GregP

[Edit: heh, he beat me to it, and said in 2 lines what I said in 100, although the actual limit would be *2* tracks at a time, rather than 1.] I meant that question for GuitarFrenzy, however to help stave off confusion: No matter how many channels your mixer has, it will likely still only output a stereo signal; and if it's one that can output more channels, you'll still have the OPTION to output a stereo (2 channels) signal. A soundcard in your price range will likely only have 2 inputs, which match with the 2 outputs of the mixer; so, you're still only recording 2 'tracks' at any given time. Your recording options with this entry-level setup: 1. For live recordings (ie. concerts and performances), you'll just be recording in stereo. You'll have to decide in advance where you want each instrument to 'sit' in the stereo mix. There are some relatively basic stand-bys if you need suggestions. If most of your recordings are going to be performance/live, I would invest in as large a mixer as you can budget for. 2. For 'studio' recordings, you can record as many tracks as you want, and mix as many tracks as you want, but you can only record 2 tracks -simultaneously-. For example: * Drums: you decide to record a drummer. You mic the kit with as many microphones as you want, feed them into the mixer, and then decide where each microphone should be in the stereo spectrum, and at what levels. You then output from the mixer to your soundcard in stereo, and record the drum track. Alternatively, you can program your drums with any decent sequencer, or use any number of 'free' loops out there, or use a drum machine or even a keyboard's sometimes-crappy drum tracks, if you're desperate. None of these things will require a mixer or microphones at all, and if you're programming them you don't even need a 'proper' soundcard except for reasonable playback. * Drums and Bass simultaneously: Maybe your drummer and your bassist really 'lock' well, so you want to record them simultaneously. With a budget setup, you'll run into a few problems-- you can use a setup like your 'live' one, and decide where to position each in the stereo pan, and at what levels, then record them both at the same time, but you'll have both instruments mashed up together, and won't be able to change their settings relative to each other later. Alternatively, you can record all the drum microphones in the "left" channel (or right... it's arbitrary), and then the bassist in the "right" channel. As long as your mixer doesn't have any crosstalk (bleeding from one channel into the other) you will now have 2 discrete tracks, and can modify either as you see fit. The drawback of this is that your drums will have to be all panned centre in the final mixdown-- it won't sound as organic as when you have your different pieces of kit in subtly different parts of the stereo panning field. * Bass, Rhythm, lead, vocals, etc: OK, now you've gotten to a point where every other instrument is a 'mono' instrument-- like a guitar, a vocal track, or whatever. You can record either one at a time, or any -2- at a time, to build up the rest of the track. This is where the number of inputs isn't as much of a hassle anymore, because just like many studios, you're only adding parts in one at a time now. So, you've recorded drums separately and now you want to add a bass. In your sequencer (your recording software), you pick a new track, call it "bass", select it, plug your bassist into the mixer, and turn down or mute every other channel on the mixer except the bass. Press "record" on your sequencer, and just like a Portastudio or whatever, the bassist can record his part "over" the existing drum line. Each other instrument's the same... you decide to add rhythm guitars, but want you and your other guitarist to record both at once... no problem, pan one guitar left, the other right, and mute the rest of the channels. Then you want to add the lead vocal. Send just one channel through either the L or the R... or record it in stereo, if you have a stereo microphone! If you record in stereo with a mono microphone (most microphones) you'll end up with one centre-panned track, which is still fine and quite usable. Later, you want to add harmonies, with 2 singers singing at once. Either record them into one track, or if you can isolate them from one another, give them each a microphone and record one in the L and one in the R! Now, I think I may have gone overboard in the explanation, so I hope that doesn't ADD to the confusion-- but to get back to your original question: With the budget setup, you will NOT be able to adjust each instrument seperately in the mixdown. You CAN mix down as many tracks as you want, without ANY external gear (you don't even need the mixer or soundcard, really, if you do the mixing on the computer-- it's all "virtual" and is independent of outboard gear), provided you have recorded all those tracks seperately. A better soundcard still helps in this phase, though, and I wouldn't recommend trying to do anything too serious with just your laptop's onboard sound, for example. You can theoretically have limitless numbers of tracks in your recording, regardless of any outboard gear, but it will come down to your computer's robustness.

Oh, and one other thing-- Does the 'bolt in' designation (as opposed to 'bolt on') refer to the fact that the bolts are 'in' the body rather than on a heel? Ie. it's the same basic principle except for pickup considerations and the fact that the pocket isn't a big ol' hunk of wood sticking 'out' from the cutaways? I notice that to accomplish this, the other major difference is that there is more wood extended past where the fingerboard ends than on a standard bolt-on (naturally). Anything else I'm missing? Greg.

That's the one! Thanks for that. (bookmarks it for future reference, and to check up on KD's mad skillz) Greg

I had to vote "Straight, No Chaser", as I just watched the Thelonius Monk documentary 3 days ago. But it's also cool in other ways mentioned.

I was looking at one of the members' websites the other day, but for the life of me I can't remember who. On the left, there was a link to "ideas", and one of them was a basic diagram for a PRS-style bolt-on. I don't think it was to scale or anything like that, and with a bit of creativity I could probably come up with my own 'version'... But in the meantime, I'd like to have another peek at it and I'm worn out from trying to search the forum for it. ;-) If anyone could point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it. Greg.

Looking good, Hyunsu! After looking at your pics, I think I have to thickness plane my body... I'm afraid my guitar will be too thick. Greg

I wouldn't do the girl on the bike. It would take a lot of skill, and people would at least appreciate that-- but in the end, it's a girl with a thong on a bike. The Celtic knotwork was much more elegant. Excellent job on the red one by the way!! I'm thinking of doing plain old blocks in my fretboard, and I'm worried that I'm going to screw it up-- and you come along and do this kick-ass inlay as your first! That's an inspiration for sure. BTW, it's the neck rather than the bridge pickup that's in the wrong way.

Are you planning on using a lot of external gear for mixdowns? A lot of people swear by it, so it's a great plan; however, for the project musician, you can get more than adequate results by staying in the digital domain, in which case the number of inputs on your soundcard won't affect the number of tracks you can mix down. For the budget recording artist who looks into the small Behringer mixers, I would strongly recommend the 8-channel one as a minimum, not because of the number of channels, but because it has slightly more sophisticated in/out options, as well as phantom power, which the 6-channel mixer does not have. I dunno if I'm ever going to have a condenser mic requiring phantom power, but for an extra $10 for that AND better in/out options, it was a no-brainer. Cheers, Greg

As per the Guitarnuts instructions, copper shielding isn't always enough-- be sure to do a proper star-ground, as well, which for many people has been even more important than the shielding.

Regarding the dremel, that's up to you, dude. Whatever you're comfortable using. I'm not comfortable using ANYTHING, so a dremel or dremel-type tool (rotary tool) with a flex-shaft attachment sounds like the best way to go. Plenty of people use a dremel without the flex shaft, from what I've seen. And I imagine people have been doing inlays with only hand tools for centuries, so you have lots of other options.

Ignorance isn't something that needs pardoning! "DAW" stands for "Digital Audio Workstation", which can theoretically be any recording setup that's BASED in the digital world (rather than analogue), but most of the time when people say "DAW" they are referring to using computers for recording. If you already have a powerful enough laptop (if you're only recording 2 tracks at a time, even a Celeron, which I sort of dismissed, would be adequate), yes, that changes the situation greatly. At that point in time, you can get a reasonable budget mixer (Yamaha and Behringer do decent mixers for a low price) and a USB soundcard solution (The Tascam US-122 looks amazing, if you only need 2 inputs-- and it comes with a nice software bundle. Otherwise the M-Audio Audiophile USB is a popular choice) and you're off to the races. Greg.

A soundclip would definitely be useful. If it's hum, though, you might be around a lot of fluorescent lights or in an area with a lot of interference from things like a computer monitor. Not all new pickups are potted, and even new potted pickups aren't potted properly. Even reputable large manufacturers have a bottom line, and they can't be there to see that a pickup has been dipped long enough, or that air bubbles have properly escaped. Greg.

The neck DOES seem to be the most complicated bit. To reduce problems, I'm getting a pre-slotted, pre-radiused fingerboard. As for the neck itself, I haven't quite sussed out how I'm going to shape it, though I imagine I'll do a lot with a spokeshave (I've never used one, but it seems like an appropriate tool) until I get frightened of ruining it, and then I'll spend a LOT of time with sandpaper, until I wish I had learned how to use a spokeshave better. <grin>

Thanks a bunch for the replies so far! One of the questions has been made moot today-- I went to the local guitar shop and bought a set of Grover Rotomatics, which are non-locking. I have to agree about the easier string changing... I've never had locking tuners, but that was one of the main reasons I wanted them; however, since the Rotomatics were the right price, I just grabbed'em. Regarding fretboard radius-- at the same guitar shop, one of the techs offered the same advice about filing down the saddles on the TOM, and offered to either file it down for me or at least let me use his files so that I can do it myself. I know that my Godin LG has a 15" fingerboard, but it seems to be a standard Schaller TOM, so I'm wondering if they've filed them, or if they have 15" TOM specially made for them. Hmm... So far, I'm inclined to just get the 12" fretboard. To be absolutely COMPLETELY honest with you, it doesn't make a HUGE difference to me, but I do somewhat prefer flatter fingerboards. Southpa: thanks for that info. I'll take a trip over to some auto shops this week and see if I can snag some. Regarding finishes in general-- I have access to my father's air compressor (dunno what it's rated, but he uses it for his car tires...?) but I don't have a spray nozzle or a booth. Would it be worthwhile getting a nozzle and then make-shifting a booth? Alternatively, although I'd ideally like to do as much of the work on the guitar as possible, there's a custom motorcycle-painting shop just up the road. I wonder how much it'd cost to do, and if he'd have the appropriate finishes. Any opinions on #1? It may seem like a minor thing, but now that I have nickel tuners, I'm tempted to try to track down nickel pickup covers. I've found plenty of chrome, but I don't recall having seen nickel anywhere around. Cheers, Greg

Laptops are powerful enough to be used for mobile recording now. You seem to already have the right idea... USB (some are USB 2.0 now) external soundcard with XLR inputs and you're set. Problem is budget. Cheaper used laptops still seem to be largely Celeron, which are inappropriate for most recording applications. Without itemizing everything, I can tell you right off the top that unless you stumble upon some real bargains, you'll have a very difficult time doing a mobile solution with a laptop for that budget. Although I usually recommend computers for recording, for budget mobile recording, you're better off with a portastudio-type thing. Greg.

Could be, these days.... I have to admit, although I've continued reading up on gear throughout the ages, my memories are still locked on those early 90's PRS guitars, when they were first becoming huge. And I am 98% sure they were compound radius, because I had never heard of a compound radius before, and it was a big selling feature as a 'unique' feature of the PRS, along with the special neck profile. Worth checking into, though. Cheers! Greg

I always thought CTS was just a name brand. I'd like to know also, if it's something different.

Well, nothing too new to add, just an elaboration on what's already been said-- There are different kinds of outputs from different types of equipment. The website only indicates that there is a TRS output, so I imagine you'll have to select a proper mode for recording... it should say in your manual, but it likely won't send the right level if it's just set up for use as an effects pedal into an amp. "Line Level" output is what you want. There are probably also things that you'll need to tweak within ACID, especially if the program uses a different driver than what your Windows default uses. Normally adjusting your soundcard's input levels from your control panel should be universal, but it won't hurt to check anyhow. My soundcard is a bit more dedicated, but I have it set for -10db gain... as long as your fader is at "7" or so, it should be fine. Then within my recording program, I also set my track's volume/level at "0db". Furthermore, I use a Limiter plugin to keep the levels down. Since the plugin operates AFTER the signal is already 'in' your computer, it won't have the same effect as a hardware compressor/limiter (ie. if your signal is going into your soundcard distorted, no plugin in the world will save it), but I find it helps keep everything in check just a little bit better. Anyhow, like I said-- this isn't anything that hasn't been mentioned already, so I dunno how useful that'll be. I just wanted the good karma. Greg.

Harbinger? disturbed: I don't have the skills or tools, either. Join me and many others here like me in tackling the task! What's the worst that can happen? If you're pressed for money, it can be quite expensive, but other than that, you've got nothing to lose!

Alrighty, then... here are the first from what's sure to be a long string of questions I'd love to know the answers to. A lot of my questions revolve around trying to save a bit of money. I'm certainly not wanting to "nickel and dime" my project, but if I can save between $2 and $30 per item, depending on the item, I could end up shaving about a hundred bucks off my guitar, which can be rolled into my next one! 1. Chrome vs. Nickel: Well, if you put them side-by side, you can see that Chrome is more mirror-like or silvery, while Nickel has a vaguely yellowish haze to it. Or is it just me? In any case, in the long run is there any reason not to mix and match chrome and nickel parts? Ie. Would chrome pickup covers with nickel tuners look naff? 2. Tune-O-Matic and fretboard radius: Without getting a fancy fully adjustable TOM, the standard seems to be that they are 12" radius. If I want to have a flatter radius for my fretboard (15"), will the TOM throw off the strings too much, or is it negligible? Does it even matter at all? 3. Locking vs. non-locking tuners: I know, it should SEEM self-evident... but aside from the whiz-bang factor of Locking tuners, is there any *compelling* reason to get them on a non-trem guitar? 4. Where should I go for paints/finishes in Canada? Stew-Mac, etc., don't ship those kinds of things up here. In the end, I want a durable mirror finish on a gloss black instrument. 5. What the heck is Bolteron , and why is it so cheap if it's marketed as a brand name? Since binding in general is so cheap, I don't need to save any money here, but I'm still curious since regardless of price, it could be the right binding for the job. 6. My top will be carved (if I don't mess it up! <g>) from a 5/8" piece. That's pretty thick... will it be a HUGE headache to use normal-threaded potentiometers, or should I suck it up and pay 3X the price for those long-threaded ones? 7. For those who use LMI pre-slotted fretboards, it seems like their slot size is .21, but the fretwire they recommend as "standard for Gibson/Fender" is .23, so how the heck is it going to fit into those slots? 8. Has anybody ever seen any speed knobs in chrome or silver? The LMI site has a B&W photo of a "black" one, but the way the photo turned out it looked silverish instead, which I thought was great. Too bad it was just a bad photo. 9. The normal LMI 2-way rod (they also have a pimped out one) is cheaper than the StewMac Hot Rod; however the Hot Rod has some rubbery crud around the metal-- wouldn't the $2 be well spent for the sake of clang-prevention, or has anyone had good success with the LMI rod? I think that's about it for now. Feel free to answer any or all of the above questions. I'm not in a rush or anything (well, except for maybe the fretboard), so I have the luxury of time in making informed decisions. Thanks a bunch, Greg

Some of their exotica is reasonably priced.... But those fretboards make me clench my nylon wallet. I'm also surprised they don't do an extra-exotic compound radius for the PRS fretboards.

Nicely done! Such a clean photo that I thought it was a computer render. The Photoshopped background doesn't hurt, either. Then I saw your fingers and part of the camera reflected in the neck attachment plate and I realized it must be real. I envy this kind of newbie-- the kind of newbie that joins and already has stuff to show. Greg

I'm not a full-on figured maple guy... but that piece caught my eye, too. I think it's ass-kicking, not ass-wiping.

Yup, I caught that. <chuckle> I needed to put a in my post. <grin>

Maybe I've missed those threads... but I haven't seen ANYONE dissing Schecter in the short time that I've been a member of this forum... ?? For what it's worth, I think the 006 is a great body style, and I'm impressed by Schecter in general. Greg (lover of headless guitars)