RGGR Posted January 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 (edited) Did you make the body a little wider for 8? Or is it stock RG 6 size?Template shown is stock RG6/7 shape. The reason the wenge laminates are in the body, cause I wanted to have the option to go wider if necessary. On top of that I think it looks more interesting this way then just mearly two pieces of Zebrano joined together. I would make it stock 6 size...no reason to make it more uncomfortable than necessary Before digging into body blank I first will lay out a neck template and see how much room I have on lower horn side. If more room needed there are few options. 1. Go with 10mm (or so) wider body layout 2. Angle lower horn at slight angle, so tid bit more room appears on lower cut out. 3. Shave off sides of lower horn. See here. and the zebrano is already heavy enough to counter the extra neck weightThe Zebrano is heavy as doodoo. Have to come up with some oversized control cavities, or some other clever idea.....because without the neck, it's already a backbreaker. Specially compared with my light weight Limba and super light weight Swamp Ash bodies I have laying around the house. The 540Pvii Swamp Ash body almost floats in the air....so light it is. How are you going to have the pickups held together? thats the bit im most interested and concerned with if you want to stick with the "floating" idea of the design i can imagine it getting quite awkward. Not sure how everything will pend out. First step will be creating those free standing coils. If that works the first battle is won. next step will be creating some molds. There are multiple ways to do that, and I have to figure out a the smartest way. Closely combined with the making of the molds is the casting of the Epoxy or something like this. Some tests have to be done to see if it's smartest to set M3 type bolds in resin while it's hardening and later replace those with SSX-M03-06 type hex socket screws, or leave M3 bolds out and drill & tap holes later in process. Again, this is uptill now just a mental excersize, and life fire test have to prove what works and what doesn't. For now first step is ordering some AWG #42 copperwire. Someone suggested for Europe www.wires.co.uk might be a good source. See here. Edited January 30, 2007 by RGGR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted January 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Here with Picaso I adjusted Nuno's pics a bit and adjusted lower horn on Ibanez RG-8 prototype is better visible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 OK...just checked out the Ibanez prototype in the link. They say there are 707s on there, but by my calculations the string spread (for an 8) comes out to about 2.9"....which is exactly the magnet length on a 707. Which means your outer strings might lose a bit of volume if you go with that magnet length. If you're winding your own, better that the magnet length exceed the string spread by 0.4" or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 have you checked the string spread on a prebuilt 8 string bridge? also...i would most definately use a kahler because you can narrow the string spacing a bit...if you can pick on a 12 string acoustic,you can pick on a slightly narrow 8 string. i really think a 707 would work...but you know what?all of this 8 string talk has me interested as all hell...i am going to go ahead and start planning an 8 string vee of my own.then i can at least find out all about it as i go... hmmm...an 8 string v is going to be a long s.o.b. to balance right...might do something else body wise...have to give it some thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21253 emg 808 coming soon by the way,they say it is a 40dc housing...not a 45 dc...i just checked on gpd and they show a 45jv5 which is plenty long Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 http://www.wammiusa.com/7328.html rggr?lookie lookie...$200 right now can't beat it,guess what wesley's ordering soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted January 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 $200 for Kahler 8 stringer is not a bad deal..........not bad at all. Would mean normal frets, instead of fanned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTU 7's. Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Nice idea man, not fanned frets! I start mine this week, i bought the woods and i have to take them today. Argentinian woods for the neck, and thw wings are of Sapelle Mahogany,and i was thinking on a spalted maple top or maybe some flamed one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted January 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Nice idea man, not fanned frets!Fanned or not to fanned? Here some write-up I copied from sevenstrings.org. OK, Naren, firstly, fanned frets are used on 6 string guitars too, and 7's, 4-string basses (Dindwall) and all sorts of permutations. Why? There's a few reasons. On sixes and sevens (with a low the advantage of fanned frets is mainly tonal. On Novax's site he explains what he calls the 'clang tone'. Read up on it. It's going to be a fairly subtle thing. Other than that fanned frets are arguably more ergonomic, again not that much of a big deal on a six. On instruments with more than seven strings, and sevens with a high A the advantages are more obvious. For example, on a high A 7 or 8 string if you don't want to be constantly breaking very thin (.007) strings the A really need a shorter than usual scale length. Under 24". The problem with that using parallel frets is the tension on the bass strings decreases radically, they like longer scales - especially with regards to intonation. So, by fanning the frets we can have a our cake and eat it too. I'm currently working on a high A 8-string which will have a 660mm scale on the low B and 600mm on the high A. That's around 26" and 23.6". On a low strung instrument it's the same scenario. For example, we want a low F# 8 string. To tune that low we really want the scale length to be around 30" or so. Going shorter means having to use very heavy strings and still having poor intonation and possibly unacceptably low tension (depends on the player). If we make our treble E 30" we end up with a lot more tension than guitarists like, it makes guitar techniques difficult and means using thinner than usual strings and more breakage. By shortening the treble scale length we can bring down the tension to something more acceptable. Add to that the ergonomic advantages that really start to come into play with wider necks and you'll see it's a pretty cool little system. And so onto the other thing. I mentioned fanned frets on talkbass recently and was surprised by the negativity I got back. I feel a lot of it is sour grapes, but there are some legitimate problems with the patent. It's mathematically incorrect in places and there is some historical precedent. But that is the patent offices problem, not Novax's, and I can think of several patents offhand that technically and historically probably shouldn't exist. That talkbass discussion brought forth some private exchanges between myself and an engineer who pointed out some intonation issues that fanned frets can have. They come into play more on big ass bass necks like that one above. To explain we first need a little lesson in luthiery. Specifically nuts, bridges and string spacing. The most accepted way to space a nut is with equal distance between the outside of the strings diameter. So the gap between each string at the nut is the same. Therefore the distance between the string centers is not equal. It actually increases slightly towards the bass side. The reason for spacing this way is to stop things getting cramped on the bass side of the neck at the nut. If we look at the other end of the string length, the bridge, you'll notice that the strings are spaced with equal centers. The strings are further apart here so it's not too uncomfortable. It also means we don't need to manufacture several saddle widths for each guitar. So all is cool, we're all happy with equal center saddles and equal gap nuts. Then along come fanned frets. On a fanned fret instrument with equal center saddles and an equal gap nut we run into intonation problems because the strings run kind of diagonally across the neck. It's a real issue with things like 10 string basses where the strings taper in so much. If we put an equal gap nut on there with strings that range from .020 - .195 you'll find that the four bass strings take up 50% of the nuts total width and the 6 treble strings take up the remaining 50%. So the middle strings really end up going sideways across the neck quite a bit! This results in intonation errors. The solution is to spcae the nut and saddles the same way. Either both with equal centers, or both with equal gaps. The intonation issue is at it's worst on those extended range basses. Guitars, with less variation in string gauge don't suffer as badly. I design my fanned fret instruments with equal gaps at both ends. I'd actually been doing it that way before I heard about the problem purely because I didn't want the bridge spacing to cramp up on my low F# 8. I've check over every fret on that design in CAD and it has a maximum error of 0.08mm, which is irrelevant really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTU 7's. Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 I think that that quote it's from durero or mike sherman. BTW i didn't tried fanned frets, but i think that it's comfortable to shred, but for some chords it's maybe "uncomfortable". BTW do what you want, it's your guitar dude, i vote fot normal frets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 http://www.wammiusa.com/7328.html rggr?lookie lookie...$200 right now can't beat it,guess what wesley's ordering soon Ooooooo! 'nuther bookmark. Actually, I think a V gives you way more options for balance issues than almost any other body. Just start with one that is already balanced, and beef out or lengthen the "V" to compensate. Heck, that trem all by itself might do the job...must weigh like 8 lbs all by itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
au3078 Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 You can still use a fanned fretted board with a standard neck. when i did it i only used an 1" difference( 25" and 26" scales). and layed it out so the bridge was the "straight fret". cool thing bout doing it this way you can change with fret board with alittle work and use the longer bass side scale if you dont like the franned fret. im not sure how big of a difference one would want to go im thinking around 1.5". i just kinda shot for half of what everyone was doing with a fanned bridge. little food for thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG3390 Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Personally, I love the fanned fret idea. I've been wanting to try one out to see if I would make one. Although I don't particularly like 7/8 Strings, (don't fit my playing style, 6 strings is more than enough, ) I think this will look killer when it's done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted January 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 (edited) Personally, I love the fanned fret idea. I've been wanting to try one out to see if I would make one. That's part of the motivation to build this guitar to begin with. The whole 8 stringer idea is so darn intriging. And last few days I have been reading up on the issue concerning 8 stringers.......and the more I read about it (sevenstring.org, jemsite, here, etc) the more it all starts to come alive. And there are so many opinion and ideas of the "right path" it's almost like a religion. Lot's of opinions on fanned frets. Some aggressively against the whole idea. Sucking it all in, chewing on the different opinions, experiences, and ideas.......the fanned frets idea has won me over. I think it makes absolute perfect sense. Only real downside is that I can't order preslotted fretboards from somewhere, and I can't use a standard 8 stringer bridge. Something that will make the build more of a challenge. Looking at what's out there, this 884 from Black Machine seems to be the route I want to take. 884 Looking at the specs: Fanned frets: 25.5"-28" (workable compromise) Nut width: 51mm nut (manageable, so far manageble goes with 8 stringers) Staight fret positioned at the 5th fret (clever!!) 24 frets (personally I will use 29 or 30 to eliminate the need for a neck pup) Strings 9-11-16-26-36-46-60-84 Not overly enthousiastic about the thin body and the headstock. So with that settled it's time to look at the headstock. Ibanez on their RG-8 has this obese looking fat headstock, not my cup of tea. While some people made some better looking mock-ups. Together with FretFind programm a first mock-up should look something like this. I need to do some more fine tuning and start hunting down some single string bridge suppliers. Width of those suckers will determine the bridge spacing. Edited January 31, 2007 by RGGR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 the gauges used on that blackmachine seem out of wack at the big string...notice every other string is very "relative" to each other...but the 84 is twice as much of a leap... i think it's probably a bass string Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted January 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Yeah, I noticed that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fookgub Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 (edited) 84 is twice as much of a leap... i think it's probably a bass string 84 is a bass string... it's an A string, and a heavy one at that (probably to make up for lower tension on the shorter scale). EDIT: RGGR, I've never played an 8-string guitar, but I'd be a little careful of placing the parallel fret so close to the nut. I have a fanned fret bass (34"-37") where the parallel fret is about the 7th. In that arrangement the slant at the higher frets is pretty noticeable, and it's easy to get lost above the 12th fret. On a bass, that's a good compromise because I rarely play above there, but on a guitar I would be looking to place the parallel fret around the 10th fret. The fan is more pronounced on wider fretboards, and I would think that your 8-string's fretboard would be about as wide as the one on my bass. Edited January 31, 2007 by fookgub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 the 84 is at the 28" side....for that tuning...i kind of think it is a bit thick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted January 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 (edited) RGGR, I've never played an 8-string guitar, but I'd be a little careful of placing the parallel fret so close to the nut. I have a fanned fret bass (34"-37") where the parallel fret is about the 7th. In that arrangement the slant at the higher frets is pretty noticeable, and it's easy to get lost above the 12th fret. By putting the straight fret lower on the neck, so further away from the head/nut, you created more slanted frets closer to the nut. By putting it at the 5th you have the most confortable frets (almost straight or straight) in area,you often use for chords. So putting straight fret at 5th fret makes good sense to me. This is what the guy from Black Machine wrote on his website. The fingerboard is slanted differently to others you might have seen. This departure is to allow chording at the first fret without the player's finger hitting or being over the nut. Also I wanted to remove the piece of unused fingerboard behind the nut usually found on fanned fret instruments. At the bridge end the angle is more radical, similar to the position of the pick hand, which is oddly natural. I'm buying that. On a bass, that's a good compromise because I rarely play above there, but on a guitar I would be looking to place the parallel fret around the 10th fret. The fan is more pronounced on wider fretboards, and I would think that your 8-string's fretboard would be about as wide as the one on my bass.It's trick to keep fretboard as slim as possible. Nice slim 51 nut, and nice slim bridge spacing. Edited January 31, 2007 by RGGR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fookgub Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 (edited) the 84 is at the 28" side....for that tuning...i kind of think it is a bit thick Yeah, but we're still talking about taking a string that's meant to be tuned to A on a 34" scale and tuning it down to F# on a 28" scale. I can see why that string has to be so big to get anything close to decent tension. By putting the straight fret lower on the neck, so further away from the head/nut, you created more slanted frets closer to the nut. By putting it at the 5th you have the most comfortable frets (almost straight or straight) in area,you often use for chords. I guess you just have to figure out where you're going to spend the most time and put the parallel fret there. In the lower registers you have the advantage that the frets are further apart, so your margin of error is greater (ie: if your fretting is a little off you still have a pretty good chance of hitting the note you want). As the frets get closer together and the fan becomes more radical, it starts to get harder to pick the right fret. This starts to happen around the 14th fret on my bass and becomes really aggravating around the 19th fret. Part of the problem is that the side dots don't match up (when viewed from playing position) with the fret locations on the higher strings. Anyway, it really just depends on what you want to do with your guitar. For rhythm and low chording, putting the parallel at the 5th fret is probably a good choice (though I think 7th would be better). If you're planning on shredding way up the neck, I'd give a little more thought to the subject. Also, I don't really buy Black Machine's comments about removing the unused fingerboard behind the nut. This can be done regardless of the fan. See? Edited January 31, 2007 by fookgub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted February 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 Also, I don't really buy Black Machine's comments about removing the unused fingerboard behind the nut. This can be done regardless of the fan. Yep, is the way to go IMHO, only trouble is that with this kinda set-up it's impossible to have angle headstock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odin Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 I have a 28 5/8 " baritone tuned to F#. For the F# string i use an 85 bass string and it works great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGGR Posted February 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 Seriously not impressed with number of options in the single guitar string bridge department. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onelastgoodbye Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 Also, I don't really buy Black Machine's comments about removing the unused fingerboard behind the nut. This can be done regardless of the fan. Yep, is the way to go IMHO, only trouble is that with this kinda set-up it's impossible to have angle headstock. Why not? you can always 'pivot' around the slanted line of the nut. Sure, it's not the standard way of doing things as the headstock wil be angled in 2 directions when looking from above, but an 8-string isn't too standard anyway. On the q-tuners, the hardest part of building these yourself would be the floating coils. I have made a few of these for a sustainer driver (look for jiggamathingie and core-less coils in the sustainer thread). It is really tricky to remove the temporary core without damaging the inner windings of the coil. And this was with 0,2 mm wire, which is a lot thicker than what you would use for a pickup. One possible way around this is using a perspex core with the magnet mounted on/inside it, then wind the coil applying epoxy/polyester/polyurethane while winding (you'll temporary 'bobbins' to block off the top and bottom as well),let cure, remove the bobbins, then cast the epoxy casing around it. The cheapest way to get single string bridges is probably to get some graphtech wilkinson saddles and make a base for it, like blackmachine does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 no...you would angle the headstock standard,and use a string tree of some type to adjust the strings that need it 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.