Jump to content

Voting November 2018's Guitar Of The Month is now open


Forum Manager
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


curtisa last won the day on November 8

curtisa had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

600 Excellent

1 Follower

About curtisa

  • Rank
    Veteran Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Tasmania, Australia
  • Country Flag

Recent Profile Visitors

8,881 profile views
  1. It's entirely possible that Mr Angove came to a similar conclusion; that the method of securing the strings was the key to the perceived differences in sounds between guitars. Eg, string-through body vs top loading, saddle construction, bridge material, floating trem vs hardtail etc. But the true meaning of his conclusion that 'wood doesn't matter' has been lost due to the unavailability of his research paper to the general public (if indeed it ever did actually exist).
  2. The pages you link to all point to the same study by Matthew Angove at Latrobe University from about 6 years ago. The problem I have with that reference is that it's impossible to find anything more about his work other than the announcement that he did a couple of months research and came to a conclusion. I've searched before and never been able to locate his research paper, so there's no way of being able to study his methods and measurements to find out how and why he came to his conclusion that material and body shape make no difference. That said, I'm personally of the belief that the whole tonewood-in-electric-guitars is a pointless debate. I suspect the material the guitar is made from does make some difference, but in the case of the electric guitar there are other things that make the differences directly related to the materials alone disappear into insignificance. The build quality of the instrument, the pickups, whatever effects you run through, the amp, the speaker and the volume you're playing at would easily swamp any differences in a basswood vs swamp ash body. The videos in the first link are kinda neat but they don't really prove that material does or does not make a difference to the tone, other than whatever material the guitar is made from the end result still sounds like an electric guitar. I'd rather just play the damn thing and enjoy the experience of making music on one of the most influential instruments of the last 100 years, than try and find reasons to like or dislike a rosewood fretboard vs a maple one.
  3. curtisa

    Not Quite A Tele...

    The zebrano in the sunset lighting almost looks too laid back for you, Scott. I trust you'll treat it to some jaw-dropping stain and buffing that we're used to from you around these parts?
  4. I had assumed it was a beauty spot Fill it with abalone and call it custom inlay. Take that, you philistines!
  5. Don't bother. Star grounding makes no difference in guitar wiring compared to good, clean soldering, and in many respects is more work than it's worth. Ground it whichever way you like; the only important factor is that your grounding layout is clean and straightforward.
  6. So you'll be rebuilding this one around the jack socket then?
  7. curtisa

    NOVA Custom U.S.A.???

    Google didn't take long to pull some results. Nova appears to have been a company set up by John Buscarino in the 90s to build customised Strat and Tele lookalikes. He still builds but has stepped away from solidbody guitars and now mainly makes acoustics and archtops. You could try contacting John via his website to see if he can tell you about it Google images returns a few examples of Nova electrics here and there. From what little discussion there appears to floating around about them, they appear to be (have been) well-regarded. This thread appears to offer some information about the history behind Nova, but it is buried amongst the derailers and could be nothing more than hearsay.
  8. curtisa

    2003 Fender Esquire Scorpion

    Installing a Floyd is a big task, but if your cohort is equipped and willing that's entirely your decision. Things to consider: Double-check before you commit router to wood that you have sufficient clearance underneath the bridge pickup for the spring cavity and sufficient thickness in the body overall to accept the sustain block. The body of that guitar looks to be carved, falling away towards the edges. This will make securing the Floyd router template tricky as there isn't much in the way of flat surfaces on the body to attach the template to. Double-check that the neck can accept the nut you have. The installation of the R2 nut requires that a shelf be cut into the top of the neck where the existing nut is currently fitted, a fiddly job unless you have some jigs and clamps available to you to position and secure the neck while making the cut. Also consider that you have the truss rod access immediately underneath the nut (will installing the nut inhibit access to the truss rod for future adjustment?), the width of the neck at the nut and the string spacing (is the nut the right dimensions for your neck?). The neck looks to be set in, so you'll be doing the whole operation with the guitar fully-assembled. Also makes the risk of a screw-up more fatal, as you'll have no hope of replacing the neck with an aftermarket one if the nut installation goes badly. The removal of wood from the neck and body will leave the existing finish pretty scarred, so if looks matter you'll also be dealing with a refinish job at the end.
  9. curtisa

    First build

    'Fender Jaguar Wiring Kit' seems to return plenty of results in Google, some for less than $60US. You'd get the two single coil pickups supplied, but you'd just chuck them in a drawer and save them for a different project, and it'd probably still be cheaper than buying all the parts one by one. You'd then just replace them with your two Seymour Duncan humbuckers like-for-like. You will have to modify (or replace) the supplied pickguard to accept the physically larger humbuckers, all the little toggle switches and those two edge-mounted volume/tone controls that the Jaguar uses.
  10. curtisa

    Help with an Ibanez wiring H-H with a 5 way

    The way I read that switch with the diagram you have posted, it should give: Position 1 (switch all the way right) = bridge humbucker Position 2 = inner (or outer, not sure) coils of each humbucker in parallel Position 3 = both humbuckers in parallel Position 4 = neck humbucker coil split Position 5 (switch all the way left) = neck humbucker
  11. curtisa

    Help with an Ibanez wiring H-H with a 5 way

    If it's come from a HSH Ibby, it's likely to just be a standard 2-pole 5-position switch. Possibly with the in-between positions 2 and 4 merged on lugs 1/2 and 2/3. I actually still have the original 5-way switch from the RG7620 (removed it when I converted it to a LP toggle). I can check it out if you like and see what pins connect to what as the switch is moved through each position if that helps?
  12. curtisa

    Help with an Ibanez wiring H-H with a 5 way

    The magic will be in the switch, which will not be your average off-the-shelf item from Stewmac. A standard 5-way 2 pole blade switch will not give you those pickup combos. If this switching scheme is anything like the one I had in my old Ibanez RG7620 (twin humbuckers, 5-way blade) the switch itself will contain a custom PCB that gives all manner of wierd and wonderful terminal arrangements. From memory the combos were bridge humbucker, bridge+neck outer coils in parallel, bridge+neck humbucker, neck coils in parallel, neck humbucker. You might be able to make something close using one of those Oak Grgisby 5-way mega switches (the one with 20 solder teminals). Otherwise you'll either need the exact Ibanez replacement switch, or revise the switching scheme to something else that doesnt require such an unusual part. The 3-wire pickup arrangement is just a simplified variant on 4-wire + shield. The tapping point between the two coils in the humbucker is hardwired out on one wire instead of provided as two separate wires which you would normally join together in the control cavity. And the shield is also hardwired to the cold side of the humbucker, saving you another wire to manhandle yourself. The downside is that you can't do special stuff like play with phase reversing and parallel coils within the one humbucker.
  13. Damn right it did. It was the rosette that did it
  14. curtisa

    Some electrical question

    Although, on second thought, are you sure there's any value in having a radio-style on/off switch built in to the volume control? The switch will normally disconnect when the volume is wound down to zero, but the pickup will be inaudible with the volume at zero anyway, which kinda renders the entire premise of deselecting the pickup with the volume pot a bit redundant. If you specified normal volume controls for each pickup instead, that would free up your requirement for independent push-pull coil split on each of the humbucker.
  15. curtisa

    Some electrical question

    Fixed They're a bit rarer, but still available as a replacement item from specialist vintage radio restoration sellers. You're unlikely to find them in a bricks-and-mortar store though. 250K log from Radio Daze 500k log from Tubes and More Combined on the rotary volume/on-off switches? Yes, too much to expect from a single pot. You could have the push-pull on the tone pot and have it split both humbuckers simultaneously though.