avengers63

I completely disagree. Until there is a clear intent to convince another that the immitated item is legitimate, no law has been broken and no action can be taken. The underlying theme with forgeries is the criminal and duplicitous aspects of it. Consider art prints. A print of a lithograph (which is a print itself) can accurately reproduce to the smallest detail every part of the original. It can even include the artist's signature. Yet the print store can still sell it. Why? They state clearly that it's a reproduction, not an original. Yes, they are making a profit from the artist's work, but the work is licensed from the artist (or their estate) giving the shop legal rights to sell them. By your arguments, they're selling forgeries, not reproductions. The Chinese knockoffs are forgeries because they claim that they are genuine Gibsons. They intend to fool the customer into believing that they are buying a genuine Gibson, when they are not. So yes, while the definition may be riding along a razor's edge, it is still 100% about intent. Then we get into fair use laws and usages of copyrighted shapes, logos, etc., which this clearly falls into.... unless he tries to make a profit from it. If he makes it clear that it is a copy, but if he makes a profit from it's sale, it's copyright infringement, not forgery.

I'm coming in on this one late, and I'm not going over to read through the blog, so I gotta ask you here.... What in the he11 are you doing making a neck from plywood? And PLEASE tell us what the deal is with the rectangle body.

Nope... not enough. I can still see some open spots to fit more on.

From dictionary.com: for·ger·y –noun, plural -ger·ies. 1. the crime of falsely making or altering a writing by which the legal rights or obligations of another person are apparently affected; simulated signing of another person's name to any such writing whether or not it is also the forger's name. 2. the production of a spurious work that is claimed to be genuine, as a coin, a painting, or the like. 3. something, as a coin, a work of art, or a writing, produced by forgery. 4. an act of producing something forged. rep·li·ca –noun 1. a copy or reproduction of a work of art produced by the maker of the original or under his or her supervision. 2. any close or exact copy or reproduction. re·pro·duc·tion –noun 1. the act or process of reproducing. 2. the state of being reproduced. 3. something made by reproducing an original; copy; duplicate: a photographic reproduction; a reproduction of a Roman vase. 4. Biology . the natural process among organisms by which new individuals are generated and the species perpetuated. This statement.... ...combined with the context in which it was made - this forum and the WIP section - gives clear indication that DivebombInc is stating that this is his own work. As there is no claim that the item is the original, there can be, by definition, no lable of forgery accurately applied to the piece. Thus it is better to call it a replica or reproduction. Dontcha love the tangents we go off on? All that being said, I think it's a great looking replica. Doing a relic piece is a completely different set of skills from straight lutherie. Making a reproduction of an existing piece takes it to a whole nother level. Bravo. (golf clap)

You'll be happy to know that I removed the roundover that was on the back. Some thickness got removed from the back while I was re-working it, so the roundover wasn't so round anymore. When looking at the way BCR does their bevels, I saw that they have a simple, shallow bevel all the way around the back of the body. So now, mine has a 45-degree bevel that's about 1/8"-3/16" deep. I gotta admit that it fits in a LOT better than a 1/4" roundover.

The body is all routed and beveled. This afternoon I drilled the control holes and started the dyeing process.

I read an interview with Eddie Van Halen in which he commented on this topic. At one point he had an explorer that he thought sounded fantastic. He later took some power tools to it and turned it into a star-like shape, removing a substantial amount of wood from the back of it. After that, he hated it. This might have been an extreme example, or maybe Ed's ears are more sensitive than others. There are hundreds of reasons why he didn't like it afterwords, but the fact remains. The bottom line is just exactly what Wez said: it WILL make a difference, but probably not enough for you to worry about right now.

Yes there's a lot of voodoo, but there's a lot of truth in it too. The hard part is mining through the rock to get to the gold. I can personally testify that the woods make a HUGE difference in the sound of the guitar. A prototype I made from sapele sounded very dark & muddy. I later re0used the pups from the prototype in a cherry-bodied guitar which was painfully bright. They've since been used in a mahogany-bodied guitar that sounds just perfect. All that being said, yes a poplar cap will change things for the sound. How much it'll alter it is up for debate. The more that's used, the more it contributes.

sorry, but it's nothing new

I do it after it's been glued on. Everyone has their own way of doing it, and nobody is wrong. The end result is the important part, not how you got there.

Weren't you the one who made the explorer from a carving found at a junk store?

super glue If that doesn't do it for you, you'll need some long clamping cauls that will run the entire length of the fretboard. Since the f/b is pretty thin, it'll be a PIA to clamp in place if you're doing it off of the neck.

Just out of curiosity, why would you post something like this? Out of all the custom winders winding P-90's these days (and there are a LOT out there) You pick a company that Doesn't Even Make a f'ing P-90. ...Unbelievable post. I thought this was a different thread. I wasn't paying as much attention to the title as I should have. I realized it way too kate to do anything about it.

Ah. That still happens to me sometimes. It's all a matter of controlling the piece. You're right - it's a lot harder to control small pieces than larger ones.

I've not experienced that much. In most cases, only the bottom inch on teeth or so are reversed. Are you by any chance using spiral blades? Try putting packing tape on the top & bottom of the wood before it's cut. This might help cut down on the tearout.

Try doing it on "big" inlays for the 15th to 24th fret. Then try and inlay them without issue.

I've been researching the idea of an interchangeable unit for a while now.

Only if he tries to beat you with the arm. And the cavity where the arm used to be kinda looks like a butthole.

No need to Google him. He auditioned for LOSH, I think in the late '60's. IIRC, they were too polite to reject him completely and put him on the reserves. Like I said: comic book junkie.

I was thinking about that when I was cutting the extra thickness off. A couple of these were made..... poorly, so it couldn't happen with these. I believe in the future, when I make a set, I'll make them a lot thicker so i can make more than one set at a time. Maybe make a couple extra bucks in the process.

I finally got the neck radiused, buffed, and a couple of layers of ploy on it. Next is to fret it and carve the back.

this morning.... ....this afternoon I made a routing template for these out of hardboard, just like I did on the Deco LP. It's worth the extra effort now to have the unbelievably fast routing/fitting later. The inlays themselves were 5/16" thick - thicker than the fretboard - so I used the template as a height gauge and cut off the excess thickness with a flush-cur saw. They're all now +/- 1/8".

Considering that I'm a comic book junkie to begin with, that would be pretty sweet.

Just what we needed.... Corvus Build-Off II

Yet the mighty Corvus loves on!!!!! This calls for more cowbell.