psw

Hey...I purposely left out mentioning the half decent performer (the headstock was all wrong) because it at least didn't have any systemic design flaws... Talking about strange attraction...I have bursts of the perverse...and this always had that weird kind of strange attraction... But I have always had something for "reversed shapes" (explorer, mosrite, iceman, firebird, etc)... Shades of the corvus here again, but then this one failed in '67 so what's gibsons excuse! The funny thing about the katana is that it was made at the same time as the corvus and just like the corvus borrowed heavily from the house of fender (bolt on neck, in line tuners, 3xSC option, lever switch and scratchplate electronics) fender borrowed from gibson with similar failures (bound fretboard, 2xHB's, no scratchplate, V shape) while both built in a host of profoundly bad design faults in the process. That's what happens when people take over a company and have no idea what they are actually do and have no idea who their customers are and seemingly didn't care. With F'n'G, (CBS/Norlin) both companies seemed to be so focused on each other as rivals rather than producing products for players. Fortunately, Ibanez and others were able to fill the gap and give us more diversity. Hopefully the corvus and looking at some of these "black sheep" from the attic, we can avoid creating further mistakes. This era by the big makers and particularly poor designs like this opened the door for custom builders...so, perhaps that is the redeaming feature of guitars like the corvus! (there, I said something good about it!) pete

plenty in the case against here... Can-Opener Thread Drak...a great post...particularly this... That was my intention in pouring a lot of loving attention on this thing...to encourage people to think about this, and other designs they may be considering. To do some homework and work towards "best it can be" even if that "best" is to be different or quirky...or simply reactionary. In particular, I find some of Gibson's designs of this era to be cynical and misguided but fender did similar things (should people think I am simply anti-gibson or pro-fender)...like this fender Katana from 1985... will this monumental failure from it's rival be the next "build-off"? There is also some interesting history and business law to learn here, both companies were nearing their death throws..both were saved by returning to better quality control of good solid products in demand in the market place and by people with renewed attention and love for the products. Such history can be instructive in these times. But the 80's also saw the rise of innovative stuff from Ibanez and Jackson and a host of others...often with 80's excess, but with more savvy and design skills. It also opened the door for so much custom building and the project guitar kind of thing in a big way and in the hands of DIYers like EVH and commercial artist models. In defense of trying to "correct" the design...in slamming the corvus I was hoping (and there has been some) that people would reflect upon why it fails. So often people have drawn out a "shape" in an attempt to be different or whatever without answering the "whys" above...in taking something like this and the feeling some expressed (that it is different and so has some attractiveness) and that there were faults...there is a forum to express what is wrong, what would be "better" and "why". A worthwhile "exercise" if not to build, at least to consider and to read and consider. Other than that...maybe there are some things that people like about it that isn't simply perverse. By trying to defend or fix the thing may open people up to the design process and aesthetic theory to create original twists on the guitar that do work. In most cases yes...in the corvus, certainly (from gibson's perspective)...we have all drawn or even built stuff that was "wrong" but the idea is to learn and refine those ideas to retain the aesthetics (whatever they may be) while paying some attention to functionality and the whys and the hows of building a guitar. great posts drak... pete

There should be a few around...but it still wont sound like an SG... That's a perfect description of a tele.."snappy"...there are a lot of factors involved that makes a tele snappy (bridge style, bolt on neck, longer scale, lot's of maple in the neck). An SG is particularly "slow" (an SG was my first guitar)...not just the mahogany in the body and neck but the rubbery less supported neck, the shorter gibson scale, the thin body (not maple topped like an LP for instance)... In short, there are some good sounds to get from a tele with an HB but it won't sound like an SG...pickups make a big contribution, but not as much as people sometimes think (especially when it comes to things as diverse as an SG and a tele)... If emulating another players "tone" there are so many other factors of course...another players touch makes a huge difference...amps and such also a big part. But even with pickup choice, there are a range of different outputs and tones...some like pickups very hot, others like them with more detail and less mud. Perhps you might like to find out what kind of pickups this player plays. Anyway...hope that gives you a bit of an idea about things. pete

Hey...now I don't see the pics in my own post... Well, it took me a week to see the corvus...I kind of see it in yours and certainly a better design as you can see from the reponses, ell done, very impressive! What do you use to draw them? Unfortunately, if I try to do that for speculative drawings it takes for ever, but a pencil and paper, especially tracing paper is a couple of minutes...hahaha Still...it's inspiration that counts and yours were prtty darn good. I was surprised at orgmorgs version of a reversed corvus/corvax...looks better than the original even upside down! LINK

Not a good idea trying to hide the pickup...distance from the strings makes a big difference. If it is a lead sound, there are replacement bridges that hold an HB with not too much modifcation ( a bit of routing under that you would need to do anyway to install a pickup). But also, a tele and and SG are completely different animals so not likely to be the same kind of sound at all. An SG typically have a smoother attack while a tele is generally the other extreme (very quick attack). If it is the neck pickup, again you can get replacement scratch plates to do that. For a low mod HB tone...replace with a rail or pickup like duncan JB junior...as suggested earlier. pete

Hmmm...still not clear on what you want to do or if it's even practical at all...generally all these pedals and even the boss stomps effectively use electronic (ie digital) switching. It can be a tricky thing to understand and unlikely you'll see anything in an effects pedal. Generally it is a simple switch that triggers complex electronic switching in chips and transistors, they require power to run of course and multiple wires that might not like being extended to the guitar.

Had an idea...the corveX (kind of X shaped..no?) if not...perhaps a good name for a product to remove corvus's's's's

Yes...well...still having trouble seeing "the bird"...but what I do see in that last ne...if you put it upright on a guitar stand there's an oddly gumby like figure with it's right arm raised and waving....

Yes...I thought so...except in judging under the most recent criteria we would have to take off marks for innovation and deviating from the design in form and function...not to mention fan fretting and the like...far to nice and practical...looks like something someone might play!

THAT is the most likely genesis of the...you know what...that I have heard yet...blame the machines... I had a vision in my sleep last night of it, in my yard like a skull on stick, one had laned head first into the ground to ward off evil spirits...I WILL be making one shortly and in today's gale force winds the strings of human hair will eerily remind me of it's presence and power...

Great drawings... This kind of thing though perfectly illustrates the "problems" with the reversed tuner thing...how are you going to tune that low e string it's so tight...in fact the whole things will be tricky like that...but it looks kind of ok and makes more sense of the cut like I said... Shows the benefit of thought, typing and drawing before taking saw to wood though This one is fun...shows how far out of whack the balancing point may be...of course, a helium ballon attached to the headstock might be a more aesthetically pleasing solution...with a long enough string, no one wuld notice it floating above you This one is sure to inspire some people...it's almost becomeing atrractive...a bit more girth and back end and its a super strat...opps...no, it's a bird, it's a plane, it's a...opps...Yo know, I'm struggling to see the bird now, but I feel like there's a bird in their somewhere, perhaps an ibis... pete ps, links didn't work for me so pasted actual pics

Fair go...if i didn't type about it...who would there be to inspire misguided affections for it in the first place Don't worry...I have my pencil and paper still...if all fails...there's still a chance of an origami corvus

Maybe in...it depends on a few things, mainly the possibility of the landlord thinking of selling the house...not time to start something like this! I still think these rules are getting silly though. I like OrgMorgs reversalacovus corvax...it does look a bit better up side down. The headless thing is stretching things pretty far, but I'd be interested in doing something like this, but not sure the corvus is the thing...I am still trying to locate some hidden beauty in the thing, but I am fading fast.... But I have looked at this rear tuner thing for a long time...here's how one person mounts them...cause you can never have too many strings (what if one breaks!)... Problem is...is the corvus really the platform for such a thing? I have had a lot of ideas floating around that I had been thinking of trying...if people too have ideas they want to prototype this kind of project may well be as good a thing as any to attempt them. It seems strange that the "closer it is to the original" gets extra points where the real difficulty is in to try and make something of it which seems to imply that any corvus shaped bit of wood painted up with a neck bolted to it will win! This seems to fit closer to the 'ideal' to me (although WezV's sketch isn't working for me so far)... So...are there going to be reverse tuner models?...cause I may be tempted to do something along those lines perhaps but I think the rear cut will need work to make it work and this might become a little less corvus-ish. The tuner thing does help things a bit though as it at least makes some "sense" to the rear cut out existing at all!

Hi WW4F... Not sure I follow you...a switching circuit...for something particular, or for switching chains of stomp boxes as on a pedal board? Not the specialty here, but with some more info...maybe could be set in the right direction ~ pete

This is all just a smoke screen to distract attention from the horror of the corvus...and a retaliation for my smartass use of google and english-latin converters... Having read the multitudes of posts, there have been some interesting wavering and contradictions...but I have heard no argument for the thing... If a build off is reduced to a faithful reproduction...what really is there? I mean, gibson's invention was pretty cynical and misguided to start with and many features highly reminiscent of fender's approach. Generally we are talking a knockoff neck from somewhere bolted to a bit of wood and some hardware...the only thing that distinguishes this "build" is the shape which is poor (certainly in the eyes of history and most if not all expert commentary). The real challenge surely is to make something of it at least a little worth while! There were early comments that people thought there might be something there, with improvements...but that's easier said than done...some on reflection seemed to retract those things on closer inspection and reflection. But as soon as "improvements" or at least deviations are suggested...oh no, can't do that!!!! It's also interesting that people seem reticent to propose what "improvements" could be...you would think this is where it's at and takes little effort and time. The reality is, it is hard work! I have sat down with a pen and paper in front of the TV and come up with a couple of ideas...but it is tricky, but that is the reward. I think that some of these, if executed well could make some interesting things that might really appeal to some people but I'm hardly going to build them all. However, someone might find some use for it and make it, or apply the ideas to something a little less uglier...or at least refine their designer's eye before taking saw to wood (something that seems to be often needed and sometimes requested)...tackling something like this could be really beneficial if done in the right spirit...but as is so often the case, it seems to be a cursed process... ... Speaking of which...I have tried to lay off the corvus...does anyone want more appraisals of the design or the corvus curse, or are we all convinced? pete

Exactly what I have been saying...no photo shop allowed... I'd go even further and make it compulsory to hand in a sketch for all members of more than 1,000 posts!

Most of my references predated the comic I'm sure and are in fact true...however, none of those book contained illustrations, so I guess the comic wins! Shows you how illiterate I am...

Exactly what I have been saying...the horror...oh, the humanity... I can't believe with so many corvus'ssss (corvi?) and crow references, no one got "the bird" from which gibson got it's name...some still can't see it...hahahaha I can see it falling over in many many ways! And in the end people simply saying...I still don't see the bird...hahaha I can't see how a headless version with rear tuners is more "true" to the design vs my completely hypothetical sketch...I even included the original for comparison... but there are plenty of potential variations in my opinion and I'd like to see more people put pencil to paper and come up with their own "version"...just cutting out the shape and bolting on a neck isn't that much fun really...how would you judge it, "yep, that's a corvus, yep that's a corvus...ok, thats a corvus..." hahaha pete

It took me quite a while to see the bird in the original design...and when I did I swear the broad wings make it look like a sulpher headed cockatoo common around here...

Murder Of Crows.... A bad film starring Gooding Jnr? Agatha Christie? Shakespeare? ... I knew that you'd be building more than one...quantity does not make desirability however pete

Hahahahhaa... I thought people couldn't see it...hehehhee...though all theses posts I have been waiting to give the corvus "the bird!" Oh John, are you confessing to not seeing it in the original? It's a "corvus", a raven, a crow...that's the whole point of the thing (not a good point, in fact and ugly point...but a point...) So...would such a modification to the "shape" still be in the "spirit" of the Corvus...cause I don't see "the bird" in some of these...or the original (well, eventually, but it took a week!) pete

Good stuff...glad to see someone use a pencil still (I'm not sure if that looks worse, or "just as bad")...since the last post, 5 minutes and I get this kind of thing...just for instance... Of course, I'm not sure that this doesn't "look worse" (if that's possible) but I think that people should be able to be judged on such conceptualizations even if the actual thing doesn't ever come to light! This one that I did literally since the last post is intended to both bring out "the bird in flight" of the original (I think some have missed why it's called the corvus) and "fix some of the balance issues and ugliness...however, I may have failed int that...but it does demonstrate that it has the intent of the corvus while being a bit different... pete (I just noticed, not only does the guitar risk nose diving, the gibson design execs had a preminition and put the bird into a permanent nose dive )

I'm still tentative, but interested...tell me this...are you guys sure, that is one ugly guitar and some people seem to be contemplating same fairly major changes (headless rear tuners)...so... Can the shape be changed a bit or stylized a bit more if in line with the general idea of the thing? Also...as an alternative name I think I suggested in the other thread... From where I assume we get vomit...which would imply sick which to some mean "good" and to others...well, sick! The more of them I see, the worse they look...drak must have found photo's of the entire production run of 1983! pete

Scrap plywood, pine or MDF...no charge...pawn shop strat with all parts including pickups...$50... Total cost...um...$50 and if you can't live with it, you can always put the strat back together.... plus, you get a trem! pete IF I do it, it would play fine and sound ok I think for very minimum cost...I'd be looking at it from more of a conceptual angle and should be of some instruction to people thinking of doing their own (undoubtedly better designs) using a similar method and cost...also extreme quick build most likely...but we will have to see how things pan out just at the moment with the personal crap!

You may well find that you need a 4pdt with any multiple pickup installation...the mini switch on a selector has problems as he did replace the neck pickup from memory so didn't need to do the bypassing which is the difficult part. However, a 4p5t super switch is capable of this so you could have sustainer and full bypass simply as one of the selections. Remember the bypass is not just deselecting the pickups, it is completely removing them. I have found some suitable push button 4pdt switches...sometimes for computer rest or power buttons and the like...I even got something that illuminate. Not the most practical thing on most guitars...but oddly enough a lot cheaper than the toggles of similar power...not sure how they would hold out. Strange I guess...but all push button fenders and the like have failed (although there is a new MIM that features on I believe). The new high end S-1 switch pot would also work...but they wont sell it to you! I toyed about with some "active shielding" as I called it. I don't think that would necessarily work as you envision it. It is in some respects how the dual coil drivers are supposed to work emitting equal and opposite EMI like a reverse humbucker. I have to say, it didn't work quite...well, it didn't work! I am glad to see people are coming around to the criteria I originally set...and you may see that for a while the Hex drivers were considered almost small enough to be housed in a modified pickup ring itself . The commercial units do allow the driver to be used as a pickup...and the sustainiac is not a bad pickup in that mode really. But, my compact stand alone driver was in line with this, my strat pickup conversion coil even more so. Converting an HB guitar is tricky...a Les Paul or 24 fret Jem has no room on it for stand alone drivers and no HB conversion system has really been developed. Anyway...good to see people are thinking and making progress! pete