Trynyty

I hear you, and I'm not upset at all. This is just one of many guitars that I own and I could sell it for 3X what I paid for it -- if I wanted to. I just thought it was a cool thing to play with and the price was great. I understand the fear or hatred some people get when someone changes something that has been almost unchanged for 60 years. That's natural. Fanned frets and headless necks come to mind. But, you shouldn't be afraid of things that make life easier -- like this definitely does. I don't know any guitarist who learned perfect pitch by tuning their guitar. It takes a lot more effort than that. You have to separate the learning from the using. I agree, it is great to learn how to tune. I'm a software engineer and we learned machine code in school. It's great fundamental knowledge, sure, but I'm very glad that I never have to write in it. The higher level computer languages make life so much easier. As for guitars, if you are on stage and need to quickly tune between songs, how would you prefer to do it? Personally, I don't have a tech I can throw the guitar to as he gives me another one ready to go - so pushing a button and strumming the strings for 2 seconds seems like a great thing. If this could be done with floyd rose trems, I'd be in heaven. If it ruins the artistic expression, then it is no good. Pressing keys to pluck notes removes half the expressiveness of a guitar, so that would be no good. My advice would be to try it. I didn't know what to expect, and I can tell that the technology is not 100% yet -- although it is damn close. What I didn't expect was how quickly I would adapt to it. It is much cooler than I expected. Plus, it sounds and plays like a Les Paul! Time to rip though some GnR covers!

Ahh... Gotcha. You mean the Toto Neorest. http://www.totoneorest.com/home.html

Try building a guitar without a router. If you ask me, tools are developed for a reason. The key to any tool is that it does not interfere with the art. In the case of luthiery, if routers made the end result worse artistically, then they shouldn't be used. If they assist in creating the vision and make life easier, go for it. Why worry about developing obsolete skills?? Also, I don't think an auto tuner will mean that no one can tune a guitar ever again because they lost the know how. That's a little silly. It's just a tool people. Don't make too much out of it. Personally, I find tuning a necessary nuisance -- not a means to artistic creation. Of course, Adrian Legg might differ with me on that...

Also, after looking at the site, you can scratch the 'invasive' concern off. It uses the strings to send signals between the bridge and the tuners, so it doesn't need much in the way of routing or running wires. The 'expensive' concern is, however, very much still present. 900 Euros? I'm suprised how cheap the Gibson guitar is. They must have got a helluva bulk discount.

http://www.tronical.com/

Not to trounce on the humor, but it is actually a pretty cool thing. There is nothing 'magical' about tuning a guitar. The less maintenance you have to do with a tool, the more you can use it for what it was intended to do. The less time you spend tuning, the more time you spend playing. I've noticed two things with this guitar so far: 1) I play with alternate tuning MUCH more. It is so easy to pop it into a different tuning - pull a knob, push a button, strum the strings and within 10 seconds it is tuned. It makes me a lot more creative. Usually, there would be a high impedance to retuning so I would just keep it tuned the way it was (unless I was going for something specific). 2) It is very easy to keep it in perfect tune. You can always just push a button to spot tune after playing a lot of wildly bending solos. I use to play out of tune a lot more because I'd wait for it to get really bad before retuning -- and even then, it'd just be a quickie tuning because who wants to stop and pull out a strobe tuner when you are in the middle of a jam? All in all, if it wasn't invasive or expensive, I'd put this on EVERY single guitar I own. I have been majorly impressed with the system. Unfortunately, it is both of those things -- so for know it stays as more of a novelty. As for butt wipers, go to a nice hotel in Tokyo. I've heard that once you use one of those automated toilets, you'll want one for the rest of your life. Water jets, heated air, all automated and non-abrasive. I don't know, maybe you like playing with your butthole and rubbing it vigorously with dry paper. Personally, that is something I could do without in my life if I had a viable alternative, but to each his own...

How different is the Wizard II from the original Wizard? I have an old 760 that I love with an original Wizard. I've seen the WIIs thrown on a lot of cheap newer Ibi's, so I'm thinking it is not as good of a neck, but I'm curious as to 'how' it is worse. Is it a thicker neck? Gotta love the Ibi sharks teeth, though. Great choice of hardware, btw. What version of the Edge is that? [Edit] It has to be an original Edge trem, same as on my 760, and in my mind that is far superior to any they make today. Did you get that off the e-bizzle? Was it greater than 150? I'm curious, because I'd like to upgrade another old guitar I have to this trem. I don't see the posts in the pic, where are you going to get posts for it? Thanks!

Wow! That's a headless style guitar that I've never seen before. I had the idea of embedding a Pocket POD into a guitar. It'd give you effects as well as amp sims. Are you making your own neck or do you have an existing neck? What about the headpiece? (edit - I missed the pics of the neck first time around -- still not sure what you will use for a headpiece) (edit - Also, it looks like the neck will have a large part of the heel protruding past your neck join -- could you post a pic of the neck fitted into the body?) Cool project, good luck with it.

Please, please, please drop this. I don't mind not winning. Who freakin' cares! I was disappointed to be running 5th at the time. Sorry I'm human, I'll try to not to have any emotion in the future. My query was, why is it 5th? Is it purely an exotic wood issue? Is it a headless issue? If so, who cares. Or is it something that maybe would help me down the road. Not to win anther freakin' contest, but to build a better, and better guitar. What is this site all about?? Building better and better guitars through positive and constructive criticism or just patting each other on the back? That is all I wanted and I thank those that actually helped with some advice. For all the others, I appreciate that your heart is in the right place, but you are reading the situation incorrectly. So far, I have: Subtle neck inlays to enhance the overall visual Sealing & priming before painting The first will happen to this guitar, both will happen to future builds.

Excellent catch on the sealing/priming. I had intended on doing this originally, but the painter insisted on not doing it. It was her first guitar (and probably first painting on wood, period). It was an error on both our parts. She made a mistake and I was too green to push it. Any advice on what to seal the body with before using acryllic paints (or point me to a post/doc)? I definitely want to get this right on the next build. And, as far as I'm concerned, you cannot have enough information before a project. What you end up doing with that info is up to you. Every project is based on your sum experiences up to that point. Guitars, discussions, nature, etc. I guarantee not a single instrument was made in a vacuum with no external input. It's all a growing experience. If people aren't happy with it, I'd like to know. If it's just because it's headless, then they can sod off.

Comparing the presence and absence of an item is different than comparing two differing types of items. The exact quote was: I don't know how anyone can defend that statement. The word 'hate' is a pretty strong word and to imply that anything that goes against your preference is therefore 'hated' is ugly. To call that 'cause and effect' is ridiculous. But hey, if you want to defend it, be my guest. I'm sure this'll boil down to a semantic debate where everyone claims their words were twisted or pedantically interpreted. Whatever. I'm not replying anymore to those posts. It's innapropriate in this forum and is not the constructive criticism/advice I was asking for. I have no power to do so, but I would ask anyone looking to post in this thread to please limit it to ideas and advice on different ways I can take this concept further or maybe in a direction I hadn't anticipated. Thank you.

I do appreciate the reply, but let me stop this before I am misconstrued yet again. I'm just asking for advice, I'm not asking people to tell me what to build. If I don't like your advice, I won't take it. If I do I might, or modify it to some degree. That's all. Don't read too much into this. I don't pretend to know everything about everything. There is MUCH for me to learn. When I was planning this guitar, I incorporated advice and suggestions from others. Isn't the point of boards like this to share ideas and help each other learn and grow? Or is it to build whatever you want devoid of input, post it and then not care what anyone says about it? That latter sounds a little pointless. So, I guess, nevermind.

That is what I said.... Cause and effect. The cause is I like the look of headstock's on guitars, the effect is that I then hate the look of headless guitars. So is it then inaccurate for me to say that I hate headless guitars? No. So, I like beer, ergo I hate soda?? Your logic is impeccable my friend.

I don't know about you personally, but if you played headless, you'd know how many people write you off when seeing it. Prejudice is defined as 'Bias for or against someone or something that fails to take true account of their characteristics'. I usually apply it only when the scope gets too large. For example, I'm not a big fan of SGs -- I just don't like the way the double cutaway is done. I don't see that as prejudice, I didn't pre-judge anything. If I instead said 'I hate all double-cutaways', now I've pre-judged double cutaways I haven't even seen yet. I've lumped them all into a large category and pronounced my judgement. Above, you stated 'I hate headless guitars'. That is an act of pre-judging all headless guitars -- even those you haven't seen yet. If you said 'I prefer a headstock', that would be different. I am assuming that is what you really meant. Personally, as a guitarist, I have a deep love for the instrument. I have Fenders, Gibsons, Steinbergers, Ibanez, Gretsch's, several basses, Schectors, acoustics, nylon acoustics, banjos, mandolins,... I love the diversity that fretted instruments provide. You don't see that with any other instrument. But hey, some people like to have a row of similar instrument. This ones red and that ones blue. I can dig it. Finally, being a maverick or being a conformer has nothing to do with the brevity of your posts or speeches. That would be more of a slacker versus diligent argument. The only reason I type long posts is when I'm afraid of not being properly understood. Apparantly I could use some work in that department. An argument is not what I'm looking for in this thread.

I think I'm being misunderstood a little. We can all say that we are total mavericks and that we don't care what anyone else thinks about anything, but that is a falsehood. We are social by nature. It is hardwired into us genetically. Not accepting that part of yourself is not accepting the 'humanity' inside you. Now, that aside, I will not do anything that I don't like just to please others -- but I can be disappointed when others don't seem to see the same thing I do. So, then I think, am I blinded by the moment? Is there something tangible that could be done that would improve/enhance these creations that I dream up? That is what I am after. Is it purely an 'exotic wood' thing? If so, then I concede. I had an artist spend many, many, many hours doing a very intricate design. I love exotic woods, but I would take that over a flamed this, or a quilted that any day. That's my preference when I can afford it. Is it a body shape thing? Is the neck too bland? I'm certainly not an expert at this and I'm kinda feelin' my way through as I go. I'm trying to think up new ways to go with this and I want to make sure that I have as much expert advice as possible. I'm not asking to be told what to change, I'm just asking for a fresh perspective. That's all. Sadness is probably not the right word. Disappointed is probably more apropos. And when I say that, I don't mean in the guitar, nothing will take away the pride I feel for this thing. More along the lines of -- imagine you love this restaurant and you can't wait to take your girlfriend there, but when you do she doesn't dig it. That's the kind of disappointment I mean. Not life-shattering, but there none-the-less. And trust me, if you played headless guitars you would know. 'Prejudice' is exactly the right word. I just didn't want to get those kind of comments here. They aren't constructive. Now, here is my plan for the neck inlays. I need to come up with a 3 fret long figure 8 mini-ouroboros. It will run from the 11th to the 13th fret. I have two ways to go with this. One, make it a small snake eating it's tail. Two, just make it an infinity sign that is fatter at some parts and thinner at others to add interest. I'm not sure which I want to do. Once caveat is that I will probably add this inlay to other guitars and kind of make it my 'thing' if that makes sense. So, it may be on guitars that don't have snake designs. This inlay will become my 'logo'. The other thing I was contemplating is changing the dots at all of the other frets to small diamonds. This would bring out the patterns on some of the snakes and move it up the neck. Again, I'm not sure about that either. I do think that adding some interest to the neck would be a postive move -- I just want to be careful to do it in a small dose. A little inlay goes a long way. Any advice on getting a graphic done for inlays? Should I find a graphic designer?