Huhuhuhu ....let's hi-jack this thread agian.
Fellow beer-drinkers all over the world.
Put the volume of your computer-speakers full throttle!
Click this:
http://www.bigad.com.au/
then click yes in the dialogue box, than click high depending on your internet connection speed.
And ...just enjoy!
I think Aussie original??
But really good!
 
 
Paul TOBO
 
Hmmm ..i didn' taste it.

Sam,
Thanks for the background on the name.
 
Keith

Paul, great ad! thanks
 
Keith
I figure when something comes along I actually know about I better jump on it.

Today my second Spoiler arrived, which I bought from another club member.  A 5 string from 1985.  Since it's a 5 string, I can use it for the band I'm in.  It's, again, a very good instrument and it's in a very good shape.  
See how nice they both look on my wall! :-)
 

Hmmmmmm ...those beauties doesn't belong on the wall ...get out playing fellah!!!
 
Paul the bad one

Maybe it's an optical illusion, but the five string looks like it has a string spacing that is narrower than the classic spacing that's standard on a Spoiler five.
 
That's a nice looking pair of Maple basses!
 
(Message edited by davehouck on September 29, 2005)

Don't know about the string spacing.  It is quite narrow, but I have no other Spoiler 5 to compare it to.  Maybe this picture will tell you more.
 

quote:Maybe it's an optical illusion, but the five string looks like it has a string spacing that is narrower than the classic spacing that's standard on a Spoiler five.
 
That's no illusion.  My Spoiler five has very narrow string spacing.  (I'm at work now, so I can't measure.  Day jobs!)

Sorry, dual post.
 
(Message edited by george_wright on September 29, 2005)

OK, I'm home now.  String spacing on five-string 87S4286, all center-to-center, left-to-right, to the nearest .25mm, as measured by 60-year-old eyeballs:
 
At the nut: 4.5mm, 4mm, 4mm, 3.75mm
 
At the bridge: 6mm, 5.5mm, 5.75mm, 5.25mm
 
Total at nut, center-of-B to center-of-G: 16.5mm
 
Total at bridge, center-of-B to center-of-G: 22.25mm

George; that doesn't seem right.  16.5mm is a little less than 2/3s of an inch.  If you don't mind, measure again in inches, the nut width and the 24th fret width.  The standard classic taper for a five string is 2 at the nut and 2.5 at the 24th fret.

If George has been reading the imperial side of his ruler as if it were the decimal side (you're looking at just a couple of markings at close range, so an easy mistake to make) I guess his 4.5 reading would correspond to 3/8, which would be 9.25 mm.
 
That's just over half as wide as the spacing on my Spoiler, which is 17 mm center-to-center both at the nut and the bridge - which I always thought is the classic Alembic lack of taper.
 
The total width at the nut would be roughly 5 * 9.25 = 46.25 mm, which would make it slightly narrower than my 4 * 17 = 48 mm. The problem is that if you see the picture of the 4 and 5 together, the 5 does appear to have a wider nut than the 4 - not much, but still.
 
(Message edited by adriaan on September 30, 2005)

Oops, there I go chastising George on his poor eyesight and make two stupid miscalculations all of my own making:
 
Obviously 4*17 does not equal 48, but 68.
 
And to calculate the total width at the nut you multiply the average string spacing with one less than the number of strings, so I should have used 3*17=51 mm.
 
Never mind that ... For George's nut width to be wider at 5 strings than mine at 4, it must have at least 51/4=13 mm average string spacing, and that's about 0.51.
 
Hm, did I just manage to go from 51 mm to 0.51? Magic number time!

Adriaan is exactly right, of course.  I was reading a ruler with major subdivision in imperial inches and subdivisions in tenths.  All my numbers are tenths of inches, not millimeters (mm).  Good thing I'm not an engineer; all my bridges would fall :-(.

Don't feel bad, the guys at NASA get this stuff backwards too.