If those numbers are scale numbers, they are in the wrong places.

 

3 and 4 should be one fret apart.

4 and 6 should be four frets apart.

6 and 8 should be three frets apart.

 

if the open string is 1 (key of E)

it should look like this:

 

| | 2| | 3| 4| | 5| | 6| | 7| 8|

 

 

Thanny said not as politely as I did that it is the shape which needs a better design, not the finish.

 

We're not trying to bust your balls (well, maybe some people are), but you're here and you asked for our input. Many of us buy a lot of basses and are always looking.

 

I discovered products by Nordstrand, AccuGroove, and Wendler thanks to this board. My Wendler bass (which sounds great) is a beautiful instrument and people like it before they've even heard it.

[...]

I would suggest that you work on the body shape/design a bit. It leaves much to be desired; at least from your webcam photos.

 

The action does look really high. Even if the fretboard has a radius to it. I like my action low - especially on my fretless basses as the low action allows for greater accuracy at high speeds.

 

I'm curious to hear how this thing sounds.

[Rowbee]

I agree, it does look exceptionally high. It looks like you might need to lean up against furniture to fret it.

[Dave Brown]

Originally posted by rdepelteau:

The action is very low, I played electric guitar for 35 years before getting on the bass, I build my bass with very low action. As low as I can make it without buzzing.

 

I put numbers on the fret positions on two of them, it's called the Nashville system, 8 is the octave, in the picture, I have two octaves plus two, that makes it 26 frets or half notes since it's fretless.

 

I I did buy a router and an edger, and that helped rounding off the edges on the ebony, and the future ones I make, should I do another with a wood body.

Still early in research, I guess.

 

Many basses, especially fretless, even upright, can go much lower without buzzing. That's why fingerboards have "relief," but didn't you say your fingerboards are flat, like a classical guitar? Even my URB has a very delicate relief, which I paid about $100 to have someone recut. Take a measurement from the end of the fingerboard to the bottom of the string.

 

Those numbers mean nothing to me. As a matter of fact, I can't tell that this bass plays in tune at all. If you are up at the 26th fret area, the half steps should be much closer together. In fact, the marks on the instrument don't seem to have the correct ratio...they are much too close to the same size as each other. Did you ratio them, or use your ear to mark the board?

 

There is a one off custom builder of very nice acoustic guitars here in Ft. Worth (believe it or not.) He went to the trouble of buying a CNC machine to use in the process of making his tops and fingerboard cuts. He only sells a few instruments per year, and does a great deal of handwork. His guitars are beautiful. His name is Ed Schaefer. (Actually, he's moved to Minnesota because he LIKES THAT WEATHER!!!!)

 

You might like to visit his website to learn about how this building thing works.

 

In fact, there is a North Texas Luthier club around these parts, where craftsmen are working hard to learn traditional building techniques. Lots of cool guitar pics on Luthiers of North Texas. Give them a look, and you might even find such a club in your area.

[jeremy c]

Did you ratio them, or use your ear to mark the board?

It looks like a ruler was used.

[Big Red 67]

Way to many problems to have the motivation to address.