Swenglish

Gut feelings have my full respect, and I think gut feeling was what directed the drawing hand of Leo Fender and Ted McCarty (tele-stratocaster + Les Paul, respectively). Some tricks might help the guts in their toil, though. Consistency in shapes is one. For example, when sketching the shape of the guitar depicted here, I used the same rotated oval shape twice, just different in size. Any other angle or shape on the cutout oval would have been wrong IMO. And I regret that I didn't use the same oval shape a third time, in the peghead. And maybe that is what gut feeling is all about - we feel this consistency or we feel the lack of it. But we can, as designers, profit from this and try to create in a consistent manner from the start.

Yep, right... just a whim. Guess you've got your answer for your initial question about that low priced GFS tremolo... The original Bigsby is expensive, yes, but it also raises the value of the guitar - and I believe quality really matters here. And they do look cool: (the guitar of the late bluesman Johnny Smoketoomuch ;-) ) Well, I know the B16 pictured doesn't fit your design - or your concept. But - IMHO - a guitar (hand-)made in the US can't compete with price to chinese low price products. Have a look at Sunsmiles product range: http://www.ssmii.com/guitars.asp Their SST 01 Strat copy costs $37.50. Their double-necked SG knockoff costs $140 ... scary ... Sunsmile may be the producer of Xaviere. But, luckily, there are people who wants to pay for top quality. Those are your customers. They want the best pickups, the best hardware, maybe an original design (your unique selling point). I say - go for Bigsby. FWIW //Erik

A few thoughts from me on this: 21, 22 or 24 frets wouldn't matter, as long as the scale length measures 25.5". Couldn't it be so that this bridge is compensated for the necessary neck tilt (for Bigsby & clones) - 2.5 -- 3.0 degrees? I could be wrong here, but when I look at the pictures your neck doesn't seem to be tilted back (I know it's not mounted on the pictures, just laid out.) But if that's the case, it would result in too short a scale length. Just a guess from me. //Erik

Thanks for your encouraging comments, and I'm glad you like the design. I will post it as a GOTM entry, however I need to fix some issues first. The backside isn't polished yet, and there is no cover for the electronics cavity. Stay tuned. //Erik

Thanks. My first guitar was not very playable either. I was 19 when I built that. More than 5 kgs of massive mahogany and a Mighty mite-neck. Two DiMarzio Super Distortion. Got stolen eventually. Strong thiefs. I would like to put up my newbuilt guitar to the january GOTM, but the professional level there scares me a little... Cheers

"You've managed to create an original design that works" Now that was the nicest thing to say! Thank you. So you're really into the Gothenburg metal scene. Very... unexpected. A bit too old for that scene myself :-), I guess I've reached the blues age. Teenager in the late seventies - Alice Cooper, Led Zeppelin, Mountain, ZZ Top etc. TWtD. The guitar is ready for photo session (still missing two frets, though. You'll have to imagine them ;-) I will not unveil the backside yet, I have not finished the cavity plate. Pickups are Tonerider Rocksong (bridge) and Tonerider Alnico IV (neck). Bridge is Hipshot. Frets are Jescar EVO. You can see the neck stock at the strap button. Tuners are Grover Mini Rotomatics. The guitar is still waiting for truss rod cover and logo. As seen in the pictures there is an extremely small peghead. I wanted to keep the neck in one piece and keeping the strings in a straight line at the same time. And I think that pegheads in general, and Gibson's in particular, are unnecessary big and unproportional. I think my peghead is the smallest possible solution with standard tuners (yes, they do point in somewhat different directions - but what the heck - function is beauty ;-) The sound was no disppointment. Not at all. Som special characteristics. I will post a sound clip later maybe, if someone is interested. The Gibson fingerboard feels too flat for me, as I am accustomed to the 7" radius on my Fender clones. I guess I will get used to it. Comments and question are welcome as always. Cheers Erik

Thanks for the comments, I appreciate it. Eddie - next time you go ti Gothenburg, drop me a line and I can buy you a beer. BTW, many years ago - like 1996 - I was in Venezuela - on Isla Margarita. Niiice Now - my method of getting a sweet glossy finish on the guitar. You know, I've tried and I've tried ... on my earlier builds I've used nitrocellusa. I have a small compressor and spraygun and I have really been doing this by the book. First pore-filling on the mahogany, sanding down to grit 1600, and many (7-8) layers of that nitro laquer. And polish, polish, polish with a very fine polish compound. And it looked good. But not for ever. After some months the guitars lost their lustre, became more and more dull, and in spite of the many layers the laquer felt thin and fragile. I know - it's supposed to be thin. That's why Fender uses nitro only to the top coats (read that on tdrpi, some fender former employee wrote). There is a commmon belief that nitro laquer makes the guitar sound better - well, I don't subscribe to that. These are electric guitars and no Stradivarius. So I tried another kind of laquer this time - an oil-based varnish-like high gloss furniture laquer (Gammaldags möbellack -- Old Time furniture laquer). And yes, this was a joy to work with. Not as toxic as nitro, either. I put on six layers, I wetsanded every layer with 800 or something. And I gave every layer two days for drying. The last layer was a bit orange-peelish, but wetsanding and polishing took care of that (I never dared to sand the final layer before). And finally - that deep, glossy finish I always worked so hard for (and failed), now it was there: Oh, I almost forgot. The guitar was stained first. With an laquer-based mahogny-colored stain. And one more thing - the joints on the maple top was sealed with epoxy ( and sanded down) before staining. So why are there two frets missing? Because the fret wire is sold in lengths of 2 feet. Four feet made for 22 frets. Really, really annoying. Have to order two more feet. Another picture, hard to get the colors right - this is way too red. But maybe you get a sense of the beatiful maple. Not the standard tiger or curly maple, but something quite different. It's very vivid and "3D-ish": This picture is taken before wetsanding and polishing, you can see a bit of the orange peel in the reflection. Coming up next: Aaaah the gold, the gold... //Erik

This will be a beautiful and impressive guitar. And the Shopbot would make a very appropriate Christmas gift for me. What model do you have? (for my wish list)

Thanks for the nice comments! Eddie, as a matter of fact I do live in Gothenburg. Or, to be precise, a village like 10 km east of Gbg - Mölnlycke. I teach journalism at the University of Gothenburg. Glad you like our city. The guitar build has developed since my last post. The truss rod was changed - the traditional LP-truss rod didn't work. I tried it before glueing on the fingerboard, it tended to dig into the wood rather than adjust the neck. I experimented with different washers, but I just couldn't make it work. So I ordered a double action rod from Stewmac. Good bye 50's - hello 2012. There is no reason not to use modern solutions. Works beatifully. The fingerboard is also from Stewmac. I tried to make my own first, but the miter box I built was not precise enough and I didn't want to invest in a Stewmac kit that woould be used only a couple of times maximum. So I sent for an ebony fingerboard, Gibson scale length. (almost all of my guitars has Fender scale, so I wanted something different). Actually at a good price too (40 usd), I expected it to be more expensive. I also ordered abalone dots and golden fret wire. And binding. There were no problems whatsoever with the assembly of the dots and the fingerboard. Just being extremely cautious when trimming the fingerbord to the exact width - the neck width minus the binding X 2. That was not easy and a slow process for somebody as sloppy as myself. The fingerboard was glued with a very good Swedish wood glue that I use for almost everything. Probably much like Titebond. But for the binding I used quick epoxy. This was really difficult, the binding being stiff and unwilling. Next time I will do it in a sauna ;-) and use something better than epoxy. I read that you could dissolve binding material in aceton - that would the perfect glue for this. Anyone tried that? I put this picture on facebook and got the following comment from my exwife: "Nice, but wouldn't it look better if you used glue instead of tape?" Coming up: Laquer. Finally I have learned.

I am not that totaly skilled craftsman that can carve a top with carving gouges or those little planers you put on the fingers (like violin builders do). Neither do I own a cnc-machine. But I do own Adobe Illustrator and my router. And this is how i make a controlled carving: I use my drawing in full scale and add height curves, every curve is 1 mm. They are first drawn automatically, then tweaked by me to the profile I wanted. I printed this and glued it to top. Enter router. Starting from the rim (8 mm deep, 2 passes) and working my way in. Like 2 hours later I was finished and could start sanding. 3 hours later I had carved my first top. Happy happy: (Almost forgot - I routed the binding channel before I started) As you can see, I changed my mind about the pick ups. There will be humbuckers. And a Hipshot strings-through bridge. It will be dyed tobacco brown and the hardware will be gold.

Kind of presenting myself in this particular forum I would like to show some past builds. First - a chambered mahogany/maple Strat I built three years ago: If my house was on fire, I would save this guitar first. Well, maybe the kids first. Next build was my celebration of the Tele idea: Now, that's my blues guitar. After this glance in my rear mirror - back to the actual build in question here. Something quite different from the guitars above. Here is the embryo after glueing the mahogany "wings" on: Note on this: I use my router to cut the outline. Simply because I can handle that with more precision than my electric saw. And I don't own a bandsaw (which would have been the obvious choice if I did). To get a perfect flat surface for the joints I use a long stripe of sandpaper attached to my table. The outline was cut after the assembly (because the outline goes a bit into the center maple). Before the assembly I had also shaped the neck: I shaped the neck in four steps: First - the router, loaded with a V-shaped ball-bearing bit. Second - a nice sharp spoke shave Third - a coarse file Fourth - lots of sanding It was actually easier than i had imagined to get the shape I wanted. But of course I trained on other wood pieces first. Next, the maple cap is glued on. It's in three pieces. Figured maple selected from like 50 planks of standard stock. It's not AAA but there are some interesting patterns. And it's cheap. The neck is made from the same planks. Next: Carving of the top.

Hi good people. I've been reading and learning from this excellent web site for some years, but it's the first time I post. You know, I've just finished a build I'm really proud of. And, yes, I want to show it off and tell those interested how I made it. You know how it goes I will discuss design, construction and different choices I've made during the process. Problems I've encountered. Maybe some little tricks that could be useful for others. I haven't got very expensive tools. No CNC, no bandsaw. My favorite power tool is my overhand router. I have built some guitars before - but those were Fender-types with ready made necks. Now it was time for a neck-through challenge. Here is my first drawing: The squares around the shape and along the neck represents the standard dimensions of mahogany and maple. I didn't want to work with those huge pieces of mahogany which mostly ends up as sawdust and small strange shapes anyway. And they are expensive too. So standard dimension planks were to be used. The heart of of the guitar would obviously be the neck. It came out like this: 5-piece neck, maple and mahogany veneer. Now, levelling the neck. I prefer to use the router for this: I work in the open door of a small shed. Next image: the truss rod channel has been routed and the rod mounted. Note: the peghead is not glued on. I wanted it all to be one piece. I figured that if I made it small enough that would be possible. (oh the small tuners I had to buy...) Unfortunately I had to change that traditional truss rod later. A modern two-way rod is a way better choice IMO. This one crushed the wood rather than adjusting the (quite stiff) neck. To be conitinued... Feel free to comment. What do you think about the design? The choices so far? Questions? //erik