sirkentesquire

Hmm, my mistake on the $1049.99 list price. That's the only price I found in Jackson's official price list for the guitar, but I guess it must not have been the custom shop one. My bad.

The retail price for that particular guitar seems to be $1049.99. It is commendable that you would seek out an independent builder to craft you an instrument, but if that particular model is exactly what you want, buy it. You likely won't find a competant luthier to build you the exact same guitar for near that price, unless they're extremely generous, for some reason. Why? Companies pump out dozens (if not hundredes) of guitars a day from their factories as opposed to spending a month or two to hand-craft a single instrument for you. That said, if you really want a single craftsman to build it for you I would encourage you to start thinking around the $2000 mark, but you might find someone for a tad less. But like I said, if you want a Jackson, buy a Jackson. They may cost more than they're worth, they may not, but it will be exactly what you want, a Jackson.

Nope, you guys are right on. If it was for me, I would want to be able to freely touch every single fret, and it would have had 24 of them, by the way. The guy I built it for is really a fiddle and mandolin player, he really doesn't even play guitar very much. It was created as more of a show piece than a perfectly designed double-neck. The mandolin was exponentially more important than the guitar, in terms of playability, sound, feel, etc. I don't think he even goes anywhere near the 12th fret, let alone all the way to the top, so with him it's a non-issue. As far as finishing goes, I agree with the nitro suggestion as well. That would have looked sweet, and we were contemplating going with a blueburst on it, which would have looked great as well. Truth be told, the guitar was finished in less then two months from conception to birth, which was just nuts. I mean, he came to pick it up for an out-of-town gig not five minutes after I plugged it in and tested her out one final time! Lacquer was just completely unfeasable with the time frame is all. I personally love the look of wood, and the oil and wax just feels so 'organic' to me, ya know? But a harder, more durable finish would have been the preference. I thought about rear-routing the controls, but honestly, I love the look of the wood for the control plates. I think it would have been a bit too bland without it, to my eyes. Like any instrument I've made, I can always see ways to improve upon the design, and that's what's so exciting, you're always coming up with new ideas, new ways of doing things or just plain off-the-wall concepts. I mean, that's what keeps it fresh, right? Right.

Not as heavy as one would think. I haven't weighed it, but I was playing it with a strap for about an hour with no adverse effects. It's actually lighter than the last bass I made with a solid purpleheart body. I should get some pics of that. THAT sucker is heeeaaavy!

Ah, you guys think like me, except about the solid colour idea. I like to always see the wood on a guitar. In any event, my customer wanted the separate controls for both necks, so that's what I did. As for the three-way switch, it looks like it would be in the way, but it's actually miles away from where you might hit it with your arm. I was a bit surprised myself! Yep, it's super balanced. My customer was also a bit concerned that it would even play correctly with a strap, but it's spot on. I guess the body is Parker like in the horn direction. A friend and I designed the shape together for a bass I made for him a couple years ago. It's the general shape I've been using for all my guitars, except this one was more rounded between the horns for neck attachment reasons. I'm still trying to improve the heel-less bolt-on design, but for this guitar upper-fret access was completely unnecessary, so it works well and still looks cool.

I am not of the digital camera age, so it wasn't until recently that I thought of borrowing a friend's digital camera to take some shots of my latest project. I figured I would post it on here, maybe inspiring someone to be more creative than just sticking to the norm. Anywho, here's a pick of the beast: It's a double-neck, alright, but while the bottom neck is a standard guitar, the top is a six-string mandolin, more or less. It's tuned in fifths, starting with a low F all the way up to a high E. I did have some string tension issues. To get equal tension for the low F it would have had to have been around 0.078", which is a bass string, so we compromised and went with a 0.060". Still a bit wobbly, but pretty good. Body: -ash with a maple top -three hollow chambers throughout the body to cut down on weight, one in front of the humbucker, one behind the guitar bridge, and the other above the pickup selector -the control and truss rod covers are made from the beautiful, yet annoyingly brittle "Chatke Kok" wood. Don't ask me ow to pronounce it... Necks: -five piece laminate of bloodwood, maple, and purpleheart on the outsides -rosewood fretboards on both, 21 frets, with MOP dots -headstock veneer of...canary wood? I think that's what it was... Electronics: -Seymour Duncan JB for the guitar, and a Hot Rails for the mandolin -each pickup has volume, tone, and a series/paralles switch Hardware: -Schaller tuners on both headstocks; regular for guitar, minis for the mandolin -Hipshot hardtail bridges with string through body -two-way trussrod from LMI in the guitar and a one-way in the mandolin -Graphtech nuts on both, as well as the Buzz Feiten tuning system on both, though I still have to get the offsets for the mandolin from the company I was really pleased with how it turned out, and my customer was blown away, which is always satisfying. Oh, and the finish is Danish oil and wax, on body and neck, giving it a smooooth finish and a nice glow. The headstock is finished with TruOil to give it a glossy look where you can still see the grain quite readily. Here are some more pics: Front Side Back Headstock Rocking out I've probably forgotten many things, so just let me know if you have any questions.

If you can't take the neck off it's always more of a hassle. Honestly, that's about it. Have you ever done a scallop before? If you have then it won't be that different except worrying about protecting the body while you're doing it. If not, it'll be a fun time I love scalloped fretboards, personally, and feel like they play as smooth as butter. It does take a lot of time and energy, though, a lot longer than most people think. Were you thinking about doing a full scallop (regular style) or a 'spoon' scallop, as I call it, where the scallop is deepest on the headstock side of the fret and shallow at the other end, making a sort of spoon shape. That's what I have on my strat. It's less work, takes away less wood and I think it plays just as great if you play pretty consistently. Go for it. Just go slow and make sure nothing bad happens to that body.

I don't want to say your friend is crazy, so I won't. You are correct, a string bent sharp will be flat when released if it sticks in the nut slot. What WILL make it go sharp is using the tremolo, which allows the string to move backwards in the nut, causing it to be sharp if it sticks when the tremolo is brought back down. If you switched it to 9's and it still is going sharp, either the nut was shaped quite lousy to begin with or it's a problem at the saddle end, which is often a difficulty as well, but I'm not familiar with PRS tremolos. Anyway, good luck getting it sorted out.

The Buzz Feiten Tuning System is a combination tuning adjustment at both the nut and the bridge. You can use it with a locking nut, but it involves having part of the fretboard routed away to move the nut closer by a precise amount. This part is the same for all instruments, just moving the nut closer to the first fret, only difference is how it's done and by how much. For the bridge adjustment you are adjusting the intonation to off-set adjustments that work to compensate the different strings to play more "in tune" with one another, especially between F and B bar chords. It's based on adjusting the third note in a chord to play more pleasently by compensating the fifth, more or less. Anywho, you can do it on acoustic, but it involves a lot of work and actually moving the saddle back, usually by filling in the saddle slot and routing another spot for it in the bridge. I'm an authorized retrofitter for electrics and bass and whatnot, but not for acoustics, though that has been how the acoustic part was explained to me.

Actually, I have had it happen twice, but it was on the same instrument. It's really just a bonus that you aren't screwed (pardon the pun) if the heads break off. It allows you to take the body off and use pliers to manually unscrew it. That's a reasonable concern. Obviously if the neck pocket is loose and the screw holes are way too big then the neck could move around. The reason behind the bigger holes is that if you have both pieces threaded (body and neck) then you never get true compression between the two since once it screws through the body it no longer pulls the neck, merely holds it where it screws in. There was actually a Telecaster that I repaired that had a loose neck due to the way the holes were drilled and their size and whatnot, which was remedied by putting in bigger screws and drilling the body holes so the screws just slid through, giving the screws the ability to tighten the neck to the body much more effectively. It was as solid as a rock. As for the screws working themselves loose, you're right in that the less wood the screw is threaded into the less there is holding the screw, but I've never had it happen before. If the screws and holes are made properly and things are tight, there are few reasons, if any, why they should ever come loose. Good observation.

By what you wrote I have to assume that there are no holes in either your body or your neck. It that is true, it's pretty easy. All you have to do is: 1) Mark out on the inside of the neck pocket where you want your screws to go. Say 1/2" from all sides of the neck and 3/4" from the edge of the body, if it's rounded over a fair amount. 2) Drill the holes through the neck pocket using the right size bit for the screws you have, whatever the diameter is minus the threading. Oh, and use a drill press or make some jig to drill straight. 3)Position the neck in the pocket on the body and clamp in place. 2) Drill into the neck with the same bit, going through the holes you just drilled. In terms of how deep to drill, I usually drill to where the fretboard joins the neck and get screws to fit that length, but they can be a little shorter. Again, use a drill press if you can. If not then a steady arm and some tape to mark the depth will be required. 3) Remove the neck from the body and drill out the body holes big enough so that the screws will slide through those holes and only thread into the neck. This is important to ensure the tightest fit possible to the body, though sooo many guitars aren't built like that, for whatever reason. It's also great if a screw head breaks off, as you can just lift the body off of the neck. 4) Put your neck plate on and put screw it together. I think that covers what you are asking. If not, feel free to elaborate.

A quick question, is StewMac the only place that sells fret tang nippers? I've been looking around and haven't found an alternative, but I may just be inept. I'm sure the ones from StewMac are fine, but it's good to have options and all. Thanks, Matt

Ah, slotting, one of the things I hate most but is very satsifying when completed. Let me see if I can explain this well... First, I slot with the fretboard attached to the neck, and the back of the neck still being square. Then I clamp the neck to my bench-type area. I mark out two points on the fretboard with pencil in the exact center of the neck. Then I get a straight piece of maple to use as a guide. I use a square to position the maple guide parallel to the centerline of the neck using the two spots I marked out, preferably at opposite ends of the neck. The guide is one or two inches away, depending. You'll see. After that's settled, I bust out my jig, which consists of a piece of wenge about 8"x 4"x 1", and two 1"x 4"x 1" legs that go on the ends. The wenge 'table' goes over and around the neck and one of the shorter edges slides against the guide piece. To make clear, the piece of wenge I use has to be a perfect rectangle, 90 degrees at the corners, to assure your slotting will be perfectly perpendicular to the centerline of the neck, you follow? Then I pull out my saw and put a few strips of electrical tape on one side, acting as depth guide to know how deep I'm cutting. The other edge of the saw rests against the wenge jig, which keeps it perfectly vertical, though you have to make sure your neck isn't higher or lower at either end as well. I position the wenge beside a marked location of a fret, clamp it in place while it's resting snugly against the guide rail and proceed to saw. I also use some wax on the blade to keep it from sticking, which happens to me a lot, though it depends somewhat on the kind of wood you are cutting. I hope that is vaguely clear. Sorry if you just can't picture it, but hopefully some other people can expound a bit more, or just let me know what's fuzzy.

It's clear that you've never built a guitar, but that's okay, as most people haven't. You certainly DO have the right to question why anything costs as much as it does, but just realize that when you look at where you're asking the question you need to think "tactful". For the guys that DO build custom guitars for their livelyhood, it is offensive when someone tells them that they are completely out of line with their prices, which is what you are saying, in effect, even if not directly. That's just how it comes off. That said, this is a case where the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. You can't just take every little thing and put a pricetag on it. That's a relatively new concept in modern thinking, and frankly it's seldom accurate or reasonable. If Doug can make a neck for under $200 than kudos to him, as that's awesome! But I'm sure he would tell you, as he alluded to, that when you focus on one thing you can do it more efficiently, which is why he would be able to make necks better and faster than myself or some of the other guys here. But a guitar isn't just a neck or a body or pickups or whatever. Think of it like art. Hmm, a $50 canvas and $5 worth of oil paints don't really add up to the thousands of dollars some pieces of art go for. The value is in the unseen. The builders here who do custom work are CREATING something new, which has innate value in and of itself, something that can't really be broken down into dollars and cents. Now I personally have not been charging very much for the guitars I have been building because I mostly do repair work and only have three instruments under my belt, but the more I get into this the more I realize that I would prefer to never own a guitar BUT a custom built one, if for no other reason than it's an expression of humanity, of how we were created to also create. And personally, I wouldn't expect to pay any less than around $1500 or so, bare minimum. Yeah, it's okay to want to understand costs and pricing and all of that, but it's not just some math equation. I commend EVERY person on this forum who has decided to step out of the boat and attempt to create something unique, something different, and to do it with their own two hands. That's just phenomenal, and I hope we can all keep doing this as long as we live.

As far as the actual position of the upper horn relative to the rest of the body, don't worry about it too much. I made two similar basses with the upper horns being an inch or so wider than the back part and there's no problems at all. If you're just moving it up or down, it doesn't have the same effect as moving it forward or back, which as was stated affects the balance a lot.