Rusty the Scoob wrote:Cool! Hopefully one of those will trickle down my way in the used market in a year or two when I'm ready.
I'm curious about all these 4, 5 and 6 string basses all reportedly being made from the same mold. Isn't that impossible given the different neck widths?

Rusty the Scoob wrote:"I forget what happened to the 4th.


RiverRat wrote:Rusty the Scoob wrote:Cool! Hopefully one of those will trickle down my way in the used market in a year or two when I'm ready.
I'm curious about all these 4, 5 and 6 string basses all reportedly being made from the same mold. Isn't that impossible given the different neck widths?
I don't think that ALL the necks were made from the same mold. It's just that #2 was a 4 string width neck that was converted to a 6 string. My understanding was that Modulus made a LOT of different neck molds during the early years. There may have been some that were used for a build different that the original one.
I think that it came down to Modulus designing the #2 neck to be stiffer than the 4 string version to compensate for the additional string tension from the 2 extra strings since there was no truss rod.
RiverRat wrote:Phil Lesh101 wrote:I beleive Phil used a 36'' not 35'' or 34''
There is no evidence to support claims that any of the basses had a 36" scale length. Given the design flaws and high cost of the early monocoque trussless throughneck construction technique, it's doubtful that they would have attempted it repeatedly.
Because of Geoff Gould's goal of a trussless neck, neck and phenolic fingerboards had to be engineered to have the proper relief based only on the string tension. So each change in scale length, neck width or even string gauge meant that a new mold had to be made for both pieces of the neck. This also is the reason Modulus contracted to have strings engineered for their own product line. The basic goal was that the string have a specific tension when tuned to pitch to guarantee that the neck relief was correct.
Discussion thread on Alembic Club about Modulus necks and their design:
http://alembic.com/club/messages/449/47317.html
And a another on BassChat UK:
http://wiki.basschat.co.uk/info:tech:use_of_composites_graphite_necks_in_bass_guitar_design
A thread on Talkbass about the early TBX's:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f8/modulus-tbx-pics-382258/
Coincidently, that thread has posts from a member who not only sold Mike Gordon his first 5 string TBX, but he also owns a 4 string pre-TBX made from the same mold used to make Phil's 2nd Modulus... no mention of super long scale length.
Photo gallery of the 4 string TBX:
http://s89.photobucket.com/albums/k206/tsarter/ModulusTBX/Phil Lesh101 wrote: Yes This is a Different Modulus, He added the Delightful Black Pick Guard on it, and yes He used a 36'' Scale
The pickguard was added due to this bass having the wired fret MIDI installed. It's the nearly the same as the other black cherry cocobola TBX 6. Geoff Gould stated that both of these basses are 26 fret 34" scale necks.

jdsmodulus wrote:yes Waldo they did. I always look for the spider on the headstock when looking at custom builds. As opposed to the traditional "X" This sets them apart somehow but not sure other than to mark its a special.

Charlie wrote:As for Phil, he came to the bass as an adult so must have made a concious decision about the way he was going to approach it.
seanc wrote:jdsmodulus wrote:yes Waldo they did. I always look for the spider on the headstock when looking at custom builds. As opposed to the traditional "X" This sets them apart somehow but not sure other than to mark its a special.
I am not clear what this means. Are you talking about the Modulus logo?




Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests