GregP

+1. I even like the LOOK of my recessed TOM on my Godin.

Someone on another forum brought these to my attention. Look like another company looking for a piece of the "high quality, but low price" market: http://www.irongear.co.uk/index.htm Of course, the "high quality" part remains to be seen. Anybody here ever use them? Anybody heard of'em? Greg

Wot he said. The extra millimetre of plastic won't be a "problem," just take it into account.

What's interesting about the GOTM, especially in months like this, where there's a dozen entries, is that it offers an opportunity to get into a discussion about what makes one build work (in one's opinion) and what doesn't...kind of a springboard for what makes a guitar interesting in general. And yeah, for certain people here, what makes it sellable (so obviously Marcovis is doing well on that point!). I mean, otherwise, if it's just a means to stroke each others' puds, what's the point? In the VOTING thread, though? Some people (foolishly) read these threads before voting. It's even MORE ridiculous to try to influence someone's vote in a negative way ("if you vote for anything with quilted maple, you're an idiot") than it is to just take a moment to mention who specifically you voted for. Each time you pay someone a compliment it doesn't mean that you are "stroking a pud," for crying out loud. It's not like "negative" criticism is the only form of valid and non-obsequious criticism. You can point out positive things and pay compliments without it being superficial or uninformed. Marcovis' guitar is amazingly executed. If YOU can't see that, YOU'RE the one blinded by the wood. Come to think of it, though, why SHOULD they look past it? It was part of the design, it helped exhibit wood-finishing skills, and it slots the guitar into that certain category. I personally find I'm tired of figured maple 2-humbucker guitars, but that didn't stop me from acknowledging the awesome work he did. I might have "looked past" the top, but there's no real reason you HAVE to. There may be something to what you say about this thread being a potential jumping off point... but there are other opportunities for that. I just don't PERSONALLY think this thread is the forum for that. And if you DO feel the urge to flex your critical muscles, I would think it's a better approach to not single out one specific guitar to rally an "anti-vote" against. Apparently you're SO good at it that you didn't realize you were doing it again. The workingman bass is a perfectly functional ("valid") instrument. As for the question, it was more like a rhetorical question. If you read my post, you would already know that some people are "looking past" the wood. Daniel ALSO stated that it was the back of the guitar that won him over, not the front. Even better than reading those kinds of responses, give people credit for critical thinking. In any event, the answer was there, and the "question" was actually a statement. "HOld on there, what are we actually doing?"-- my answer, already given, is-- "voting for a superbly-crafted instrument." I risk pissing you off, I'm sure. I've been told I should have been a lawyer (and I realize, lawyers are not universally loved. ), due to the way I approach debates. In any event, I hope you'll just take my word for it that by "debating" you here, I continue to have nothing against you as a person. I hope the same goes the other way. Greg

I once read that Carvin's TOM is shorter. Actually, their own description seems to match: http://www.carvin.com/products/single.php?...C&CID=GTR/K It uses thumbscrews, though; dunno if you'd need adapters in the event that your Gotoh bushings are already installed. I would venture "yes" but I don't actually know. Greg

I have to agree with jmrentis on both points-- 1. the pictures are fine 2. it sounded like an insult to people who voted for it, and the builder I specifically stated that I do NOT in fact like figured wood, but that it won my vote. Why? The execution was excellent. The execution of other guitars was excellent, too. I'm not going to itemize why I did NOT vote for all the guitars that I did not vote for. It's not the sort of thing that requires justification... all that matters is a vote and a wee bit of chatter. Criticism is for build threads, IMO. Greg

It was great! Except for having to look at your boobies. V. Cool hearing those Guitarheads actives in action. Sometimes you could hear too much of the actual track to keep tabs on YOUR playing, but still cool.

Hrm. People have put resonator cones into all kinds of shapes. I Googled around a bit and found a "Do-Bro-Q" on the MIMF forum, which was a neck and other relevant parts installed into one of those round charcoal barbecues. Jay Turser, of all companies, makes a solidbody Resonator. Found one on eBay here http://item.express.ebay.com/Musical-Instr...cmdZExpressItem But I'm sure there must be a more permanent link out there in the internet somewhere. If someone takes the time to find it, posting to this thread might be helpful for future readers. [edit: here we go --> http://www.jayturser.com/jt-res.php ] I'm not 100% convinced that you're going to get much of a resonator sound translating into the mag and piezo pickups, but since I've never tried it I don't actually know. That's just my scepticism showing. Greg

Start looking at some Google images out there. People very much misunderstand and overestimate the importance of polepiece alignment. Wasn't there another thread that just got bumped yesterday? Greg

Nothing at all to do with voodoo, and yes something to do with your tubes-- though I don't actually know the KT88 specs and performance. Tubes will eventually go into overdrive, with one side-effect being that the signal becomes compressed. You can push them harder, and you'll get more clipping, but you won't get much more volume. Amps with a lot of headroom will be able to achieve higher volume without clipping. In general, people will specify that they mean "clean headroom," but if not, you can assume that they're talking about the amp's ability to push the power section hard without clipping. If your distortion is generated in the preamp, you can still talk about 'headroom' in the power section. Ie. it's not a simple "distortion vs. clean" equation-- unless your amp specifically generates its usable distortion in the power section, at which time there's a more direct correlation. That's just layman-speak... someone who actually knows amps better might be able to refine or clarify that information. I'm no textbook authority on amps. Greg

Workingman bass almost had my vote, but I couldn't resist Marcovis' guitar. And I don't even like figured maple tops all that much.

Google "f-spaced humbucker" and the "I feel lucky" button gets me this: http://www.jag-stang.com/FAQ/index.php?pag...p;id=39&c=4 Not the best page ever (it should show the f-spaced polepieces in an "after" shot!) but just an example that even the very first hit of an internet search will give you the answers. In any event, since I'm already posting... might as well answer the question, too... F-spaced pickups have their polepieces spread out a bit wider to accomodate for the fact that the strings are also wider apart closer to the bridge. My impression (not historical fact) is that it became pretty common to install them on superstrats equipped with Floyd Rose trems. The goal is to have the strings more accurately aligned with the polepieces. There is likely a quantifiable change in the sound between normal and f-spaced, but for the most part the magnetic field of a regular pickup is plenty large to accomodate strings that may be a little bit off-centre from the polepieces. The slugs and screws don't have laser-precise fields pointing straight out from them, after all. Greg

So, it's Tuesday. What was the verdict?

You mention adjusting height, but have you adjusted neck curvature (ie. truss rod adjustment)? With a superlative fret job, some people can have dead-level fretboards. I know a few people on this board who have their guitars that way. But more commonly--especially if you don't have a superior professional setup job--the neck will be slightly "bowed". Also, just to be absolutely clear-- if you are fretting at the 7th fret, it's not necessarily that fret that's causing the problem in that exact moment. It could be any fret from 8 onward. If the 7th fret is too low, it could be the problem. But if the 8th (or whatever) fret is too high, THAT's where the problem is. I hope I'm making sense. The first step is to do a full setup, including adjusting height and relief (amount of bow-- which is itself a side-effect of the truss rod working to counteract string tension). If a full setup doesn't fix it, then you might be able to do (or have done) a fret levelling job, which means that the frets don't necessarily need replacing. If you or the luthier determine that this won't solve the problem either, than you can consider a full or partial refretting. Greg

The lighter was just to demonstrate to the camera (for sceptics like me) that it is glass and not plastic (plastic would melt and warp) and wasn't actually part of what made him allegedly able to cut the glass.

I've never seen anyone else looking for a way to cut class on PG. The rest have already "googled it". Something's fishy in that video, but it might just be my natural scepticism. What would be REALLY useful is if you tried it and got back to us. Please use gloves and eye protection and any other precaution you can think of.

I guarantee there are sites out there with lots of information particular to cutting glass. While a few people here might happen to know a bit about it, sometimes a little Google goes a long way.

All true. GFS's P90s are offered with a reverse-wound, but that won't help if you already own the pickups.

There's a recent thread on the PowerTune guitars. Their marketing-speak is sketchy, but the unit *is* available as an aftermarket product, for the low price of $900.

If it's just for you, there's no trouble with the law, and only an idiot would see it as anything other than a tribute. If your sense of style and aesthetics tells you it'd be a cool finish for your guitar, there's no reason to not go ahead with it.

I'm no pro, but isn't the most significant reason it's difficult to chrome wood is because wood isn't conductive? Ie. it can't carry the current necessary for electroplating? Slap me if I'm missing something obvious, but it seems to me that the whole reason you can only have "fake chrome" of varying qualities is because you can't truly chrome wood...!

There are threads about chrome finish on guitars. See what the forum search turns up. I don't remember all the details, but the impression those threads left with me was: it's not easy, it's not cheap, and it rarely looks like actual chrome. Greg

a later stage of what? If the guitar has finish on it, it's not trivial to strip in order to prep the body for binding. It looks like there's currently no clear on it, mind you. Is that correct, rubberchicken?

I dunno, dude. Those are on my want-to-buy list. ;-) I know what you mean about the wires-- they're just a twisted pair, as far as I know. Not sure if that's a manufacturing decision or what. I'm not even positive that those 2 wires are of LESSER quality than some of the thin-tacular little wires that come inside a 4-conductor cable. The shielding issue is a bit odd, though. If you have tonnes and tonnes of random cables lying around, you could probably makeshift some sort of sleeve. I have a few different varieties of cable that you could just yank the guts out of and be left with a shielded sleeve. The short version: if you made a mistake, it's the same mistake I'm going to make whenever I'm back in the black. Greg

Sorry, yeah, I realize I didn't communicate very well. I think that you earnestly were including him (as the drummer) in songwriting (needing his drumming expertise and input), but he might have felt it was just an extension of the songwriting pressure. Of course, not knowing ANY of you, who can say.