Build #2

[Xanthus]

http://public.fotki.com/Xanthus/build-2/newproject.html

There's my awesome mockup of my next project, sort of what would happen if Rhoads and Alexi had a lovechild. It's wrong on so many levels.

Stats:

-Rhoads V proportions

-Neckthrough maple/walnut (yeah, I realized I didn't put the walnut lam in the middle, on my kick-ass photoshop pic. imagine it)

-Alder wings

-Fret access cutout

-TOM bridge

*2.25 degree neck angle

*String through or tailpiece, haven't decided yet

-SS frets per recommendation of Wes

-Dimarzio Evo's neck and bridge (good luck to me finding a non-F-spaced pickup)

-3-way blade switch (not the Gibson toggle pictured; I'm lazy)

-concentric Vol/Tone knob

-All black hardware (once again, lazy)

-Same Ibanez-ripoff headstock as project #1 (yes, I'll get finished pictures up soon)

-24 fret rosewood, no face dots, abalone side dots

*black paint job, trying to decide on blue or green bevels (I've been dreaming of painted bevels long before I heard of Mr. Laiho )

So yeah, that's about it. I'm hoping to pick up the maple and walnut for the neck tomorrow, if I've got the money. Shouldn't be more than $30 though. After reading that very intriguing thread about string through vibrations/overtones and all, I've been confused regarding how I want to work the bridge situation. I've decided on a neck angle with this neckthrough to both give myself a challenge and leave the option of a tailpiece, if I decide to get one. I'm leaning more towards a tailpiece because I feel like the strings on build #1 are too floppy because of the shallow break angle over the bridge. The other thing is the aesthetics of the tail; a Rhoads with a stop tail doesn't look all that great, imo. Paint is another thing: Blue or green, though, what's the opinion? anyone?

Don't expect a ton of work on this one, I'm only really planning on getting the neck done this summer, maybe the body glued if I'm feeling up to it. I just want to know what people think of the proposed idea. Comments/suggestions are welcome, especially criticism, even though it's still just on paper

::EDIT::

Strap button/jack placement is up in the air, too. I want the butt button as far into the crook of the V as possible while still allowing room for my knee to balance in there. I also play with 90 degree angle jacks, and will obviously want to use the same cord when switching guitars on stage, so the standard Fender jack will probably be out. Along with the jack placement issue comes routing/drilling issues, because it's a loooong way from the (general) jack placement to the control cavity. I'll probably make a jack cavity with its own cover, then send it down to the control cavity. Having a TOM tailpiece is easier, then I won't have to avoid the ferrules when drilling my holes.

[JOAMdude]

pure concentrated aweesomeness

can't wait to see how it turns out

[ElysianGuitars]

should do x2n neck and bridge with the bridge in series and neck in parallel, don't gotta worry about f spaced then, and it sounds phenomenal... imo anyways. if used some recessable straplocks you could put your strap buttons anywhere. and have you considered putting the jack on the back? using a 90 degree angle cable would work well for that...

Edited May 12, 2007 by ElysianGuitars

[Xanthus]

The x2n looks pretty sharp, and blade pickups alleviate the polepiece problem quite nicely I'll check them out, as well as do some research on series and parallel (wiring as a whole pretty much eludes me). I played the Evo's on Vai's signature model, hence the pickup/wood combo (sans walnut laminate), they sounded phenomenal! Have you played any guitars with Evo pickups, Elysian? If so, how do they compare with the x2n? I don't think any stock models have that pickup in them, so it's not like I can walk into GC and pick one off the wall.

I've thought about doing recessed straploks, and I'm pretty sure that's the road I'm going to take, because it'll bring the guitar that much closer to my body. I started a "balancing a V shape" thread a while ago, so I'll probably end up trying a few different placements, but I have a general idea of where they need to go.

I've been pondering a jack on the back of the guitar too, but I don't know where to put it that would make it feel "comfortable." I imagine having a metal jack poking your stomach isn't very pleasing when you're playing for an extended period of time.

I'm looking at my mockups again, and that heel is going to be *fun* to carve out

[ElysianGuitars]

x2n isn't too far from the evo tone wise, its a lot hotter though... but in the neck spot in parallel its a very smooth pickup, and if you were to wire a 3 way mini switch to the neck pickup for series/split/parallel, when in series it'll actually overdrive an amp, when in parallel or split its smooth as butter... definately gotta know about wiring if you want to do this stuff... and one solution for the jack problem could be to just buy another cable for your new guitar, and keep it plugged into it, so when you want switch at a show etc you just unplug from your amp instead lol... or you could put it on the longer horn of the V on the back, so it won't poke you anywhere, though then you'd have to figure out how you're gonna get a wire to it...

yeah, 2 x2n's is how i prefer, i run that in the 6er i built, with the bridge in series neck in parallel... and i built a 7 string superstrat with the same config but a 3 way miniswitch for the neck pup...

Edited May 12, 2007 by ElysianGuitars

[Xanthus]

Hmm, that's really interesting, something I'll definitely have to check out. I'm in the process of looking up wiring techniques, too.

I think I've solved the jack problem, too. I'll use a flushmount jack like that, the one on my other guitar. I'll use regular straploks, and recess the one on the neck heel, but not on the butt. That way, I'll have the extra space to thread the cord through, under the strap, so it won't be flopping around on me. Yeah, one button recessed and one not might look a bit funny, but it solves the problem *shrug*

[ElysianGuitars]

Hmm, that's really interesting, something I'll definitely have to check out. I'm in the process of looking up wiring techniques, too.

I think I've solved the jack problem, too. I'll use a flushmount jack like that, the one on my other guitar. I'll use regular straploks, and recess the one on the neck heel, but not on the butt. That way, I'll have the extra space to thread the cord through, under the strap, so it won't be flopping around on me. Yeah, one button recessed and one not might look a bit funny, but it solves the problem *shrug*

you can still put the chord through without issue with the recessed straplock...

[Xanthus]

Heh, probably, yeah Just the way my mind works, I figured more wiggle room would be better.

Damn weekends, I need to go buy some maple. I'd have ordered it earlier this week, but Northwest was going to charge me $20 shipping for a $20 wood purchase, hahaha.

[Xanthus]

Huzzah! Got the maple and walnut, paid more than I thought I would, but got a ton more than I'll ever need! I see an excuse to make another guitar in the future.......

Boards measure:

Maple: 1 3/4 x 11 x 44

Walnut: 3/4 x 4 x 80

There's a few imperfections in both of them, but they'll be worked around, with plenty of usable wood to spare. Total cost was $49. The boards should be sanded, cut, and glued tomorrow.

One question, though, if anyone has time. Which version of Titebond do most people here prefer? I know there are a lot of incarnations of the brand, and some are better than others. I believe the bottle I have is Titebond II: Son of Titebond. My grandpa builds furniture, so I'm pretty sure what is good enough for him is good enough for me, heh.

Also, I've been thinking of keeping as much of the core/neck as possible, when it goes into the body. Meaning, giving the dimensions of the boards, the final neck blank will be around 3 1/4" wide. Significantly wider than the fretboard, but at least I'll be able to get the whole headstock and not have to glue wings on it, hahaha. I'm debating on leaving the wide core since it's heavier, denser wood than the alder body, and will give the build some body weight. So something similar to the Firebird design that Gibson used. Any opinions?

[ElysianGuitars]

Huzzah! Got the maple and walnut, paid more than I thought I would, but got a ton more than I'll ever need! I see an excuse to make another guitar in the future.......

Boards measure:

Maple: 1 3/4 x 11 x 44

Walnut: 3/4 x 4 x 80

There's a few imperfections in both of them, but they'll be worked around, with plenty of usable wood to spare. Total cost was $49. The boards should be sanded, cut, and glued tomorrow.

One question, though, if anyone has time. Which version of Titebond do most people here prefer? I know there are a lot of incarnations of the brand, and some are better than others. I believe the bottle I have is Titebond II: Son of Titebond. My grandpa builds furniture, so I'm pretty sure what is good enough for him is good enough for me, heh.

Also, I've been thinking of keeping as much of the core/neck as possible, when it goes into the body. Meaning, giving the dimensions of the boards, the final neck blank will be around 3 1/4" wide. Significantly wider than the fretboard, but at least I'll be able to get the whole headstock and not have to glue wings on it, hahaha. I'm debating on leaving the wide core since it's heavier, denser wood than the alder body, and will give the build some body weight. So something similar to the Firebird design that Gibson used. Any opinions?

look up kxk guitars, he does his neck throughs the way you're talking... and about which titebond, i prefer regular titebond, if i'm not mistaken, titebond II isn't water soluble, which means its harder to clean up...

[IbanezFreak666]

that looks amazing! i want one

defo go with blue

green and black is awsome but the blue in the pic is just more awsome

[Xanthus]

A wee update, laddies! And by wee I mean tiny, and I'm not insinuating anything. I'm not even Scottish.

http://public.fotki.com/Xanthus/build-2/

The website, again, for those of you who don't want to scroll up the page.

I got the lam's glued and clamped and left them for 48 hours-ish. If you notice something strange in the pictures, it's because I wanted to try something new out. I threw down a layer of newspaper on the workbench (finally a use for the Boston Herald ) and then glued the lam's up. I wrapped the newspaper on top and bottom, getting it stuck to the glue, then clamped the lam's together and also clamped the whole thing vertically. My reasoning for this is I wanted the pieces to move as little as possible when they set. I knew I was going to have to plane the sides flat anyways, so I figured the less physical labor, the better.

The experiment worked out awesome, as evidenced in the later pictures. The newspaper peels right off, and whatever is stuck to the glue is shaved off with the plane anyways.

HOWEVER, I realized that my relative un-skill with woodworking tools was never going to get the sides square and level enough to slap a fretboard on. I used a hand plane, sandpaper block, power sander and electric planer, and though it's a lot better than when I started, it's still not good enough.

Thus, I'm at a standstill until I can find someone who'll let me use a thickness sander or big-ass planer or something. I dunno even what the tool I need is called, I just know that I don't have it. Maybe if I bring my block down to Home Depot and ask reaaaaally nicely...

I was honestly considering strapping a portable belt sander to the workbench and setting up a fence/guide rail, but there's no guarantee that my homemade jig will be any more accurate...

[Xanthus]

(bump disguised as a question)

When doing the neckthrough with a neck angle, would the general consensus be to have the little 1/8" or so lip for the fingerboard to rest on, or no? It's not a neck angle problem, but a humbucker ring problem. Without the lip, the fretboard would be basically sitting on the same plane as the face of the guitar, and since the thinnest pickup ring is 3/16" it leaves precious little wiggle room. I'm thinking of going with a tiny lip, just so things fit easier, because on normal bolt on guitars with neck angles, a bit of the neck pokes through over the body.

In either case, I'm getting a friend to plane the sides of the blank square for me tomorrow I might draw up a plan and get the squaring and the bandsawing done in the same go.

Now I'm just waiting on LMII. FedEx ground is wicked slow...

::EDIT::

I'm planning on taking a decent amount of pics during the neck-building process. I might assemble a tutorial of some sort, on the craziness involved in making a neckthrough with a neck angle.

[Xanthus]

Ok, mates. I'd have some progress pictures for everyone, but it seems I've cocked up my fretboard something awful. In my youthful exuberance, I seemed in hindsight to have rushed things a bit, since I was tense in general, never having done a neck before. Well, in short, I:

1) added too much glue under the fretboard, causing it to leak all out the sides and such,

2) the glue caused my fretboard to not sit flush against the neck, mainly over the last 6 frets or so,

3) in wiping the glue off the side of the fretboard where it leaked out, I actually wiped it all in the end of the fret slots on almost the entire bass side

4) realized I didn't push the truss rod deep enough into the neck, so that the sandpaper block was sanding the top of the nut when I was sanding the top of the headstock

4a) no choice now, I'm GOING to need a veneer to make up that height

5) I did all of this on the "good" neck blank

I feel like such an amateur A, admitting this, and B, it reflects very badly on my reputation of being an extreme planner.

Anyways, what to be done, what to be done...

My first thought would be to remove the fretboard and truss rod, sand everything flat AGAIN, and start over (note to self: glue doesn't take well to sandpaper). But, would the board be salvageable? it's got more than enough height if/when I need to sand the glue off the bottom, but what about the sides of the fret slots, with all that glue? The fretboard was sanded to EXACT dimensions, because I was going to take Perry's tip of using it as a guide to run a template bit on and bring the neck dimensions in. There's no space to sand the sides if I want the board to be usable. I'm not much in the spending mood to get a fret slot cleaner from StewMac, either. I'm thinking that the bump where the fretboard didn't sit properly might mess with the board being true and flat.

My other option would be to scrap the board after i pry it off and buy a new board, but once again, I'm kinda broke right now...

Ideas? I'm in desperate need of help *sigh*

[jmrentis]

Damn, I hate having problems sometimes. I am in a similar part of the neck build and planning as much as possible. I hope that you get enough quality advice to fix your problems, I'm sure you will. One suggestion that popped into my head on the fretboard width is binding. I'm fairly certain you didn't bind, but I could be wrong and you could have used wood binding and slotted them too. Anyhow, if you need to take some off the sides you could always add wood or plastic to increase width for support for the length of the frets for proper string spacing(did that make any sense?LOL) Anyway, there are many different thicknesses of binding and I know you wouldn't need to take enough off the width to even match some smaller bindings. Anyhow, I thought I's throw that out there to think about, if you got width and thickness you should be able to use it, if you really want to. Best of luck to you and hope you get it fixed. J

Edited June 26, 2007 by jmrentis

[Xanthus]

Yeah, I'm thinking of having to bind the neck and cut through the binding, because I can't do miter joints, let alone nip the tang for every fret on my first fretting project ever I'm far short of having that sort of patience! And another thing is pure aesthetics; the LMI board has amazing grain lines, quality of the kind I don't think I'd get if I called up StewMac. Binding would certainly take care of the width lost in sanding...... again. I thought of the best way to get the fretboard to thickness, too! Take a laser level and mark out the taper, and put a piece of brightly colored tape on the line. I used blue painter's tape. Now you have a highly visible stop line for sanding. It worked amazingly!

If I didn't mess up so much already, I was thinking of combining my pictures and making a tutorial for the main site. The community needs a neckthrough tutorial badly.

[jmrentis]

Yeah, see thats why I was thinking going with binding because such reasons as you liking that board. I get the same way with certain pieces of wood I buy for their looks, I can't just toss it and but a different one. Strangely, I either get attached or plan on how that piece will look in the final product. I would try your best to salvage the board if you like it. Also, I would make the tut and see how it turns out, I think screwups and problems make for the best tuts because people get a better look at all the details and how to go about fixing and avoiding those problems. I would love to see a bunch more neck tuts on the main site, everything from headstock veneers, binding, and a ton more, plus like you said neck throughs. So I say go for it and see how it goes. Good luck. J

[Xanthus]

So the fretboard is off, and I'm thinking it's junk. It's got a decent bow in it from removing it, and it's still pretty covered in glue. The steam didn't loosen the glue from the fret slot ends either. On top of that, it looks like I've rusted the truss rod. I didn't glue a wood strip in between the rod and fretboard, because with the LMI truss rod it doesn't say it's necessary. I'm going to have to attack that steel rod with some steel wool if I ever want to see it working in all its $25 glory. I'll try to throw up some pics after I finish practicing guitar on my nice first build, the one with the prefab neck, saving me a lot of hassle... *evil glare*

[DrummerDude]

Cool design. I have always liked the ESP-SV for having this high frets access cutout.

I don't like the straight Ibanez-style headstock that you've chosen to use on this one, though.

These axes have prolongated bodies and adding a straight headstock makes the overall design look tooooo loooooong.

But htat's just me.

Good choice of body shape too - the Jackson Rhoads has a considerably smaller body than the ESP-SV an that's what, in my humble opinion, makes it a little bit more "fast" and sleek looking.

Cool stuff man.

You took the best from both and put it in one whole piece.

Can't wait to see it finished.

Are you going to add a rear cutout for the belly?

SVs have them, Rhoadses do not.

Edited June 27, 2007 by DrummerDude

[Xanthus]

The headstock is going to be a bit more pointy than the Ibanez, but the same footprint/overall silhouette. It'll be the same headstock as my first guitar, but I see what you're saying with the long body look. Same with my first build

I'm glad you like it, overall, though. I do too, as soon as I can stop tripping over my own feet, I'll put in some major progress, I've got the body 95% planned out, to-scale, everything, boo yah!

[gibsonsg26]

thats looking realy good if i were you i would go with the evolution pickups i have them in my randy and there amazing. I was starting to think i should bring back my randy when i first got it because it sounded so bad (its an old korean performer series) but it looked so good and i had a feeling it could sound as good as it looks. The pickups took a guitar that sounded like a tin can and made it a beast pinch harmonics are amazing with them and the neck pickup sustains for days. I have the x2n in another one of my guitars and as soon as i have the money im going to change it to an evo the x2n is nothing like the evo imo i think it might just be too hot for my amp. cant wait to see the guitar done.

[Xanthus]

Hooooooooooooooooooooooo boy.......

Help plz! Where's that guy who pulls the sign out of his mouth...

There we go!

So, I was having a really good guitar building day, and seeing the frequency with which guitar building days happen at ALL these days, that was something. I roughed out the headstock some more, leveled out the back of the body, and set up a nice jig to route the lip into the top of the body (no neck angle, remember?). Well, in my youthful enthusiasm, I went ahead and did half the body. I moved, leveled and reclamped for the second half of the body (small jig/table), and proceeded to route the rest of it off. Now, it came down to the delicate area around the fretboard where I needed to route the lip, so I took a break, chiseled the edge against the fretboard so that the pieces would fly off and I wouldn't have to get so close with the router.

Needless to say, I took a small gouge out of the corner of the fretboard, low E side. A nice semicircular cut with a 1/2" router bit into the 24th fret slot. It's probably 1/4" wide.

Well, !*%(*#@. I dunno what my options are, now. Do I "clean up" my mistake, and keep what's left of the 24th fret? Do I just set up a straightedge and route the 24th fret off? What's a suggestion here? I'd rather not have a 23-fret guitar, because it'd mess with my OCD like woah. I'm a big fan of nice, neat octaves. If I wanted to be extreme, I suppose I could chop off the 23rd fret too, and have a "normal" 22-fret guitar.

I'm more leaning towards trying to find a way to clean up the gouge, maybe just make the cut straight and take the rest of the corner off. I never use the 24th fret on the thicker strings, hell, I very rarely use the 24th on any string except the high E. Maybe I could put one of those uber cool swooshes into the fretboard! Or, not.

Any ideas, guys? I'm at a standstill until I get this sorted out.

[Muzz]

Hey Xanthus, I feel all queasy when people cut frets off fingerboards. I saw one post a while back that hacked down the fretboard, I had to have a few tequila shots to feel better. So my advice would be not to amputate.

Could you post a pic of the semicircle gouge? Have you considered flattening the bottom of the gouge then cutting a piece of wood slightly thicker to glue in, then sanding down flush? It should be easy to follow what's left of the fret cut into your repair. Then stain to match the original wood. Good luck with it.

Edited August 15, 2007 by Muzz

[jmrentis]

IS there any way you would feel comfy posting a pic of the incident? No worries if not, I sometimes skip pictures at certain stages because my work isn't always flawless, it'll be better once I get all necessay tools though.

Anyhow, I think a wicked slant might be cool! As you said you only really use the high strings anyway, so why not do a wicked slant and have like a half fret at the 24th slot. I think it would look pretty cool and probably take away any OCD set backs. Don't worry either, I have plenty strange ticks like that and so do a few of my friends, it actually seems to help in building guitars, but it also can drive you nuts.

Anyhow, I would go with the slant. Depending on the size and such, you could even glue some wood back in and put an inlay in that area. On my project now I am doing 24 frets and have some shaped inlays for the other frets, but I am using a cool block inlay for the 24th fret, A) because it fits better and I think it looks better. Its basically one of those "V" type block inlays that I am cutting myself with some strips from Andy Depaule. So depending on the gouge you could fill with some matching wood and try to inlay over it, but personally I might go with the slanted cut at the end of the fretboard. Seeing it would help, but I know you might not want to. No worries either way, but I hope you get it worked out, I'm sure you'll do a great job fixing, best of luck man. J

[Xanthus]

Yeah, guys, I can post a pic of the board tonight after work. Gotta get ready for work, though, thanks for all the advice It's much appreciated!