SawDust_Junkie Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Has anyone here built a Les Paul double cut-away ? Or know the dimensions for one ? Specifically the upper and lower bouts. I have a CAD drawing of a double cut-away that I got from somewhere on-line (can't remember at the moment where though), and I had a friend who has access to a CAD printer print me out a full scale copy. I noticed that the upper horn extends further toward the headstock than the lower horn by about 1/2" to 5/8". Is this standard , or is it just the preference of the person who drew up the CAD. I got to thinking that it could be in order to help balance the guitar by shifting the center of gravity, but I am not sure. It seems to me that on every double cut-away I have seen, the horns are perfectly symetrical and even. Am I wrong ? And if I am correct, and the horns should be the same, I took a standard Les Paul top I have cut out and simply drew the outline and then flipped the "template over and matched the outline to the top portion. This resulted in an outline with even, symetrical horns and looks more natural to me, but I did not know if the real LP doubles were that way ? Does anyone see a problem with my solution using the LP template ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SawDust_Junkie Posted January 18, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 (edited) Never mind guys, I went back to the Gibson web site and took another look at the doubles. After looking at them for a while, I have decided that the upper bout is indeed set a little further toward the head stock than the lower bout. The upper horn appears to be a little more pointed that the lower one also. I just never noticed this before. Since I have started this thread anyway, I might as well put it to good use. I have another question about carve top guitars in general. I know the top of the guitar has be angled to the same degree as the back angle of the neck. Does this angle continue from the heel of the neck where it joins the body, to just behind the bridge pickup ? ( this is assuming a two humbucker configuration). And then are the actual TOM bridge and tailpiece mounted on the portion of the body that is still at the original plane that the wood started with ? Like this illustration ? Edited January 19, 2005 by Fender4me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneMonkey Posted January 20, 2005 Report Share Posted January 20, 2005 Check your mail dude Kaj Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SawDust_Junkie Posted January 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2005 Thanks kaj ! Igot the second e-mail, but for some reason I can't open the files. I have VoloView express, which is supposed to support .dwg files, but it keeps telling me these files are in an unsupported format. Are the .dwg files the only thing you have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setch Posted January 20, 2005 Report Share Posted January 20, 2005 Since I have started this thread anyway, I might as well put it to good use. I have another question about carve top guitars in general. I know the top of the guitar has be angled to the same degree as the back angle of the neck. Does this angle continue from the heel of the neck where it joins the body, to just behind the bridge pickup ? ( this is assuming a two humbucker configuration). And then are the actual TOM bridge and tailpiece mounted on the portion of the body that is still at the original plane that the wood started with ? ← Take a look here: http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.ph...ndpost&p=115488 There are two angled portions, one at the neck angle, and one from the end of the fretboard to the bridge. The bridge itself sits on an unangled area, at least the way I build them. Here's one I did a while back based on the Gibson type doublecut, and I'll get back with some pics of one I'm working on now, which is a symetrical DC like you described. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SawDust_Junkie Posted January 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2005 Thanks for your reply setch. I have read through your thread on building a Les Paul, and I saw the pics your link went to. What I still don't quite understand is, is the angled portion of the body between the end of the fret board and the bridge at a different angle than that of the body/neck joint ? Or, do you simply continue the same angle back to the bridge ? In the picture you posted in this thread, is that Hipshot type bridge ? I didn't think the height on those were such that they required an angled neck to compensate for. I thought that the neck angle was to compensate for a TOM type bridge, which seems to set alot higher than the one in your picture. By the way, that is a beautiful guitar you posted ! I have also seen a thread here at PG that shows angling the back portion of the body, from the rear of the bridge to the rear of the body. Do you do yours this way ? If that's the case, it seems to me that the area directly under the bridge is the only part of the body that is at the original plane of the wood and not tapered as part of the carve. I am wrong ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneMonkey Posted January 21, 2005 Report Share Posted January 21, 2005 check your mail again dude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SawDust_Junkie Posted January 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2005 I got'em kaj. Thanks again. The .dxf format worked on my VoloView software, so I was able to open them this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneMonkey Posted January 21, 2005 Report Share Posted January 21, 2005 kushdy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SawDust_Junkie Posted January 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2005 I'm bumping this to see if setch got a chance to see my questions. Are ya out there setch ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setch Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 I'm bumping this to see if setch got a chance to see my questions. Are ya out there setch ? ← Sorry, composed a reply a few days ago and managed to lose it somehow... nuts The secondary angle is less steep than the neck angle. Draw it all out on paper and you'll see how the angles relate. Look at the pictures again, and read the text - It's all there... I really can't explain it better than I did there, unless I take the time to draw a bunch of diagrams etc. The bridge on that guitar is this one. It's not much lower than a tune-a-matic, so I needed neck angle, around 2 degrees I think. Even hardtail Fender bridges require neck angle if you are to use a flush fretboard - strat fretboards sit a little above the body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setch Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 I'm bumping this to see if setch got a chance to see my questions. Are ya out there setch ? ← Sorry, composed a reply a few days ago and managed to lose it somehow... nuts The secondary angle is less steep than the neck angle. Draw it all out on paper and you'll see how the angles relate. Look at the pictures again, and read the text - It's all there... I really can't explain it better than I did there, unless I take the time to draw a bunch of diagrams etc. The bridge on that guitar is this one. It's not much lower than a tune-a-matic, so I needed neck angle, around 2 degrees I think. Even hardtail Fender bridges require neck angle if you are to use a flush fretboard - strat fretboards sit a little above the body. 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.