# Rondo Fanned-fret Headless Basses



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 27, 2017)

http://www.rondomusic.com/HXB-404_3034_Nat_Burl_Headless.html
http://www.rondomusic.com/Brice_HXB2_405_3235_Headless_NatBurl.html


----------



## bostjan (Oct 27, 2017)

Sweet, but why only 35" on the 5 string? Maybe later they'll do a longer one. Also, maybe later, they'll come up with a more compact head piece. I'm intrigued by the bridge, though, and the top looks tasty.

EDIT: Actually, on second look, I'm concerned about the small distance around the tuners, especially on the 4 string. I'd have to try it myself, before judging, though, but just from the look of it, it looks like it might be a little bit of a pain.


----------



## lewis (Oct 27, 2017)

the 4 string is right up my alley.
I would have imported one had it been 34-37 scale.

Looks sweet.

also yeah the tuners do look awkward.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Oct 27, 2017)

Seeing as the Vader bass isn’t available multiscale....is this one of the only fanned headless basses in existence?


----------



## bostjan (Oct 27, 2017)

diagrammatiks said:


> Seeing as the Vader bass isn’t available multiscale....is this one of the only fanned headless basses in existence?


Watson http://www.watsonguitars.net/12B053.html




Rainer at LeFay Bass Engineering has headless and multiscale and multiscale headless





I think there was another high end option as well

EDIT: Yeah, Negrini (lesser known)





Obviously none of these are at a competing price range with Brice.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 27, 2017)

What about Headless *Fretless* multiscale? ...with an extension on the lowest string, so that it being headless is kind of _pointless_ as well. Haha...oh, I really need to think up a better joke.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Oct 27, 2017)

I remember not finding any affordable production or semicustoms. Gngs are not cheap. 
I’m surprised kiesel doesn’t offer it on their bass

A fanned fretless would work. But I can’t imagine anyone sitting down and learning how to play it.


----------



## ixlramp (Oct 28, 2017)

2 fanned fretless basses (one is unlined 9 string 41 positions):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/conklinseven/IMG_0529.jpg
http://www.basses-lkah.fr/basse-41-remige-quot;rquot;-02607.html


----------



## thraxil (Oct 28, 2017)

That 4-string has some serious stabbing potential.


----------



## spudmunkey (Oct 28, 2017)

Holy crap, does that fan look ridiculous on the Rondo 4! Although, I suppose I'm looking at it from a guitar player's perspective, where there's obviously chording involved, and while still a part of bass, chords aren't nearly as vital/common...but the angle of that nut looks crazy uncomfortable for maybe anything but the rarest of low-down notes.


----------



## A-Branger (Oct 29, 2017)

NOPE


----------



## iamaom (Oct 29, 2017)

Ugh, rondo's headlesses are a shame. One of the biggest things about headless is the A S E T H E T I C S of a sleek, tiny instrument. The huge cut out and that razor edge not-headstock makes me wonder why anyone would buy one.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 30, 2017)

The shamiest part, for me, is that they're 80% onto a good idea, then the 20% that just doesn't seem to parse for me is bad enough to maybe spoile the pot.

I'm thinking a 37" headless bass that accepts "normal" bass strings and where the headpiece isn't a mile away from the nut would be cool, because the limitations of string length would be minimized, and it'd be easier to find a case to fit it. Those are pretty "boring" and "practical" reasons, but really, 9 out of 10 times, it's the boring and practical stuff that sells me on an instrument. Stuff like blinking LED fret markers are cool, but in the back of my mind, I'm thinking about whether it uses a 9V battery or some stupid coin cell that I have to special order, and where the battery compartment is, because I've seen stuff like that where the battery is in the heel of the neck, and you have to take the entire guitar apart to swap batteries.

So, anyway, the Brice. Still, it's a $500-600 headless multiscale bass with an impressive top, and that's great. I just really hope the access to the tuners is easier than it looks from the photos. Still, Rondo is like the goose that laid the golden egg...it's just that it laid a couple of golden eggs and quite a few regular goose eggs.


----------



## PBC (Oct 30, 2017)

bostjan said:


> The shamiest part, for me, is that they're 80% onto a good idea, then the 20% that just doesn't seem to parse for me is bad enough to maybe spoile the pot.
> 
> So, anyway, the Brice. Still, it's a $500-600 headless multiscale bass with an impressive top, and that's great. I just really hope the access to the tuners is easier than it looks from the photos. Still, Rondo is like the goose that laid the golden egg...it's just that it laid a couple of golden eggs and quite a few regular goose eggs.



The same issue is present on their headless Hawkers (still waiting for them to get some with 24 frets). I sure this isn't the case, but I wonder if there is a design patent of having the string end at the nut, similar to how companies trademark their headstocks. We'll have to wait and see. 

While they may not nail the idea the first time, Kurt and Co. definitely refine their ideas and make it work and the stuff they have put out always seem to match my ridiculous choice of specs. I wouldn't be too surprised when they come out with their fanned 6 and 7 string Brices as well as expanding the scale length (hopefully 40").


----------



## bostjan (Oct 30, 2017)

A multiscale bass ~36-40" scale headless for $<800 would be a must-have addition to my family, personally.


----------



## PBC (Nov 1, 2017)

bostjan said:


> A multiscale bass ~36-40" scale headless for $<800 would be a must-have addition to my family, personally.



I can be done. I don't know if Kurt has a deal with La Bella but it seems like ever single instrument has their strings for stock. Unfortunately, La Bella doesn't offer custom bass strings which is unfortunate because then it might be possible to go even longer. O4P can apparently go to 47" which would sound incredible but, after an email I had back and forth, they won't guarantee strings for instruments before it's built; therefore if you make a bass at that length then there's no certainty you can even get strings for it. 

I ordered a Kalium Long bass string to test and found that the longest scale length possible for that string is 40.25" about .75" longer than their Quake, although probably for safety 40" be better. If the stars align with Skip and Kurt getting something going, a headless 40" fanned would be a thing of beauty.


----------



## lewis (Nov 1, 2017)

bostjan said:


> A multiscale bass ~36-40" scale headless for $<800 would be a must-have addition to my family, personally.


blimey yeah. Would save for that in a heartbeat. I need my first recording bass to be super long scale to give me the twang I need. Ala Dingwall.


----------



## Hollowway (Nov 1, 2017)

I've got my Quake 37-40" coming in the next few weeks, so I, for one, would NOT like to see a low priced Brice in that scale.  But, the longer the better!


----------



## bostjan (Nov 1, 2017)

They'll have to make it 37.5-40.5" then.


----------



## ixlramp (Nov 2, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Also, maybe later, they'll come up with a more compact head piece





bostjan said:


> and where the headpiece isn't a mile away from the nut


Individual string clamps are good for affordability, you don't need to manufacture a new headpiece for differing numbers of strings and you have flexibility of string spacing.
Having a large distance between the nut and lower clamps (as here) is a very good idea as that means more chance of the string having tapered before it reaches the clamp, this helps with clamping Bs or lower strings and makes the clamps more compact and cheaper to make.
It can be tricky choosing a string length such that the nut-end taper ends between nut and tuner post / clamp, the choices of winding length tend to rise in 2" steps and basses tend to have a 2" distance between nut and tuner posts, so at least 2" between nut and clamp is ideal and will still keep bass length manageable.


----------



## bostjan (Nov 2, 2017)

ixlramp said:


> Having a large distance between the nut and lower clamps (as here) is a very good idea as that means more chance of the string having tapered before it reaches the clamp, this helps with clamping Bs or lower strings and makes the clamps more compact and cheaper to make.


That's a good point, but then, if that's a major concern, honestly, why even bother with a headless? I'm not trying to be reductive, but if the headpiece assembly has to be 2" away from the nut, you're only cutting down maybe 50% of the length of the headstock and moving the centroid of the instrument an inch and a half. I guess any benefit justifies the idea, but just from my perspective, when you've seen the photos of basses like the LeFay and GNG posted above, it makes it seem, on the surface, like the tapering problem is surmountable. I'm sure that the only way to really know intimately how much pain is involved in sourcing strings, would be to own one of each.


----------



## exo (Nov 2, 2017)

To be 100% honest, the ass end of Rondo's headless efforts thus far make ZERO sense to me, and the "headstocks" not much more regardless of if it's a bass or guitar.!The entire point of "headless" is to have a compact footprint and ergonomic nature, and the efforts thus far miss the mark

Gimme a headless fanned fret 24.75-26.5" version of a Hadron 727 combined with an Ibby RBM, 12-16" compound radius fretboard, and THEN we're talking as far as guitars go, and a 34-37" multiscale bass with the same basic specs would tick off a lot of boxes for other folks as well I'd imagine....


----------



## ixlramp (Nov 2, 2017)

bostjan actually i agree that the best design has the string clamps as close to the nut as possible, minimising the length beyond the nut increases tuning stability, Steinberger had the right idea (apart from requiring double ball end strings).
This would require clamps that can accept large gauges, but the advantage is no more worrying about whether the string has tapered down before it reaches the clamp.

Current bass design is irritating in how you need to find a string length that has a nut-end taper that is between nut and tuner post, and this is irritating for string makers too, having to produce strings in a range of winding lengths in 2" steps.
A headless with a large clamp means one less worry, as long as the winding length is long enough for the scale it will work, you can then use normal bass strings on short scale basses.


----------

