eckodanny Posted June 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 it all depends on how much can your bridge's saddles be adjusted... i guess it would be pretty much a close call with 1/16" ← Ohh yea! Hmm, so I really don't have to move my TOM bridge back at all (supposing it can be adjusted at least 1/16"). As for the pickups, what do you guys recomend? Should I use humbuckers like LP's usually have? Or should I use single coils (which are drawn in my plans)? Many thanks -Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted June 7, 2005 Report Share Posted June 7, 2005 Pickups are a real personal choice. It really depends on what you want it to sound like. There are plenty of choices, just don't get sucked in by too much of the advertised hype. You can get some very reasonably priced pickups that will sound great. Just do a lot of research. Go try some LPs with different pickups and see what your ears tell you is the best. Good luck! Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 7, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2005 Ok, that sounds good But what pickups do you guys think the typical LP would have? (I think that I want that kind of look, and I'll base my tone prefferences a bit on that)... -Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 7, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2005 Just so I can get an idea of what LP's usually have...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted June 8, 2005 Report Share Posted June 8, 2005 Maybe this woill help ( if you haven't allready looked). Gibson-LP Or Seymour Duncan for referance. SD Bartolini's site has some nice tips also. Bart's Hope that helps a bit, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 8, 2005 Report Share Posted June 8, 2005 LPs famously have humbuckers, but they started out with P90's, and many people still prefer the P90s. I a P90 guy myself, but since I do some home-based recording and I like to eliminate noise as easily as possible, I'd rather have some hum-cancelling P-90s like the Virtual P90 (stupid choice of word, "virtual"... it's not 1991 when that was a big buzzword... <laff> ) but that's about it. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2005 I like to eliminate noise as easily as possible, I'd rather have some hum-cancelling P-90s like the Virtual P90 (stupid choice of word, "virtual"... it's not 1991 when that was a big buzzword... <laff> ) but that's about it. Greg ← Where did you find your p-90's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 8, 2005 Report Share Posted June 8, 2005 I found them in my guitar. <laff> Mine are Seymour Duncans that came with the Godin LG. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2005 (edited) Thanks a lot for your responses about the pickups, guys! It's a lot help! On a different note, I talked to my project advisor (as I mentioned earlier this guitar is for a project), and I told him my plans for the guitar. I told him that I wanted to use a u-channel truss rod. I have searched this question in the forums, but I didn't find an answer: If I use the Martin style adjustable rod from Stewmac, do I need and anchor in the heel-end of the rod?, and will a gibson Hex nut fit on the end, or do I just adjust it with an allen wrench?. AND, do I need a wooden strip, or fillament, like Secth used when covering up the truss rod (can I simply route a channel, put the rod in, cover with fretboard?) Your feedback will be kindly accepted -Daniel Edited June 8, 2005 by eckodanny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalig Posted June 9, 2005 Report Share Posted June 9, 2005 what type of les paul are you thinking of making, like the standard, custom etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 9, 2005 Report Share Posted June 9, 2005 Isn't the Martin style truss-rod too short? By Martin, I'm assuming acoustic guitar, though I suppose there could be an electric guitar truss-rod described as "Martin style" because of the engineering. If it IS for acoustics, I'd reconsider and go with something longer, designed for electric. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setch Posted June 10, 2005 Report Share Posted June 10, 2005 'Martin Style' simply means a u-channel trussrod. All the rods I've seen for sale are plenty long enough for use in electric guitar necks, and I've used them in my last 4 necks, 3 single action, and one double action in Simo's bolt on neck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 10, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2005 (edited) 'Martin Style' simply means a u-channel trussrod. All the rods I've seen for sale are plenty long enough for use in electric guitar necks, ← Yep, Setch is correct on that topic, sorry for not explaining fully, here's the link. -Daniel Edited June 10, 2005 by eckodanny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 10, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2005 (edited) what type of les paul are you thinking of making, like the standard, custom etc? ← I would like to build a standard LP, at least now, beacause of the discussion about the supreme , but my plans are for a custom, so I think I'll go with that. They are similar right? Oh yeah, can you guys look a couple posts back to my questions about the truss rod? Thanks -Daniel Edited June 10, 2005 by eckodanny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted June 10, 2005 Report Share Posted June 10, 2005 No offence Daniel, guys...but...I've got to say...THIS THREAD IS WIERD. In My Opinion...a Les Paul is NOT a first time project...I wouldn't even encourge someone to try their own fret job...this thread is strangely silly....LP Supreme ...for a first time builder...I don't think so!!!!! Get ye to Universaljems and check out this kit: Les Paul Kit ...start small...it will be less expensive, you will get a guitar out of it, it will look like a Les Paul, you will enjoy it...and it will provide you with a springboard for future projects as you progress... For example, unbolt the neck and build a new body, try out different pickups and electronics on it...practice some finishing... Ok...it's not a Les Paul...but I can pretty much guarantee...neither will whatever comes of what you build from scratch, as a first time builder, be a Les Paul, Supreme or otherwise, if you ever finish it at all... Anyway...as I say no offence...but I think someone should be encouraging people to do something achievable... Anyone what to comment? (BTW...I quite like the supreme, I wish my LP had cavities, after years of playing it I'm sure I'll suffer permanent back injury as a result!).... pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 10, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2005 No offence taken, Pete, I can accept criticism. You have a point, but if you read a bit further back, you would see that we already dimissed the idea of having to make my own fret board (since I can get one off Stewmac), and I have already decided not to make a Supreme but a Custom instead. I suppose you're right when you say that a LP isn't a recomended 1st time project, but I think that I would like to try it. I will take what you said into consideration. Thanks for the comment -Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted June 10, 2005 Report Share Posted June 10, 2005 Good...Well then...as a LP Custom owner...and not to kill discussion....I definitely consider routing tone chambers into it, a real Les Paul is just too heavy, it's crazy! I also think they might add a little character to the sound...sometimes they do sound a little too smooth... If you wanted to do a kind of Hot Rod Paul...maybe you could incorporate a neck thru design. The Magnet attached control plate is a good one...I have already got that worked out for my aluminium guitar I'm working of...must have been reading my mind. I'm keen on the idea as I'll have batteries that will need changing and access to the trem cavity for string changes...I want a real smooth completely "screwless" kind of look on the back. Anyway...back to the LP's folks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 12, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 (edited) Anyway...back to the LP's folks ← So, do you guys know what I should do about my truss rod? (If you haven't seen my question, read back a few posts) -Daniel Edited June 12, 2005 by eckodanny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 12, 2005 Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 I would strongly strongly encourage you to do something very basic like a telecaster instead. My current guitar is for all intents and purposes very much like a chamered DC Les Paul. It's a pain in the arse to do it right as a first-timer. I'm going slower than molasses and I wish that I had done something simpler so that by now I'd at least have a guitar to show for my work. Going back in time, I would have done either a tele or a Musicman Axis type guitar. I'm learning lots as I go, and I know that you probably have all the optimism, confidence, and even patience to bite off a major project. Other people encouraged me to do something more simple and I didn't listen. I strongly urge you not to make the same mistake I did. Regarding the truss rod-- the channel you will rout in your neck is the rod's own anchor. It won't go any further back than the end of the channel, after all. It looks to be adjusted by an Allen key. When you buy the rod, you won't need additional hardware to install it, if that's what you're asking. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 12, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 (edited) Thanks Greg, Do you know if I should rout the channel deep enough for the truss rod and a wooden strip (to fit above the rod)? Or is there no need to do that? -Daniel Edited June 12, 2005 by eckodanny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted June 12, 2005 Report Share Posted June 12, 2005 I would strongly strongly encourage you to do something very basic like a telecaster instead. ... Other people encouraged me to do something more simple and I didn't listen. I strongly urge you not to make the same mistake I did. ← no comment...psw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2005 Greg, Do you think that a Tele would be an easier project than a LP because it is not carved top? Maybe a Flat top LP would be an easier first timer tyhan a carved top... I would, however, like to build this guitar from scratch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 21, 2005 Report Share Posted June 21, 2005 I'm no expert, but common sense dictates that almost everything about a (standard) Tele project will be easier than the LP. Keep in mind that I'm referring to a "standard" tele-- of course an LP shape can have tele characteristics and a tele shape can have LP characteristics (including carved top). Consider: 1. Pickups in a tele are mounted to the bridge and a pickguard. Even if you eff up routing, the flaws will be covered up. LP pickup and electronics routing requires more precision and effort. 2. Bolt-on vs. mortise and tenon construction. To some people, this is 'six of one, half dozen of the other' and to them one isn't really more difficult than the other. But, many others feel that set-necks require a bit more effort and precision. 3. Headstock construction-- no angled headstock to worry about. Again, (and having done one) a scarf joint isn't all THAT tricky, but it's still an extra step by comparison 4. Flat top of the tele vs. carved top of the LP 5. Binding is almost 'required' to make most LPs look good, though it's certainly not a rule. Teles, on the other hand, don't come standard with binding 6. No neck angle on a standard tele, compared to a slight neck angle on a standard LP. 7. Mounting a tele bridge is 'generally' easier than an LP because you don't have posts and bushings to worry about. Line it up, drill pilot holes, and screw it in. ------ Basically, Fender and his team engineered the Tele to be easy to make, at a factory, by unskilled workers. It stands to reason that a tele project would be easier to make. However, nothing's stopping you from: a ) being ambitious. I recommend against it, but not everyone will run into the same walls I have. Your mileage may vary. b ) making an LP shape, but using tele-like engineering/specs Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eckodanny Posted June 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2005 Youre right Greg, I am thinking seriously about making a simpler LP beacause of your and the other guys' recomendations Im thinking about this: -Material finish, which will hide slight imperfections -Flat top, so that i dont have to carve that much, and i have to make a smaller neck ange -No binding, because of the material finish -Bolt-on neck, (this one is just an idea...) Would this make my project easier? My LP would now be LP shaped, but would incorporate tele style specs... I would still like to build this guitar with a headstock angle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 21, 2005 Report Share Posted June 21, 2005 The scarf joint is really no problem at all, so I say go for it, for the headstock angle. Don't know about fabric finishes since I've never tried one. I've seen very few that I like the LOOK of, but if you have a pattern you already like, it's something to consider. I wouldn't do it just to cover flaws, though. Most of the areas where you're likely to make a mistake aren't going to be 'hidden' by the fabric anyhow. For example, your pickup cavities. Do it because you like the look of it. Don't plan for mistakes! My examples just showed all the possible areas of error, but I didn't mean to imply that you're definitely going to make them. You may very well end up doing an awesome and clean job! I DO think that a non-binded flat-top, bolt-on LP will be an easier project than a full-on LP; however, beyond that, I haven't much opinion or experience. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.