Not Quite A Tele...

[ScottR]

The grayish discoloration is probably gummed wood dust and oil getting into the pores. Typically with Danish oil, you don't sand after application. You do all of your finish sanding prior to applying the oil. Then you apply the oil heavily and let it sit and soak for 15 minutes or so and then wipe it off. If there were any dry looking areas before you wiped it off, it means that area soaked it all up and needs more. Apply again and see if any areas look dry after 15 minutes. If so wipe off and repeat until the wood won't soak any more oil in. Then wipe that off  and you are done. You do not want any surface film build up, that is not what Danish oil is for.

I haven't tried @Mr Natural's steel wool for the last coat's applicator, but assume the concept is the same, wipe it on and let it soak and wipe it off.

I did leave a surface film with it once and used the steel wool to rub that off, which worked nicely, leaving a very smooth and slick surface. And no discoloration, because it all sticks to the steel wool fibers.

SR

[mistermikev]

30 minutes ago, ScottR said:

The grayish discoloration is probably gummed wood dust and oil getting into the pores. Typically with Danish oil, you don't sand after application. You do all of your finish sanding prior to applying the oil. Then you apply the oil heavily and let it sit and soak for 15 minutes or so and then wipe it off. If there were any dry looking areas before you wiped it off, it means that area soaked it all up and needs more. Apply again and see if any areas look dry after 15 minutes. If so wipe off and repeat until the wood won't soak any more oil in. Then wipe that off  and you are done. You do not want any surface film build up, that is not what Danish oil is for.

I haven't tried @Mr Natural's steel wool for the last coat's applicator, but assume the concept is the same, wipe it on and let it soak and wipe it off.

I did leave a surface film with it once and used the steel wool to rub that off, which worked nicely, leaving a very smooth and slick surface. And no discoloration, because it all sticks to the steel wool fibers.

SR

i wasn't trying to level sand it or anything... what happened is I forgot to (pre) paint shielding into my pickup cavities.  Doing so I had got a little shielding outside the pickup cav (because I didn't want to risk putting tape on the finish).

I tried to use water to get shielding paint off... almost worked.  then I sanded... and voilla - i ended up with exactly what you described: gummed wood dust and oil. 

Perhaps I should have tried min spirits?

either way - thank you I appreciate the info.

[ScottR]

3 minutes ago, mistermikev said:

Perhaps I should have tried min spirits?

Probably a good idea or even lacquer thinner, or steel wool (which I hate using because it leaves steel wool dust/fibers everywhere....sometimes it is what's best for the situation though). The thing is, the oil goes pretty far into the pores. so if you're not willing to keep sanding until you get it all, the risk of gummed wood dust and oil will always be there.

SR

[Mr Natural]

47 minutes ago, ScottR said:

I haven't tried @Mr Natural's steel wool for the last coat's applicator, but assume the concept is the same, wipe it on and let it soak and wipe it off.

i read where this is what carl thompson does on his basses so that is where I got it from- with danish oil- the first coat is the most important- and you should flood the hell out of it- put more on that is needed- let it soak in- then as scottR says wipe it off after 15 min or so. if the wood soaks it up during that first 15 min- put more on- flood it- cause after the first coat- the second doesnt really matter-(it will be blotchy/leave spots on surface) if the first coat was done correctly- and basically the steel wool/wet sand with oil is to do nothing more that slick/shine that wood.

its a wet sand/wipe off immediately type thing (you dont want any steel wool fibers sticking to the wood- that would defeat the purpose). follow that up with some wax on the body and that puppy will shine. 

watco is what carl thompson uses and I followed suit as well and have never used another brand.

keep in mind-danish oil offers almost zero protection- but is better than bare wood as bare wood gets dirty quick and atleast you can semi-wash up/or worst case sand and apply more oil with danish oil aand have it look great again

[mistermikev]

12 minutes ago, Mr Natural said:

i read where this is what carl thompson does on his basses so that is where I got it from- with danish oil- the first coat is the most important- and you should flood the hell out of it- put more on that is needed- let it soak in- then as scottR says wipe it off after 15 min or so. if the wood soaks it up during that first 15 min- put more on- flood it- cause after the first coat- the second doesnt really matter-(it will be blotchy/leave spots on surface) if the first coat was done correctly- and basically the steel wool/wet sand with oil is to do nothing more that slick/shine that wood.

its a wet sand/wipe off immediately type thing (you dont want any steel wool fibers sticking to the wood- that would defeat the purpose). follow that up with some wax on the body and that puppy will shine. 

watco is what carl thompson uses and I followed suit as well and have never used another brand.

keep in mind-danish oil offers almost zero protection- but is better than bare wood as bare wood gets dirty quick and atleast you can semi-wash up/or worst case sand and apply more oil with danish oil aand have it look great again

i would give another thanks but apparently I'm out for the day - great info tho!  if it's good 'nuff for carl!  should probably sticky this response - I'll def reference it next time I do danish. 

[ScottR]

I'm thinking about wiring these days. I remember (sort of) a conversation about the differences between 50's style wiring and what is normally done these days. I recall thinking the 50's style had some intriguing things going on and that I might need to try that. I no longer remember what those were though.....can someone remind me?

SR

[mistermikev]

https://www.seymourduncan.com/blog/tips-and-tricks/lespaulwiring

in short:

The modern version will maintain the overall volume better when you roll down the volume but at the cost of losing a bit of high end

the 50s version keeps the amount of treble the same but drops a bit in volume as soon as you roll down the tone pot.

[ScottR]

Thanks Mike.

Those diagrams also bring up another difference I've often wondered about. They show the cap running between the volume and tone pots. Others just have it running from a lug on the tone pot to the housing of that same pot (ground). What are the differences in those variances? I normally use the ground to the same pot method.

SR

[mistermikev]

9 minutes ago, ScottR said:

Thanks Mike.

Those diagrams also bring up another difference I've often wondered about. They show the cap running between the volume and tone pots. Others just have it running from a lug on the tone pot to the housing of that same pot (ground). What are the differences in those variances? I normally use the ground to the same pot method.

SR

I would think that would just mean you roll off less treble as you hit 0-5 on the pot with the cap on lug 3... so it would spread that rolloff over the entire 0-10 (if on lug 2).  I was wondering what the effect would be with the cap on the master tone but I guess since there's nothing resisting it it would be equiv of having it on either pot... and depending on the lug.

[mistermikev]

I'd like to change my answer (I misread your post).  I think you mean what is the dif between tone cap going to 2 or 3 of TONE pot... and there is no dif there.  (my bad)

[Andyjr1515]

10 hours ago, ScottR said:

Thanks Mike.

Those diagrams also bring up another difference I've often wondered about. They show the cap running between the volume and tone pots. Others just have it running from a lug on the tone pot to the housing of that same pot (ground). What are the differences in those variances? I normally use the ground to the same pot method.

SR

I might be wrong, @ScottR , but I think the cap across to the two pots is an important element in the playing advantage of what many of us call '50s wiring'.

From a player pov, it is that the volume pot position interacts more with the tone than the modern wiring and this gives you effectively two  interdependent tone adjustments.  The volume affects the tone and the tone affects the volume.  

So, for an example, and setting the amp clean on the edge of breakup: low vol high tone will give you almost acoustic cleanness; wind up the volume, drop the tone a touch will give you mild crunch; wind the tone up will give you screaming overdrive; drop the tone right down will give you classic blues smoothness.  And all this without any pedals and without touching the amp!

But the bad news is this isnt full on full off stuff. It is fluid and near infinitely variable.  So the player has to really tune into the sound and get a feel of how the tiniest changes can make a big difference - then remember what did what!  Add a second pickup and it can get VERY complicated.

But it is a sub-5 minute solder job.  I always suggest folks who are interested to just try it.  Swop the wires on the bridge pickup, and play bridge only and try it.  If the results are unimpressive, just undo the couple of solder changes and you are back to the beginning

[ScottR]

15 hours ago, mistermikev said:

I'd like to change my answer (I misread your post).  I think you mean what is the dif between tone cap going to 2 or 3 of TONE pot... and there is no dif there.  (my bad)

I think you had it right the first time.

And thanks for your help, the electronics side of guitar building is my weakest point.

SR

[ScottR]

7 hours ago, Andyjr1515 said:

I might be wrong, @ScottR , but I think the cap across to the two pots is an important element in the playing advantage of what many of us call '50s wiring'.

From a player pov, it is that the volume pot position interacts more with the tone than the modern wiring and this gives you effectively two  interdependent tone adjustments.  The volume affects the tone and the tone affects the volume.  

So, for an example, and setting the amp clean on the edge of breakup: low vol high tone will give you almost acoustic cleanness; wind up the volume, drop the tone a touch will give you mild crunch; wind the tone up will give you screaming overdrive; drop the tone right down will give you classic blues smoothness.  And all this without any pedals and without touching the amp!

But the bad news is this isnt full on full off stuff. It is fluid and near infinitely variable.  So the player has to really tune into the sound and get a feel of how the tiniest changes can make a big difference - then remember what did what!  Add a second pickup and it can get VERY complicated.

But it is a sub-5 minute solder job.  I always suggest folks who are interested to just try it.  Swop the wires on the bridge pickup, and play bridge only and try it.  If the results are unimpressive, just undo the couple of solder changes and you are back to the beginning

Thanks Andy, that was what I was trying to remember. Is the cap across the pots the only element of 50's wiring, or there other wiring differences as well? This guitar will have two wire humbuckers and a three way blade switch, neck-both-bridge set up.

SR

[Andyjr1515]

This is the basic circuit I use:

So, as you can see, it's just which lug you solder which bit to.  For a two pickup arrangement it's exactly the same in all other respects as modern 'standard' except for the above on both pairs of pots.

I'll find a decent video when I get a moment illustrating the sounds....

[Andyjr1515]

This isn't bad in terms of what you can do with each pair:

The first ten minutes illustrates what I mean.  The guy has no pedals and no mate changing anything at the amp.

A two pickup guitars will have the same myriad of tones on each pickup and then additionally the mix between them.  It's than all about working out the best combinations and permutations of knob positions for the sounds you want.  

[mistermikev]

1 hour ago, ScottR said:

I think you had it right the first time.

And thanks for your help, the electronics side of guitar building is my weakest point.

SR

if we are talking about the tone control only... not the interaction between the tone control and volume... and specifically whether or not the cap is A) between lug1 and back-of-the-tone-pot(with lug2 being the incoming connection), or B ) BEFORE lug 2...with lug 1 connected directly to back of the tone pot (gnd)...  I don't believe there is any difference.  Either way the tone pot is only a resistor and the second half of it (lug3) is un-usued so it's a single resistor with a variable value between 0 and 250K (assuming 250k pot).

(note that I'm talking about the modern version in B... and my A is the common variation on a tone pot NOT picktured in the seymour article) to confuse things more... in the seymour article the vintage wireup has lug 2 of the tone pot going to gnd and the cap connecting to lug 1.  this would be functionally equiv to B.

It's counter intuitive to me because you'd think in the case of B: the resistance of the tone pot would be AFTER the cap... which should make it a high pass filter(cuts lows).  Resistor + cap = LPF and cap + resistor = HPF. 

I have to read up some more on why that ISN'T the case(hi pass filter), as I understand it has something to do with the circuit being dc?

for the record in the seymour article they are talking more about which lug of the VOLUME pot the <tone circuit> is connected to, and also whether the pickup is on lug2 (sent to gnd) or the switch is on lug 2 (disables both pickups when either tone is rolled completely off).

[curtisa]

11 hours ago, mistermikev said:

It's counter intuitive to me because you'd think in the case of B: the resistance of the tone pot would be AFTER the cap... which should make it a high pass filter(cuts lows).   

The cap is still allowing highs to bleed to ground, whether the variable resistance of the tone pot is before it or after it, so it is nominally still a low pass filter (or high cut, whichever you prefer) whichever way it is wired up. The variable resistance that is the tone pot just makes it harder or easier for those highs to be swallowed up by ground. The bathtub can have a 0.5 inch diameter plug hole or a foot in diameter - either way the water is going down the drain. The only difference is how quickly it disappears.

 

Quote

Resistor + cap = LPF and cap + resistor = HPF.

You're thinking of the situation where the cap is inserted fully in series with the audio signal and the resistor is connected across the audio signal and ground.  In all the tone controls mentioned above, whether they're vintage 50s/modern/left handed/superthunderpatrolmeister etc, the cap is always connected across the audio signal and ground, making it a low pass filter.

 

12 hours ago, Andyjr1515 said:

This is the basic circuit I use:

The only difference between the above diagram and 'modern' wiring is where the top of the cap on the volume pot is connected to. Cap to middle lug of the volume pot is the 50s scheme (as per above). Cap to left lug is the modern scheme. In the former case you're 'toning' the output of the volume control. In the latter you're 'toning' the pickup before 'voluming'. 

The Seymour Duncan article that @mistermikev linked to earlier may confuse things somewhat by also switching the lug terminations on the tone pot as well in the two diagrams presented. This difference between the two schemes is a red herring, as exchanging the case (ground) and cap terminations on the tone pot makes no difference either electrically or sonically:

[Andyjr1515]

2 hours ago, curtisa said:

 

Cap to middle lug of the volume pot is the 50s scheme (as per above). Cap to left lug is the modern scheme. In the former case you're 'toning' the output of the volume control. In the latter you're 'toning' the pickup before 'voluming'. 

 

Best explanation of WHY it makes the difference I've ever seen

An explanation well worthy of me shamelessly stealing 

[curtisa]

Steal away, by all means. It beats the other analogy I was piecing together in my head, where the wire from the pickup is the Bridge of Khazad-dûm, the signal from the pickup is The Balrog, and the capacitor is Gandalf. An' Gandalf does this thing wiv' his staff and smashes it onto the bridge and yells out 'YOU SHALL NOT PASS!!!!'. An' the Balrog, he's all like 'Steady on, guv'. I was just goin' to get a little bit past ya to go an' get a Cornetto from the shops'. An' Gandalf is all like, 'well, if you;re gonna get a Cornetto, can I give you a coupla quid and you go an get me a Snickers bar while you're at it?'. An' the Balrog is all, 'Yeah, mate. I can go jus' this once for ya'.

...but then it all got a bit too complicated...

[Andyjr1515]

10 minutes ago, curtisa said:

Steal away, by all means. It beats the other analogy I was piecing together in my head, where the wire from the pickup is the Bridge of Khazad-dûm, the signal from the pickup is The Balrog, and the capacitor is Gandalf. An' Gandalf does this thing wiv' his staff and smashes it onto the bridge and yells out 'YOU SHALL NOT PASS!!!!'. An' the Balrog, he's all like 'Steady on, guv'. I was just goin' to get a little bit past ya to go an' get a Cornetto from the shops'. An' Gandalf is all like, 'well, if you;re gonna get a Cornetto, can I give you a coupla quid and you go an get me a Snickers bar while you're at it?'. An' the Balrog is all, 'Yeah, mate. I can go jus' this once for ya'.

...but then it all got a bit too complicated...

Actually, I'm English.  So I'm going to steal that one too 

[curtisa]

It's amazing how much Lord of the Rings mirrors real life 

So @ScottR, when are you going to wrest back control of this thread of yours?

[mistermikev]

"You're thinking of the situation where the cap is inserted fully in series with the audio signal and the resistor is connected across the audio signal and ground.  In all the tone controls mentioned above, whether they're vintage 50s/modern/left handed/superthunderpatrolmeister etc, the cap is always connected across the audio signal and ground, making it a low pass filter."

Mine eyes have seen the light!  Right-o.  the output of the circuit is before either cap+R or R+cap... not after the cap or resistor... missed that.  Nicely said.

[ScottR]

6 hours ago, curtisa said:

It's amazing how much Lord of the Rings mirrors real life 

So @ScottR, when are you going to wrest back control of this thread of yours?

In a few hours.....

In the meantime, thanks for all the insights you three provided. That was exactly what I was hoping for.

SR

[ScottR]

22 hours ago, Andyjr1515 said:

This isn't bad in terms of what you can do with each pair:

The first ten minutes illustrates what I mean.  The guy has no pedals and no mate changing anything at the amp.

A two pickup guitars will have the same myriad of tones on each pickup and then additionally the mix between them.  It's than all about working out the best combinations and permutations of knob positions for the sounds you want.  

Very nice.

SR

[ScottR]

I got some of that Simtec Easy Sanding Sealer that @Skyjerk recommended in his amazing Rootbeer Float build. The stuff appears to be everything he said it was. It filled all the pores...and zebrawood and ash have some pores...and was clear and hard and shows no signs of sinking. And it truly is easy sanding. I created some giant orange peel and sanded it all smooth with one piece (not sheet), one piece of 220. No clogging what-so-ever.

Sealed:

Three coats built up this much:

Leveling:

SR