x189player Posted February 3, 2005 Report Share Posted February 3, 2005 (edited) For my next project, I'd like to do a doubleneck guitar/bass- because I hate having to switch back and forth. Rather than building a new body, I'd like to work with existing bodies I have, to create a doubleneck version that never existed of one of my favorite guitars. Anyway, this raises questions. I've seen it done where somebody basically chops off the top and bottom third of two guitars and glues them together. Problem is, just like a traditional doubleneck, it's huge and heavy as heck. So what I'd like to do is section an existing body and move the center section downwards, then mount the second neck above it. This will also bring the necks much closer together, which is what I want (I've been experimenting by duct taping a second neck to a guitar and seeing how close I can stand it before my hand gets squeezed in the middle) it looks like there's just enough room. Here's what I have in mind: before: sectioned and rearranged: additional neck pocket routed for upper neck, bass bridge mounted on back leg: my question is... anyone know of issues involved with doing this? with slicing up a guitar body and gluing it back together? The body is canadian rock maple, not a solid piece but a plank glued-up at the factory from boards about 4" wide. Any opinions on whether I can get away with this without stripping the poly first? If I could do it, I'd almost be tempted to slice it and reglue it with red intact, then fill the lines with matching red paint (it's a toyota red color) then drop filling and polishing like a repair. all opinions welcome before I get out the saw... Edited February 3, 2005 by x189player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orgmorg Posted February 3, 2005 Report Share Posted February 3, 2005 Interesting idea. I can see how you have gotten around cutting straight thru the body by arranging the cuts around the trem hole, but remember that the saw is taking out wood that you will have to replace. Also, are you losing too much of the control cavity? ( don't wanna lose control ) The other problems I see are that it will be way overbalanced toward the neck(s) unless you can graft a top horn on somehow to put the strap button further forward, and the bass bridge needs to go further back to make up the correct scale length. ( there may not be enough room ) Other than that, I think it'd make a real cool axe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x189player Posted February 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2005 good point about the saw kerf width... So I need to cut straight across through, so I can compensate for that, rahter thna cutting a C shape. I think I can work around the control cavity issue. I'll have to enlarge it and drill more knob holes. The balance is actually pretty good- one of the reasons I picked this body shape is it's so large and heavy- it's essentially an explorer with a notch taken out of the back face- and I tested the weight by test-bolting the necks on, bolted them to the back of the body, two screws from each neck going into the four holes of the cavity (does that description make sense? they were too close together, but it looked good! ) and it's actually quite well balanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitar_ed Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 Another issue is scale length. I am not sure, but I think that most bass' are 34 inch scales, making them 9 inches or so longer than a standard guitar. Guitar Ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay5 Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 There are too many issues with this to make it worth while. Firstoff, the fact that you have to "section" the bodies and then worry about lining everything up is more trouble than making a new body as far as i'm concerned. Plus, you are leaving yourself with very little structural support for that bass neck. The tensoin on it is going to be high. You also dont liik like you're leaving a whole lot of room between necks. Finally, as mentioned the scale length is somthing you have figure out. Honestly, I would just build a new body. That way everything is where you want it and how it needs to be. I think it would be more work to do it the way you are planning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibum5545 Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 The main problem I can think of is that it'll be -way- neck heavy, especially because it lacks an upper horn. The idea of a smaller, slimmer doubleneck isn't a bad one, but you'd be better off starting from scratch. Grab a nice chunk of mahogany and a fresh sheet of graph paper, and come up with a design that doesn't have all the inherent limitations of using a former body. You'll almost certainly run into less problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x189player Posted February 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 (edited) As far as balance is concerned, I've already tested it, as I mentioned. I temporarily bolted a bass and guitar neck to the body- backwards, because of course they won't both fit in the neck pocket. Note: I am NOT proposing actually building the guitar this way- but it is a quick and dirty method of rougly approximating the balance of the thing. although there are no strings, the tremolo and tuners are in place because they're big contributors to the angular momentum of the thing: and here it is hanging: As you see, it's not neck-heavy. If it were mahogany, korina or something, it would be, but it's rock maple, adn that body is heavy. The balance point is pretty good- it's right about in the middle of the existing neck pocket. again I'll say it: there's plenty about this mockup that's wrong- the necks are too close together here, and the body is hanging upside down- actually if you flip it over it's even more tailheavy, and hangs straight down and then some, and balances up like this. And that's without pickups or bass bridge yet either. But I do think this adequately addresse the balance issue. Scale is fine too- I've measured based on the 12th fret length, and places the bridge neatly on the back leg, just as in the photoshop mockups up top. That also leaves room for where a pickup will go. I don't have pics to show, but I tested the neck spacing by hanging a second neck from a guitar with duct tape, and seeing how close together they could be before it started to interfere. And it looks like I can just get away with it with the spacing planned. Strength is indeed what I'm worried about. Again, no way with mahogany, but solid rock maple? Maybe. I'm going to try it, and if I'm wrong it will break, or start to. And then I'll unstring it and come up with some engineering- like a truss rod from the shoudler to the bridge, or sawing it up again and adding an additional spacer block- but if I can get away without doing that, I will. The design isn't in question- I'm using this shape, this body, or trying to. We'll see. The execution, however, is open to options yet. At this point I'm leaning to stripping the whole thing first, to keep an eye on the wood as well as realizing that I like natural wood pointy guitars better anyway, even if it's humble unfigured maple under there... probably... I'm thinking about that saw kerf again- I think what I'll do is cut into the back angle, three blades wide, to compensate for the three longitudinal slices. that way I can leave the back lines unbroken. I can see I'm going to need to set up a clamping table for this... and clear the boxes from around the radial arm saw... Edited February 4, 2005 by x189player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 I think the balance works out OK, but I also don't think you have enough a good enough foundation for the bass neck. You could add a wider shim when you take account of the kerf, but then the angles of the body edges will be off in either the front or back of the guitar. Another issue is whether you can recover the flat plane of the guitar top once you do this. Can you be assured of getting all the pieces on plane when you glue up? Finally, it will be hard to thrash away on the 6 with the bass strings so close. And chances are the bass strings will sit a bit higher than the guitar strings. And more than likely you'll need to completely refinish the body. If you have access to the proper tools, it is easier to build it a new body from scratch... ...or a new neck. If it were me, I'd just make it into an 8 string. Build yourself a neck (longer scale), get some new pups & Hipshot 8-bridge, and you're done. A 4-string bass is only one octave below guitar after all....you don't really need a second neck if you want a guitar & bass in one axe. Unless you're heavy into thumb cheats... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Sorbera Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 I think the biggest problem would be strgenth. Can the body handle a bass neck thats offest from the middle of the body? Bass' have much more pull on them. I would seriously be scared to do that. You know that the first guy to make a 12 string acoustic (no truss rods back than) the neck snapped and it slit his throught and he died because of it. It's just not good to have that ammount of pressure the horn of a body. just my oppinion, i dont want u gettin hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepultura999 Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 (edited) imo the necks look too close together, but that could just be my eyes lieing lol. I suggest going through warmoth for a double bass/guitar. If you want different pickup configurations, then I suggest you call and find out, i'm sure they'd do it for you. http://www.warmoth.com/guitar/bodies/d_nec...action=d_pstrat Edited February 4, 2005 by sepultura999 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay5 Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 Honestly, with everything that you have to work out and everything that could go wrong I really think you are making more work for yourself. Just make a new body, you'll learn a lot and it will be nice to know that you arent potentiallly wasting your time on somthing that might not work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Sorbera Posted February 4, 2005 Report Share Posted February 4, 2005 Honestly, with everything that you have to work out and everything that could go wrong I really think you are making more work for yourself. Just make a new body, you'll learn a lot and it will be nice to know that you arent potentiallly wasting your time on somthing that might not work. ← let me add something that might now work and could be potontially dangerous. 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.