guitarnut Posted May 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2011 Are you using EM6000? What's your experience with the durability of that stuff? I've only finished one guitar and I used KTM-9 and am very unhappy with the durability. I'm pretty hard on my guitars, but this one was soft for a long time. My guitars don't see much movement except from stand to stand...I don't play out anymore. The EM6000 is claimed by the maker to be more durable and resistant than solvent based lacquers. I've had a few slips where a neck has bumped a console of table and I've had zero issues with chipping or cracking and once it's dry, it's a hard shell. I believe Target Coatings has a comparison chart on their site. It might be in the EM6000 MSDS also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazygtr Posted May 7, 2011 Report Share Posted May 7, 2011 Another build that's been languishing in the vault since May of last year...had to rescue it from page 27 of the forum...sad. Not that anyone cares anymore, but I wanted to document the warp up. So, I got off track on this one because I didn't have PUs that I wanted for it. I decided to go with a set of Vintage Series '62 Customs. Beveled Alnico 3, staggered poles, brass base plate and cloth wrapped wire. I have the bridge, neck ferrules and tuners due in today, so this one should finish up quickly...then on to new, exciting builds. Peace, Mark Hi, new one here:) Just wanted to thank you for all the detail and info you put into your threads and builds. For someone like me who is still learning, this is priceless! I do care! Jose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2011 Hi, new one here:) Just wanted to thank you for all the detail and info you put into your threads and builds. For someone like me who is still learning, this is priceless! I do care! Jose. Thanks Jose. I felt good about this one in the beginning, but it's been out of sight, out of mind for so long. Good to know it's helping out. Peace, Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2011 Well, my plan to use a phase reverse on the neck PU has hit a snag. I just realized that the '62 has a metal base plate. The unground/reground procedure works great on a fiber base plate. Unfortunately, the '62 cover is connected in 4 places to the metal base plate. The coil is connected to the base plate at the eyelet...so, I can either do a simple phase reverse knowing that the plate and cover will become part of the hot side of the signal when reversed or just stick a placebo switch in the hole and forget about it. With the cover and plate in the hot side of the signal, I could get unexpected noise, a nasty hum if I accidentally touch the PU, or short the PU to ground if I touch it with a string. I guess it's worth a shot...it's a simple fix if I don't like it and the switch needs to be installed either way. Peace, Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted May 8, 2011 Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 I'm sorry if I missed something,but couldn't you just drill for a mini switch and have the switch for phase reversal be usable? Or(and bear in mind I am only able to wire guitars by diagram),would you be able touse a push/pull volume knob to do the phase reversal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avengers63 Posted May 8, 2011 Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 Or you could put the phaser on the bridge pup..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 I'm sorry if I missed something,but couldn't you just drill for a mini switch and have the switch for phase reversal be usable? Or(and bear in mind I am only able to wire guitars by diagram),would you be able touse a push/pull volume knob to do the phase reversal? The mini switch has been the plan all along...already drilled. The issue is that the metal cover and base plate ot the '62 PU are part of the ground. Flipping their phase puts them in the positive side of the signal...exposing them to certain pitfalls like noise and accidental contact. It works, it's just not ideal. There's no way to isolate the plate and cover other than removing the thin coil wire from the eyelet and running a new lead for it. The unground/reground, as it's called, works with a PU that has a fiber or plastic base plate because the metal cover is lifted from contact with the coil and regrounded to the circuit by a new ground wire. So, when the PU is phase reversed, only the coil is reversed...the cover stays grounded. The fiber plate is a non-issue. Peace, Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 Or you could put the phaser on the bridge pup..... Same issue...metal base plate. This would actually be a worst case setup. The plate is grounded to the bridge, is grounded to the strings. So, you would be touching the positive side of the signal any time you're in PR. The reason most folks PR the neck PU is because it's far less likely to be touched. The only way I can think of to make it work would be to futz with the thin coil wire by lifting it from contact with the plate. Not something I want to mess with. Peace, Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 I did a quick illustration to show the phase change in the PUs with metal plates and with a fiber plate at the neck position. I didn't show strings above the neck PU because they have no mechanical connection to the PU like the bridge does. Hope it makes it clear. With standard wiring and a metal plate on both pickups, you can see how the grounds invert to positive. In the case of flipping the bridge PU, the plate and strings become part of the positive side of the signal which, as we all know, would be like grabbing the end of an instrument cable that's plugged into an amp. The unground/reground procedure accomplishes phase reverse but does leave the neck PU vulnerable to noise and accidental contact. This is the scenario I'm faced with because of the neck PU having a metal plate. This one shows the same conditions but with a fiber base plate that is more common on Tele neck PUs. You can see the same issues with the bridge PU but the neck PU accomplishes the goal since the fiber base has no connection...only the coil inverts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Our Souls inc. Posted May 8, 2011 Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 Well, my plan to use a phase reverse on the neck PU has hit a snag. I just realized that the '62 has a metal base plate. The unground/reground procedure works great on a fiber base plate. Unfortunately, the '62 cover is connected in 4 places to the metal base plate. The coil is connected to the base plate at the eyelet...so, I can either do a simple phase reverse knowing that the plate and cover will become part of the hot side of the signal when reversed or just stick a placebo switch in the hole and forget about it. With the cover and plate in the hot side of the signal, I could get unexpected noise, a nasty hum if I accidentally touch the PU, or short the PU to ground if I touch it with a string.I guess it's worth a shot...it's a simple fix if I don't like it and the switch needs to be installed either way. Peace, Mark I say go for it. The strings to pup contact would make it a kill-switch of sorts. the noises might be there depending on the setting /venue but it's always reversible ( no pun intended ) . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 I say go for it. The strings to pup contact would make it a kill-switch of sorts. the noises might be there depending on the setting /venue but it's always reversible ( no pun intended ) . Yeah, I did. My thinking was the same. I've tested it in the studio and there's no difference between the two positions...other than phase reverse. I'll have finished pics up in just a few. Peace, Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarnut Posted May 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 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.