Neck shaping. Tool tips.

Here are 2 videos showing a little work that I am doing on the 6 string bass.

This video is a general "what I am doing" one. The semi-hollow body is nearly finished - I have been play testing it a lot (IE I like playing it and don't want to take it apart to finish...).

This is a mid-stage video of the headstock and body carving. The key in the work is to visualise and maintain focus on the end goal and not to freak out about using a rasp or chisel and leaving an uneven surface - you work in varying degrees of coarseness for the sake of efficiency.

Spoke shave/Chisel/Rasp/File/Cabinet Scraper/Power tools/Sand paper?

Here are some of my criteria for choosing which tool to use when shaping a neck - this is not a complete resource - experiment. I have seen people shape whole instruments with a rasp - there is no "right" way. (HINT: A drywall hatchet is NOT the right way. Someone actually did this!!!).

Power Tools

I like to do as much as I can with power tools. These are often the best at working with very hard woods, they work (often) faster than hand tools. Since I am specifically mentioning the neck, I will stay on topic regarding my use of them.

- Main cuts in the preparation of the neck, all thicknessing/surfacing (laminates etc) (Bandsaw, table saw, router, power plane)

- All channels (rods/bars down the neck) and holes (machine heads) (Router/drills)

- General sanding (Palm sander/belt sander)

*After rasping it often works that a palm sander can clean the gouges up just faster than a file, however it is not as nimble. This is very good because the cabinet shaper will work VERY well on a smooth surface.

- Penultimate sanding (Palm sander)

NB. Keep all fingers! Sharp tools, tight collets, awake operator. Cut 3 times, measure once... right? ;)

Spoke shave

The spoke shave is the main tool that I use to shape the neck. It allows me to do long smooth cuts and due to its narrow base I can work on curves, slopes and in confined space. The long plane fails because its base is much too big.

- Main neck shaping (to any contour - deep "C", "V", hybrids or compound shapes).

- Limited shaping at the body and headstock side - this is due to its size. Much like the long plane cannot fit to shape the main part of the neck, the spoke shave is limited, and that is why I have a handful of tools to work with.

NB. Remove less rather than more and be aware that grain can reverse and tear out. A sharp blade, strong grip and shallow cut depth will help.

Rasp

The rasp is a very rough tool. It is excellent at removing a lot of material in hard to reach areas. It is capable of creating very natural curves, and with care the "clean up" of the gouges it leaves is simple. The palm sander/file/sandpaper are good options for removing the gouges.

-Neck/headstock transition area. This is the only tool for the job (in my opinion). The spoke shave will not do this well. Sanding will take forever, as will a file.

- Body/neck (heel) transition. In conjunction with the chisel and spoke shave this moulding can look very neat.

NB. Long, controlled strokes - pushing or pulling in the direction of the cut work best. Resist the urge to drag the tool back across the work piece - you un-necessarily wear the tool and yourself.

Chisel

I like carving with the chisel because it seems like something that they would have done in the "old times". I don't like cutting myself with the chisel, though I bet they did that too!

The chisel is fabulous at carving the tight radius shapes found at the heel, for detailing areas anywhere - sometimes the chisel more accurately removes wood.

- Neck/body transition area. The chisel is indispensable for shaping in here, as I am building mainly through-necks and there is always a very tight radius needing shaped. The rasp runs the risk of damaging the body with scrapes whereas patience and a bit of focus with a chisel will turn good results.

- Headstock/neck area. The chisel is useful to help shape this transition in several ways. Before the rasp is used you can remove bulk wood with the chisel to speed the rasp work. (I do this sometimes). Or after you can clean up rasp marks in hard-to get areas, or indeed just general shaping.

I find that a firm, strong grip with both hands, 1 supporting the blade is necessary for most of my shaping. If the tool is sharp there is no need to muscle the cuts - you should not be taking so much wood off that it needs undue force. If this is happening, sharpen, think, work. A firmly held work piece is a MUST for working.

NB. As with most wood working tools, the chisel is USELESS if it is blunt. It is a danger to your piece and to you if it is blunt. Sharp tools = good work.

File

The humble file is very useful at cleaning up the gouges left by the rasp - seems like most of the tools here are damage management for the rasp - ha! It is very capable at shaping and cuts very effectively across the grain. Like the rasp it leaves gouges, it can also ruin a nice carved radius if you run the edge into it - stay awake.

- Cleaning rasp damage. This is anywhere you use a rasp - anywhere on the neck.

- Working on medium radices. Usually nearing a final step as it will take some time to shift even 1-2mm.

NB. Push, don't push/pull. Files cut in the push direction and you speed up the wear/bluntening process if you push/pull. The dust doesn't get as good a chance to clear and it cuts no faster. Good support from both hands will always give better results, 1 handed filing will produce more scrap wood... guitar shaped wood. Or some "clever" thinking (about how to get around the gaff).

Cabinet Scraper

Very useful tool for final shaping. It can remove more wood than you wood think. (sorry) They can get into reasonably tight radii and will mess things up if you are too hasty, especially against the grain. They work remarkably well on sanded wood, much better than a rough surface. They can tend to accent a rough surface unlike a file or sandpaper which removes the peaks and levels it.

- Entire neck final shaping before sanding stages. Useful to remove any slight undulations in the carving.

NB. Keep a keen edge on this tool. Support with both hands, and tell it that it is just as useful as all the other tools even though it is just scraper...

Sand Paper

Hand sanding is the final stage. It is so painfully boring that I like to do as much as I can with a palm sander. Work from coarse to fine, do not let any scrapes from a previous stage pass into the fine stages of sanding because you will never shift it with fine paper. Lift the cabinet scraper/coarse paper.

- Entire neck/entire instrument.

I tend to work in the following order of grades:

1. 80 grit (palm sander)

2. 120 grit (hand sanding - block/sponge support optional)

3. 180 grit

4. 320 grit

5. 400 grit

6. 800 grit

You don't need to go much further on an oiled instrument, and on a spray finish you should stop at around 320/400 grit to give the paint a key to grip, then finish the paint up to 1600+ grit.

I have been writing too much, I now have a headache. I think watching some Frasier or something will help!

Until next time, here is a cool guy playing a bass.

Blessings,

Mike

How to check if your neighbour is in.

My neighbour is a dick, is he in tonight? Let's see...

Firstly, this is how me and my brother check to see if our neighbour is out. Let it be known that there is a mutual disdain between ourselves and the single-brick depth walls do little for sound insulation. In any case I am in a perpetual state of annoyance at having my playing curtailed and enjoy these moments.

Secondly, you should treat this video as a rare opportunity to glimpse into the lives of trumpet players and musicians. We hope that you learn from this video, we know that even the best can learn from this.

Dan is pictured with the silver trumpet, Mike is off-screen for the benefit of the viewers... (AKA poor film work)

Enjoy :-)

Mouthpiece placement. Upstream/downstream.

For the benefit of any brass players who happen to read this blog, I will post more things that Mic Smith has generously shared with me! I will include my email, and amend any facts necessary! WARNING: This gets geeky, and only touches on a small area of playing, one which fascinates me all the same.

Hi Mic,

I decided to check out a Curry 3C. from the marketplace, and man it is a really nice mouthpiece. I think it is becoming my fave quickly. It has the big fat sound that the TF has, sounds brighter, slots nicely and is in tune. Cheers for the tip - I thought it would be like a Bach 3C which is why I didn't bother with it for some time, and it isn't! Still favouring the 3M. for lead, but the 3C. could quickly become the go-to piece! I am playing Joseph in a local production in a few weeks time, might see how it goes!

I am still having inconsistent days, but on those good days I am playing up to a good F. At a band competition I had a decent Ab on the cornet... which was uncalled for but out of an immature reaction to a comment made I played the solo cornet line 8va... I didn't do this on the actual competition :)

I wonder if you have experience of players who can switch to an up-stream style embouchure from a downstream type. I reckon it isn't a great idea, but I will admit to doing it for the thrill or when I am really beat, I don't do this much in fairness. I can quite often pick out a double C at about a mf - F dynamic, or up to a G at any volume I want, but I really do avoid this because I reckon it isn't good practise... The give away is when you can't play in the normal register with any security, but the switch is pretty quick, 8th rest if even. I know in 1 example, Bruce Adams (big Scottish trumpeter, really great jazz player) used to gig a lot in his youth (6 hours a night from 14 years old) and I think he hit his lip and he had to do shows and learned how to play upstream and always has since, but that was due to physical damage. That is a pretty serious case! In any case, Bruce has INSANE range - often something I attribute to upstream players.
Anyway, just a quick update - I hope you are well in what is probably unquestionably warmer weather than we have... and I have nothing to complain about... yet! How are those new springs? I emailed Kanstul to see if I can get my 1525 valves moving better

Mic's reply:

Hey Mike,

Like I said, I find my self using the 3C as much as possible. There's something unique about the cup shape that makes it more efficient than say a Bach 1C or 1C shape without losing the depth of sound players like. Before this 3C, if I were on a Broadway show, I would use either the the 3B or 3DE. Now, there is no choice to make...it'll all goes to the 3C. The 3Z I just sold was a great lead piece but I did have to deal with compromises in my sound on or below the staff. After shipping off the 3Z this past week, I worked a couple of studio things where I used the 3C so I basically spent the entire week on that piece. I had a couple heavy-hitter lead gigs this weekend and used the 3DE. I found that there was no loss of power, range or endurance using it as opposed to the 3Z. Sure, it might take a little more air but not much more. I like the depth of sound the DE provides...something that was lacking with the Z.

I know you probably hear all kinds of theories about lead players having to play on extremely small and shallow equipment. They say its a sign of being efficient as a player if one can handle playing all night on a 6A4a. The problem is that your chops have to have room to vibrate and this has nothing to do with the size of one's lips, contrary to popular belief. I've worked beside too many players with huge lips who sound quite good on very shallow cups for this idea to make sense. While I can play on cups as shallow as the 3Z, it did start to feel a little cramped towards the end of the night. With the 3DE, I don't have this feeling. It plays as free as the the 3B I use for classical work.

As far as your upstream experiments go...be careful. It doesn't hurt anything to experiment a little but make sure you aren't killing your "bread & butter" downstream embouchure. I actually took a couple lessons from Doc Reinhardt way back in the day. He "diagnosed" me as a type 3B downstream. He said that a lot of 3B's make a gradual progression towards upstream players due to them performing a lot in the commercial world. As you know, the bottom lip is all but indestructable so moving the placement down to, say 1/3 top, 2/3 bottom can help a player deal with pressure better. I've never messed with it much as what I have works pretty well and it would probably screw up my classical sound. The one thing I do know (for me) is that keeping almost all the weight on the bottom lip is a great way to increase your endurance because it babies the top lip. I used to have an exercise I made up that promoted keeping the bottom lip as the "anchor". I would play some note in the staff and while holding it, I would move my jaw out and slightly rotate the horn down to the point where it ALMOST breaks contact with the upper lip. So, at this point, 100% of the weight is on the bottom lip. Once I got the feel for this, I would start doing everything with this set up. The depth of sound isn't quite as meaty but its more of a feel thing. While I normally play with more weight on the bottom now I will use this little trick on long blows where I don't want to tire the top lip out. I would try this before taking the plunge into upstream but only you can decide if its hurting anything.


I benefited from that info quite a bit. I think my reply email sums this up best - again - this is online for the benefit of others, not me - I have benefited already. Take the care to note why I benefited - I was returning to a previous mouthpiece placement, previously avoided due to damaged tissue in my lip. Soon I will experiment with a 1/3 top, 2/3 bottom lip placement soon, with all pressure on my lower lip. I have not yet tried this - I want to understand the implications of this. I am currently working to consciously lower pressure, extend the lower jaw and solidify a happy placement of mouthpiece - too high was clearly a temporary answer for a temporary problem which in hindsight could have been cured by using a sensible mouthpiece, less pressure and a LOT of long tones. More at the end.

Your comment on mouthpiece placement was very interesting... and rewarding. And above all - even when I reckon my mouthpiece can't get any lower, it still hasn't hit 50-50... (this is when I am lowering it in experiments).

Ok - so I don't change mouthpiece placement just randomly because of emails or because I think I suck and it is bound to be gear related... but I did change it because I remember consciously moving it up once because 1) I had hurt my lip playing too much on a really sharp-rimmed tiny mouthpiece about 2 or 3 years back - moving it up seemed to help (I also went to a larger piece, from basically a Schilke 13a4 size to a B4S - a 3C). and 2) because although the range suffered, my sound on the B4S plus moving the piece higher, was much mellower and pretty. That I now know was substitute for a "useful" tone. Mellow is at times synonymous with dead to the younger player (I was he) I didn't realise how useless such a dead sound was! Anyway - the past week or 2 I have been doing a lot of my blowing on the 3C. or the 3M. - they are soo similar - the 3C. is a better all rounder, the 3M. is less work in big band, yet I want brighter in that case... anyway - after looking at some older photos of me playing - say 4 year old ones - I had a lower mouthpiece placement. So I reckoned it was worth a shot. I don't use that much arm-pressure when playing, so I figure I can't damage myself just experimenting. Well I tried it - it felt foreign, but nice. My sound became more vibrant or clearer, pitching went a bit weird, but when I slotted a note it seemed solid! Chipping and splitting a few easy notes, but everything else was better! I think my horn angle is a little lower now, my range is about the same, my attacks 100% clearer, my sound much fuller (if a little brighter or richer), and my endurance is better surprisingly! I can't muscle high notes as easily when tired - but I don't see this as a downside - I shouldn't be doing that anyway! As for sound - I still like the dark sounds, but the core sound I have on the 3M or C or TF or Z when I can play it is the same, but the overtones and quality differs. The TF is a dream to play, soo easy, I guess I like the looser slots and mellow tone, but it is draining and lacking sometimes. The 3C. is cracker for most everything else - did a little lead on it - sounded good!

Again - thank you for your help - I am glad you mentioned moving the piece down - I had forgotten that I had consciously moved the piece up in the past and by the results I am getting now - it was detrimental! I am no Charlie Scheulter, but I am pleased to have made more of an improvement by what could be returning to my older position, or perhaps even lower than that. I am going to experiment - I will have to get a feel for where it sits optimally for me. I feel like I need some weight on my top lip to make everything work - weight wise I think I play about 1/2 1/2, but trying my best to favour the lower lip - admittedly if I am wrecked there is sometimes a tendency to lay it on the top lip which is bad, but I do try to avoid that!

And there you have what, for me, proved to be invaluable correspondence. Again, I urge you to check Mic's playing - support a fabulous musician!

www.myspace.com/micsmith
"Trumpets Alone" Mic Smith
Available at CDBaby:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/micsmith

I want to stress how player-specific this is. For a full month I have been playing with a lower placement, and it is working for me and probably because I used to play somewhat like this. I am going to try 1/3, 2/3 placement, and work on getting the weight on my lower lip, but I reckon that what I have is what I am going to work with. As Mic and other great teachers say - experiment, but realise when you are doing yourself harm - tread cautiously! Re: downstream/upstream, well I am classed as a IIIB embouchure (downstream), and I make the switch (to upstream) - when I take the head-staggers or sometimes I am just plain done. I know for a fact that working on this and not my normal IIIB setup is detrimental if done in excess. There is also the tendency to play the uppermost notes on a lead pad with the upstream embouchure - this never trains the normal set to do this work and ultimately you (I, me) am taking a step backwards - if that clarifies anything for a reader, I am happy - I learned this the tough way.

Finally, for anyone who gets the WTF face when they read "Curry 3C. mouthpiece" etc etc... I will make a brief synopsis so that you can stay with me.

Deeper mouthpieces emphasise lower harmonics and sound darker/mellower, less harsh. Shallower mouthpieces do the opposite, and there are varying degrees in between. The mid point most often being the "C" mouthpiece. I my case a "Curry 3C.". The reason is that different music demands different sounds, furthermore the shallower mouthpieces facilitate playing louder for longer in the higher tessiatura. This page explains the Curry mouthpieces that I currently use.

If you got this far - pat on the back. If you got this far and don't play a brass instrument - I will buy you a pint!