aidlook

Get ya own material! Lol, should have read the entire thread I guess....

he's like...he's like a british Litchfield....

As crafty said guitarfetish has some nice tele stuff (bridge, knobs, control plate, pickguard etc). You could go with nitro if you want, don't expect to hear any difference to any other finish though. For finishing go with what's available to you and what will get you the best results with the equipment you have. Why does finding a pickup prove tricky? there's a gazillion different pickup manufacturers.

If you are willing to sacrifice the "made by fender" sticker on some of the parts you could probably save quite a few bucks without sacrificing quality.

What type of switch are you using for the footswitch?

I've heard higher gauges often cause the electrons to feel lonely...That can't be good for sound.

Doug, it's not the resin but the fibreglass we're talking about here. The increased stiffness of thin fibreglass would be marginal, but more importantly unneccesary. I can't really see any gain from using the fibreglass on an already finished neck, unless you want to add texture to it or something.

I think you should laminate Mahogany/bloodwood/mahogany, and then bevel the edge to get the bloodwood accents.

won't do much to the frets, just wipe it off. Where will you get the unfinished maple neck?

This seems to be based on the fact that I questioned your statement that krylon makes any guitar sound like a smuthered turd. I really hope it's based on something other than that as well since you're reccomending someone to not look for information on this forum. And really, you should be able to come up with a better argument than claiming people who don't agree with you tone deaf.... @ fryovanni and prostheta I think we're actually kinda on the same page here, although I may not come off as good as I want to in the communication. My basic points I was trying to explain was that of course everything added or subtracted from a guitar will change the tone in some way, although it's so small that I doubt that anyone would be able to tell. Also there are some larger factors that are always overlooked like the fact that the pickguard (about the same mass as a plastic finish) is made out of plastic, or the human contact with the instrument.

First of all I never said I haven't used rattlecans, I just don't anymore because I have other options available wich are better suited for my needs at the moment. I missed your point about the soft finish?really? seems to me that your point was that it should make perfect sense that soft finish=tone of a smuthered turd. I just don't believe that statement without you actually showing something more than unsubstantiated theories to back this up. Who said anything about thickness? I did. You seem to have missed the point that a finish with 1/100th the thickness of a resonating body could at best have a marginal effect on the resonance, and to say that this marginal effect could completely 'ruin' the tone of an instrument is pretty silly if you have nothing to back it up.

Maybe if you stated who built the neck and actually checked and confirmed the scale length (would just make it seem a bit more serious to me at least)

Prostheta, couldn't really find that explanation. It's seems like what you're getting at is homogenous+low complexity=good sounding. Wouldn't a simple occilator produce the most pleasant tone known to human ears if this statement was true. Also it seems like wood wouldn't be a very good material to build guitars from in the first place if your theories where true, due to the variying density etc. It's just an extreme oversimplification as to what we percieve as good sound. The duct tape on a drum skin is not a very good analogy, a piece of duct tape on the side of the drum would be a better comparison, we're talking resonant frequensies of the body here, not the string. If what matters is how homogenous the resonating body is, it seems like casting the body out of some homogenous material would make the guitar sound a lot nicer. I still see nothing but 'this makes sense' claims with no actual testing or evidence to back the theories up. Seems like swapping plastic pickguards for wooden ones would make for an equally big change in tone (for the positive since the system is now more 'tuned'). Also it seems like a wooden bridge and wooden knobs would be optimal. All your arguments seem to be based on the theory that low complexity=what all people percieve as good sound. It's just not that simple. I'm not gonna say that different finishes don't affect the resonanse at all, but I am going to question the magnitude of change it's going to make. I have yet to see some factual evidence of this, or even a remotely scientific test. I also believe that physical contact to the instrument would be a much bigger factor than what finish you apply.

You will get a lot of different opinions on this, mixed up with unsubstantiated claims and pseudo-science. I have yet to see one reliable source with any scientific proof being able to claim one finish 'sounds better' than the other. An important point is that all terms describing sound are very loose. 'Tone' might have a million different meanings to a million different people, yet people often claim this or this ruins tone. Everything you do to an instrument is going to alter the sound in one way or another. Most of these variations are going to be so small that no-one will be able to tell the difference. I personally don't think that one minor alternation can change the sound in such a way that it would sound bad to everyone. First rule when learning about guitarbuilding on the internet is to be weary of all your sources. What happens way too often on the internet is that someone posts something that makes sense to them, a lot of people read it, and after a while it's posted as validated fact. Common sense is probably the largest source of bullshit on the internet. Try to filter out everything that seems unsubstantiated and only take serious sources as fact. I'm not tellning you to not take other people's input on things just because they're not experts on the subject, but don't take any one persons claims as facts (unless the person really has the evidence to back it up).

To try to explain it a bit clearer for the original poster: The scale length is the distance from the nut to the bridge, but you might have noticed that that distance is not the same for every saddle so it's not a good place to measure. The 12:th fret is supposed to be exactly half-way to the bridge and therefore you can measure the distance from the nut to the 12:th fret and multiply that number by 2.

Yes, looking at those pictures you have obviously gotten something wrong, shame because it was a really nice finish. But no product, used the exact right way would be that sensitive to touch. AGAIN, in the first place I didn't question the durability of your paint but the fact that you said it totally ruins tone. I only remember quoting the word 'ruins' and I'm pretty shure you used that. I don't use rattlecans, I shoot nitro, but that doesn't really matter. My point is, and has always been, that you post unsubstantiated hypothesises (is that the plural form ) and claim them to be true. IF you're gonna post your unvalidated theories MAKE SHURE the newbies that come to this forum ARE AWARE of the fact that they are nothing but unvalidated theories, otherwise confusion arises. So? your theory is that, because it's softer, it gives any given guitar finished with it 'the tone of a smothered turd'. So you mean a finish that is maybe half a mm thick at best could have such a devistating impact on the tone (now this is also a pretty loose term) of a solid body about 100 times thicker. Seems to me like something even bigger touching it ,say like your belly or your arm, would have such a big impact that the instrument would be worthless, also considering how much softer the skin is. So according to your logic (hard=good) we should be playing our guitars in suits of armor?

I wouldn't worry about tonal differences...what confuses me though is how you can screw up the angles and then somehow use the back of the board?

Well the issue wasn't really about how the finish turned out (you have obviously done something wrong here), but the fact that you claimed that paint sprayed from rattlecans somehow magically 'ruins' your tone. Giving other people advice based on, well nothing, doesn't really help people out at all and confuses people.

Care to post some kind of proof of how it 'ruins' the tone. I thought Nitro was the only way to acheive a professional look. I don't want to wait weeks or months for the job to cure before clear coating, and nitro clear over acrylic paint could be a problem. I just want the guitar to look great the first time and not look to cheap. I know how to paint, never clear coated before, just not familar with the different brands and how well they make a guitar turn out.....thanks for the reply Where did you get the idea that clearcoating with nitro would be a problem? care to post any source of that info? Seems like you could use the search function and read up a bit on these topics to get your info straight.

I've used aluminium on two builds, works great and easy to level

Technically you could say the exact same thing about ANY guitar mod. Maybe he just has a different taste to you? *shock* Well yes...and there'd be an obvious point in most mods whereas here it seems you're only taking stuff away from the guitar, leaving empty holes and not adding anything really.. Anyway I think it'd be cool to just skip the switch completely and go for a blend pot and a killswitch.

Since you have a floyd rose in the guitar I'm assuming you're gonna fill all the cavities with wood and refinish the guitar as well, after filling the cavities with blocks of wood, just drill holes for the TOM, then countersink those holes with and route straight lines between them for the recess...then refinish

I'm just gonna have to ask....what's the point of this mod?

If your string height at the bridge is the same as with a tremolo, why would you have to angle the neck?

That one doesn't really say how tall the saddles are, neither did you post wich of the strings you wanted 12,075ml of the body (ml is a measure of volume by the way). The second one you posted is almost 11mm off the body without taking the saddles into account so you would probably be too high on the lowest settings anyway. Recessing a t-o-m would probably be the best way to do it anyway since there's some major wood-work to convert from a floyd rose anyway and it's not really that hard.