Not Enough Space For Bridge

[Razortalon]

This is kind of hard to explain, but I'll try anyway. So, I'm designing a guitar to build, and the shape is sort of v-based. I'm using one of my other guitars, a Schecter Diamond Series Gryphon to take measurements from. So, I measured from the front of the neck cavity to the bridge. If I apply that to my current design, the bridge will be between the legs of the v, floating in the air. I don't want to change the shape of the guitar though. Can I move the entire neck-pickups-bridge assembly forward, so that the space cut out for the neck cavity will be shorter? But that would be weaker, so what about making the neck cavity stick out from the body of the guitar. Given the problem, what solution would you suggest?

p.s. I was going to call the guitar Leviathan, but then I read the copyright infringement sticky, and found out it was already taken. Depressing...

Edited December 7, 2008 by Razortalon

[Keegan]

Use a shorter scale length? Schecters are 25.5", pretty long. 24.75" is the only other common scale length. If you're making the neck, you can make it any scale length.

[Southpa]

Two options, one of which I've already done and one that I am in the process of doing. I've moved everything towards the headstock by about 2.5" on my first "from scratch" build while maintaining a Gibson (24 3/4") scale length. The result is a potentially neck heavy guitar, I used mini-Grover tuners to lighten up the headstock and added some lead weight to the body. Also, neck joint is at around the 22nd fret, kinda weird to play the guitar because its out of proportion, takes a bit to get used to it. And lastly, I had to squeeze the 2 humbuckers a little closer together, about one inch, than your standard pickup spacing. The result is an interesting guitar indeed, you just have to get used to the 12th fret being farther away from the neckjoint.

Right now I am building a scaled down (87%) Flying V for my friend's son. I intended to use a preslotted 25.5" scale fretboard I had handy but realized that the stop tailpiece was going to wind up in mid air with that length. This guitar is pretty much going to be a custom job anyway so I opted to make a custom scale length (23.5") giving me an extra 2 inches to fit all the hardware (Dimarzio super-dist, TOM bridge and stop tailpiece).

So there ya go, I guess whatever you do is going to depend on what scale length you intend, sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it too and compromises must be made.

[Razortalon]

Well, I like the 25.5 scale length, plus i'm talking about a larger difference than .75 inches, although I'm not sure exactly because the way I drew the guitar isn't terribly precise. Oh! Wait! I was looking at the older version. On the newer one, the neck pocket seems to extend too far into the guitar. ~6 in compared to around 3.5 on my schecter. That's easier to correct though, you just cut off the top of the neck pocket until it's 3.5 in. I think I've got this solved.

[borge]

you can copyright a biblical creature?

what scale is your Schecter? I think you've missed something, look at a real V.....

[j. pierce]

If you're building your own neck, You could just make it a 24 fret (or more!) guitar, (basically adding frets until the fretboard meets the body) with a longer tenon after the fretboard ends extending into the body. Of course, this may preclude you from using two pickups, and this wouldn't work with an aftermarket bolt on neck, of course.

If you are using a pre-made bolt on neck, look at how Warmoth does their explorer and V guitar bodys, which are designed to use strat-style bolt on necks. Not how I'd do it, but it works.

Flying V style bodies are very often set-neck construction, as that style lends itself to the tenon extending past the fretboard area and into the body. Of course, there's nothing saying you couldn't build a bolt-on neck that did the same thing, where wood extends past the end of the fretboard, and gets attached in the body.

Are you using the neck from the schecter on this build?

[Razortalon]

I think you can copyright it as the name of a guitar, if I understood correctly. The Schecter's 25.5, and this will be too.

It's not really a v, except that it has two legs. It looks like this

This will be my first guitar, so I would like to build everything, but I'm not very confident I'm my ability to cut the fret slots accurately. I may go with a pre-made fretboard, but maybe not. Definitely 24 frets though. What is a "tenon"? I looked at the Warmoth V, the joint doesn't look very strong, but I guess it is. For a first guitar, I probably won't go neck through, just because I would probably screw up the neck angle. I won't put the schecter neck on permanently, but I may bolt it on for a few minutes out of impatience, because I want to play it or something. What you were saying about adding more frets, wouldn't they get ridiculously small?

[joshvegas]

I think you can copyright it as the name of a guitar, if I understood correctly. The Schecter's 25.5, and this will be too.

It's not really a v, except that it has two legs. It looks like this

This will be my first guitar, so I would like to build everything, but I'm not very confident I'm my ability to cut the fret slots accurately. I may go with a pre-made fretboard, but maybe not. Definitely 24 frets though. What is a "tenon"? I looked at the Warmoth V, the joint doesn't look very strong, but I guess it is. For a first guitar, I probably won't go neck through, just because I would probably screw up the neck angle. I won't put the schecter neck on permanently, but I may bolt it on for a few minutes out of impatience, because I want to play it or something. What you were saying about adding more frets, wouldn't they get ridiculously small?

How on earth are you planning on using the middle two tuners?

Can I make a suggestion? do a bit of reading not knowing what a tenon is kinda shows you might need to learn a bit. And then do a bit of reading on how to plan the guitar full size because unless I'm missing something that headstock is going to give you some serious tuning difficulties. and then stop and think and go over everything again. and then practicing on some scraps.

THEN start building

having said that I'm not great at following my own advice!

This is pretty much the current bible....

http://www.amazon.com/Make-Your-Own-Electr...r/dp/0953104907

... there are others

Edited December 8, 2008 by joshvegas

[Razortalon]

Holy jesus, how did I miss that??? I had the tuners near the outside, but i figured that would make the strings bend too sharply from the nut. That's a shame, I kind of like that headstock design. I would certainly agree that I don't know enough yet, which I why I'm starting my research now, with the goal of starting the guitar when I go visit my dad (Who lives in another state) around christmas. My current level of knowledge is just from reading through a few build threads. I will definitely try to get my hands on that book, it's not the first I've heard of it, and it seems to be very highly recommended. As it happens, I am currently making a quick prototype practice version out of an old dresser we were going to throw away to see if any issues (such as the headstock) pop up. Any other glaringly obvious mistakes?

Edit: I'm trying to look up tenons, and I understand what they are, basically, but everything I see about them is in regard to a set neck construction. Are they still applicable with a bolt-on?

Edited December 8, 2008 by Razortalon

[Keegan]

How big is the body?

Edit: No, a bolt-on doesn't have a tenon, it's just the neck itself. You need at least a 3" pocket to bolt it in I think, at least that's what Fender uses, you might get away with less, but not easily.

Edited December 8, 2008 by Keegan

[Razortalon]

Well, that square around the body is 10 units by 7 units, with each unit being the width of one notebook paper line. (Thats what I get for designing a guitar in English class) make each unit 2in, so 20in by 14 in

Edit: Ok, well I'm good there. I went to draw it full size on that piece of a dresser and the neck pocket of 6in looked too long, so i cut it back to 3.5, and moved the bridge and pickups and stuff 2.5in forward (keeping in mind that the neck must have a length so the scale of 25.5 is preserved)

Edited December 8, 2008 by Razortalon

[Keegan]

Hmm, that should be plenty big. You just need to draw it on a bigger piece of paper that you can scale to full size easily(or better yet, draw it full scale), with a proper neck pocket. Standard neck pocket is 3 inches long by 2-3/16" wide. Again those are Fender dimensions, so if you make your own neck it can vary, but that width is pretty universal for 25.5" scale. The length is more dependent on how much wood you want under the fretboard, and how far away you want it from the strings. With wood under all of the fretboard, 24 frets, and a 3" neck pocket, you'll move the bridge about an inch further up. You could have extra wood beyond the fretboard that bolts into the body, moving the bridge even further up with the same length neck pocket, but then the whole thing might be ridiculously long.

Adding more wood would also make the width of the neck pocket change, because the taper would be different.

Edited December 8, 2008 by Keegan

[Razortalon]

That was what I meant about the practice version, I have it all drawn out full size on some spare wood. It's a good thing you mentioned that about the 2-3/16, I was being sloppy, using a tape measure, and measured it as 2-1/4. I'm trying to optimize it so the bridge is as far towards the back as possible, because it seems like the shape is going to put it a little more towards my left (when playing) than most guitars, and I want to minimize the effect of that. And contrary to the drawing, I have an extra stop-tailpiece (i don't think thats the real word for it), so it probably won't end up being string through. So, I want the bridge/tailpiece as close to that cutout in the back of the guitar as possible. This post doesn't seem to make much sense, I think I need sleep.

[Keegan]

Is this your first build? If it is, you'd probably be best off making it easy on yourself by getting a pre-made neck with a paddle headstock so that you can cut your own headstock. In any case, the neck needs to be done or at least fully planned first, so that you have measurements to work off of for the body, especially in the neck pocket and bridge positioning.

[Ripthorn]

If you are worried about space between your bridge and the end of your body, I would look into a wraparound tailpiece. They are probably the most compact bridge and that would give you more space for pickups. You don't want too sharp of a break angle over your bridge to go to a tailpiece. The only other thing I would consider is where the heck your strap buttons will go. If you put them on the side of the body, you are going to have yourself a guitar that has abysmal balance. If you put them on the back of the body, then you shouldn't have as many problems. Sounds like a minor issue, but having ignored that on my first build, I have myself a guitar that takes a head first dive every time I put it on. It's only saving grace is that the arm rest is good enough that I can even the balance out while still playing comfortably. Ergonomics, man, they are more important than one might initially think.

[Mickguard]

Well, you don't need the neck to extend so deeply into the body. And you can extend the 'shelf' for the neck if you want for more support.

From your drawing, it looks like it's not the bridge that's the problem, but the tail piece -- consider getting rid of that and using a string-through body style instead.

Although I'd be reluctant to proceed with a project based on a sketch like that. You really ought to spend a bit more time on this -- work in Autocad or similarly accurate software that's going to allow you to develop everything with the proper dimensions.

The first line you put down is the line for the bridge -- the second line you put down is the line for the nut (use the program to place the line using the exact measurement). Everything else about the guitar is built from those two lines.

Other V type guitars don't have the same problem you're having--they manage to fit two pickups and a bridge on there -- so there's something wrong with your drawing/measurements.

As for the headstock thing...well, you'll need to find a compromise between the shape you like and the issues that shape might introduce.

[Razortalon]

It is my first build, but I would feel kind of lame if I bought a pre-made neck. It's like, "look! I made this guitar sort of all by myself" Not that I have anything against people who buy necks, but I would rather not. I will be drawing this on AutoCAD before I start, but I won't have access to the program until I get to my dad's house. I figure I can start by putting the bridge where it looks good on the body, and offsetting a line 25.5in to find the nut, and then move the bridge and neck together until the neck pocket is right, is this wrong? The drawing actually has it string through, but since I'm going to have an extra tailpiece and no string ferrules (or whatever they're called) I'll probably use that. With the bridge, pickups and neck all moved forward 2.5in, it looks much better, and the string break angle over the bridge looks like it will be plenty, as I have enough space to put the tailpiece up to ~3in from the bridge, which is more than my Schecter has. The strap button will be on the bottom side of the left leg, looking at the picture. Ergonomics were the inspiration for this actually, because a V style will slide off your knee, and the straight line doesn't conform that well to the body. Obviously, it won't be perfect, but I'm hoping it will be better. It is that much harder to build a neck through? After all this discussion, it seems a bolt-on isn't that simple, really, and the extra sustain could do nothing but help.

[RAI6]

What you need to do, is draw the position of your nut and bridge.

Then design the body around that.

It's quite backwards to design a body, and then try to fit the important elements to that...

[Geo]

It's quite backwards to design a body, and then try to fit the important elements to that...

Now, of course when you draw the actual full-sized plan, you start with the nut/bridge/string taper... but I don't see a problem with sketching ideas on notebook paper. The important thing is to transfer a sketch into a workable design.

I figure I can start by putting the bridge where it looks good on the body, and offsetting a line 25.5in to find the nut, and then move the bridge and neck together until the neck pocket is right, is this wrong?

This sounds like a headache. I think there will be a lot of trial and error and a lot of erasing. My suggestion: Draw your bridge line (the theoretical bridge-end of the scale length), draw the nut, draw the string taper and the edges of the fingerboard. Then redraw the body around this. It will come out differently from your sketch, but it MUST come out differently, because a sketch hides dimensions that won't work on a full-size guitar. Keep looking at your plan from above, so that you can see the whole guitar. Your eye will point out things that "don't look right" as far as the shape goes. Keep in mind principles of balance etc.

Lastly... you seem to show a lot of initiative. While you still need to do a lot of reading, I would encourage you to go ahead and build your own neck. It's not that hard and then you have control over the feel of the guitar. You can carve the neck to fit your particular grip or playing style. It's also a great learning experience. You'll make a lot of mistakes but your next neck will be much, much better.

EDIT: I don't know if you're considering a one-piece bridge/tailpiece, but this is a good choice.

http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Bridges,_tailp...und_Bridge.html

Edited December 9, 2008 by Geo

[RAI6]

I know he's only sketching, but he's verbalizing ideas that are a little backwards, and I simply wanted to point that out.

Sketch all you want.

The sketching however, cannot monopolize the outcome.

At some point, reality has to be placed before concept.

[Geo]

At some point, reality has to be placed before concept

Absolutely. My sketches always change dramatically when I transfer them to a full-sized scale length.

[Mickguard]

Keep in mind that a wraparound tailpiece is going to change the string tension.

In my experience-- using a top-mount tele bridge-- the guitar was just unpleasant to play because of the added string tension.

I don't have the same issue with a wraparound with the Gibson scale, however, so maybe it was just that guitar.

[Razortalon]

So I redesigned it starting with the correct scale length. I was assuming that if the scale is 25.5, the 12th is at 12.25 and the 24th is at 18.75, is this right, half and quarter divisions? Also, I had an interesting idea, what if the neck extended past the fretboard, long enough to include the pickups in the neck, and then make the pickups connect with clips like EMGs, so it has the upper fret access of a neck through, but the adjustability of a bolt on? Like a bolt on, but with a really long bolt on piece? The wraparound bridge is cool, but, alas, I have already ordered my parts.

[Keegan]

Keep in mind that a wraparound tailpiece is going to change the string tension.

In my experience-- using a top-mount tele bridge-- the guitar was just unpleasant to play because of the added string tension.

I don't have the same issue with a wraparound with the Gibson scale, however, so maybe it was just that guitar.

How does a wraparound change the tension?

[joshvegas]

I wondered that too atleast to any significant degree.