Build #2

[SiZi]

My previous build was a tele body, so this time I am thinking of a Strat body. Walnut body and neck. Also, I want to learn a few new things so the neck will be a one piece. For the body, I am thinking of trying binding + contouring the top like a PRS. Body colour I’m thinking black under and shell pink on top. Heavy relic to show off the grain of the wood in key areas. For the fretboard, I am considering a rather large MOP inlay of a large wave.

Questions for the more experienced builders on this forum, if you might be willing to share your perspective please:

1. Considering the rather large MOP inlay, I feel like I should make the radius 12 because I am worried a tighter radius will make me sand into the MOP at the edges - will 12 be OK? Or should it be flatter? Any thoughts? 
2. For pickups I was thinking of 1962 replicas made by General Vintage Tone. Not cheap. Does anyone have experience with their pickups? Worth the price? 
3. the body measures 45mm thick. What do you suggest is a good thickness to which I should drop the body around the edges and contour from the top down to that height? 

Thanks so much! 

Edited March 17, 2023 by SiZi

[Bizman62]

5 hours ago, SiZi said:

1. Considering the rather large MOP inlay, I feel like I should make the radius 12 because I am worried a tighter radius will make me sand into the MOP at the edges - will 12 be OK? Or should it be flatter? Any thoughts?

I'd say 12 is a good radius. However, if uncertain, I once made this little math excercise that tells how thin your inlay will be at the corners. Or rather, how wide can you make your inlay before the edges reach zero thickness.

[SiZi]

3 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

I'd say 12 is a good radius. However, if uncertain, I once made this little math excercise that tells how thin your inlay will be at the corners. Or rather, how wide can you make your inlay before the edges reach zero thickness.

Wow super helpful. Let me give this a shot! 

[SiZi]

2 hours ago, SiZi said:

Wow super helpful. Let me give this a shot! 

Based on my calculations a 12 inch radius doesn’t look feasible. Even 16 inches is close. The inlay is only 1.5 mm. I think it might be better suited for 16 inch or flat radius on an acoustic. I will try this out on my 3rd build, where I will use a two piece neck (separate fretboard) so that if I make a mistake it’s only the fretboard that is wasted. My current build is a one piece neck so I don’t want to risk it all. 

thanks so much for the help! 
 

Does anyone have suggestions about the contouring depth? I am wondering how deep I should route at the edges in order to contour from the top of the body like a PRS or Les Paul. The body measures 45mm (1.77 inch) thick at present. Thanks! 

Edited March 18, 2023 by SiZi

[SiZi]

I’m thinking I will carve the top 15mm (0.6inch) of the body. And I will put 7mm binding after that. So, if we measure from the bottom of the body width, the binding will start at around 23mm (0.9inch) from the bottom and then the contouring will start from 30mm (1.18 inch) from then bottom, and the bridge will sit at 45mm (1.77 inch) from the bottom. 
 

does anything sound off here? 

[Bizman62]

3 hours ago, SiZi said:

Based on my calculations a 12 inch radius doesn’t look feasible.

That seems strange unless you're really going to the edges in which case you may have an issue. That said I did the math with a 300 mm radius for a 56 mm wide fretboard and if I calculated correctly X would be 298.8 mm. Adding to that the 1.5 mm of your inlay we'll get 300.3 mm which means you'd still have an extra 0.3 mm at the very edge. Or if it sounds clearer the cavity for the inlay would be 0.3 mm deep at the edge. That may sound very little but it's 20% of the total thickness.

 

[SiZi]

1 hour ago, Bizman62 said:

That seems strange unless you're really going to the edges in which case you may have an issue. That said I did the math with a 300 mm radius for a 56 mm wide fretboard and if I calculated correctly X would be 298.8 mm. Adding to that the 1.5 mm of your inlay we'll get 300.3 mm which means you'd still have an extra 0.3 mm at the very edge. Or if it sounds clearer the cavity for the inlay would be 0.3 mm deep at the edge. That may sound very little but it's 20% of the total thickness.

 

Yes I had similar calculations. The inlay goes all the way up the 7th fret - there is a large wave and then a smaller but longer one. So, at the narrower end of the fretboard (like 50mm width) the amount of material at the edges is VERY tiny (since this inlay goes quite close to the edges). This would still be Ok if I had confidence in the precision of my work. A little here and there and it could be the difference between .3mm and zero material left (this is what happened to me the last time I tried the same inlay- though that was with a 9.5 radius). The thing is I also don’t know how many mm I would need to shave off to get from flat to 12 inches. And so the depth of the inlay is another issue (I don’t want to route after radius- this was a bad experience the last time because the MOP didn’t sit flat and eventually cracked). Basically, the steps I would need to follow are first routing, then radius. And with how close the depth calculations are I feel I will mess it up - it will need to be trial and error to some extent even after all calculations. And this is why I need back up fretboards for this particular task.  

[avengers63]

18 hours ago, SiZi said:

1. Considering the rather large MOP inlay, I feel like I should make the radius 12 because I am worried a tighter radius will make me sand into the MOP at the edges - will 12 be OK? Or should it be flatter? Any thoughts? 
2. For pickups I was thinking of 1962 replicas made by General Vintage Tone. Not cheap. Does anyone have experience with their pickups? Worth the price? 
3. the body measures 45mm thick. What do you suggest is a good thickness to which I should drop the body around the edges and contour from the top down to that height? Thanks

1. I think Bizman has that one covered.

2. I've never heard of them. What I've experienced - It's OK to be frugal, but don't be cheap. Make sure they're using quality parts. Take some time investigating what the different magnet types sound like. Don't be afraid to buy used pickups on eBay, but be aware that there's a possibility they might be damaged. YouTube is your friend, especially for sound comparisons. 

3. 45mm is about right for a Strat-like body thickness, so you're off to a good start. The carve depends on the neck angle and type of bridge. Staying with a Strat style hard tail and no neck angle, I wouldn't go more than 5-10mm. The more exaggerated the carve, the worse it looks, at least in my eyes. 

[SiZi]

42 minutes ago, avengers63 said:

1. I think Bizman has that one covered.

2. I've never heard of them. What I've experienced - It's OK to be frugal, but don't be cheap. Make sure they're using quality parts. Take some time investigating what the different magnet types sound like. Don't be afraid to buy used pickups on eBay, but be aware that there's a possibility they might be damaged. YouTube is your friend, especially for sound comparisons. 

3. 45mm is about right for a Strat-like body thickness, so you're off to a good start. The carve depends on the neck angle and type of bridge. Staying with a Strat style hard tail and no neck angle, I wouldn't go more than 5-10mm. The more exaggerated the carve, the worse it looks, at least in my eyes. 

Thank you. Your persepctive on point 3 is something I did not think of ie headstock angle and how that plays into the symmetry of contour in terms of aesthetics 

[avengers63]

I wasn't referencing the HEADSTOCK angle, but the NECK angle. With a Gibson-style tune-o-matic bridge, an archtop, or an acoustic, the neck isn't parallel to the face of the guitar. It's at a bit of an angle. This lets the strings still be relatively close to the body/pickups while compensating for the bridge height. Of you examine a Gibson, specifically a Les Paul since you're making a carved top, you'll see not only the neck angle but that the carve isn't even, resulting in the top of the carve not being on the same plane as the rest of the body. 

As you're making a carved Strat, this isn't nearly as important for you at this point. Still, I'd greatly encourage you to research the topic. The more knowledge you have, the more informed a decision you can make on how you are to proceed.

[SiZi]

1 hour ago, avengers63 said:

I wasn't referencing the HEADSTOCK angle, but the NECK angle. With a Gibson-style tune-o-matic bridge, an archtop, or an acoustic, the neck isn't parallel to the face of the guitar. It's at a bit of an angle. This lets the strings still be relatively close to the body/pickups while compensating for the bridge height. Of you examine a Gibson, specifically a Les Paul since you're making a carved top, you'll see not only the neck angle but that the carve isn't even, resulting in the top of the carve not being on the same plane as the rest of the body. 

As you're making a carved Strat, this isn't nearly as important for you at this point. Still, I'd greatly encourage you to research the topic. The more knowledge you have, the more informed a decision you can make on how you are to proceed.

Thank you for clarifying. Let me read more and think about this. Thanks again!