bluesy

I find the table router method much easier to control. This also means, I think, less chance of error as you have more feel for how it is cutting, and can take it easy on the difficult parts. If you have sharp router bits, route in the right direction, don't take on too much thickness at a time, etc, I wouldn't expect many problems.

I think it's cool making your own hardware such as the bridge. Very custom. I like it.

What I did, using a similar bender, it used it as a guide. I fed the fret wire into the slot from one end, holding the wire down with the palm of my hand, and with my other hand, I pre-bent the wire as I fed it on. I could tell if I was bending it the right amount easily, by the way it sat in the slot, and the tang sitting in the slot prevented the fretwire wanting to twist as I bent it. Worked quite well!

Thanks guys. I am just doing the tidy-up bits now - for example, painting some clear finish on the edges inside the f-holes with an artist's brush, and I need to put a cover over the truss rod end. It's probably a common thing, but I find I get very picky about details. The closer to finished it is, the more tiny things I find to fix up (and sadly, more things I find that I will have to do better on next time). But it's been a great first experience - largely to all the help from this forum.

Thanks for that, and that's to everyone else as well. I never thought it was going to be so controversial Once again I appreciate all the help I've been getting here. Cheers all!

That's what I can see. If I remove just a little off the last few frets, I could lower the bridge more and get a lower action overall. This applies to neck relief as well, and is maybe the reason some people don't see the need for it. To me, neck relief is a given, it just makes sense to shape the curve/bow of the neck, to accommodate the way the string moves more, as it vibrates, towards the midpoint from wherever you fretted it and the bridge. You correctly point out that this point moves as you use frets further up the neck, and this ties in with the need for fall away, as the part of the neck that is clamped to the body can have no relief due to bending, therefore it needs it added by contouring the fretboard (or the fret tops). I suppose too, this all has bearing on another subject I read about, especially with respect to string bending, and that is compound radii on fretboards. Mine, like many, is a simple 12 inch radius fretboard.

I do this on all my guitars. The fall out/off is slight though. Barely the thickness of a piece of paper at the very end of the fretboard. I don't have my feeler gauges at the computer so I can't give you a exact measurement. Let me know if you're interested and I'll get you some actual values. I usually build the fall off into the fretboard and its only on the last couple of frets, usually never gets to the 15th fret. More like 17th fret and after. I can get lower action by using this building technique and I can also get wider bends without fretting out. This is definitely something I'll keep doing as the advantages are there. I'd rather take the materail off the wood than the metal frets. I tried perfectly flat and a slight fall off makes a world of difference, for me at least. This sounds just right. Yes, up to the 15th fret approx. it plays fine, so no need to touch them. 17 to 22, the last 6 frets is all mine would need. It is good too, that you mention bending, because I hadn't figured that into my thinking on the geometry. ...and yes, it is only a small amount that will be required!

Yes I have set the relief "per the book" but also experimented a bit each way with it. The neck relief doesn't really have much (ANY?) effect on the part of the neck that's bolted into the pocket (it doesn't bend) - and that's what we are talking about here. The way you explain it makes sense however, and I'd even add that the relief in a neck means it is not a triangle, as one side is actually curved, but in a way that helps , not hinders As I said, the guitar is nicely playable when setup for a "normal" action, and I'm just looking at tweaking it to cope with a super low action "just in case" I ever want to set it that way. Maybe it IS a lazy way of doing it...

I see. Obviously too late for me to do that. I think I can safely try this technique, as I really can't see how it can go very wrong. Truth is, I am not a player who uses those last frets anyway, but it would be nice to know they were out of the way, and able to be played on occasion.

Not quite, because raising the bridge will increase the action for ALL the fretboard. I want to leave the bridge down low where most of the fretboard has the lowest possible action, then, I think, lower the upper frets just a tiny bit to allow proper fretting of the very top notes. But doesn't reducing the height of the fret tops on the upper frets do just that - increase the action on the upper frets, I mean? That seems to be what it needs you see. I know what you mean. But then, there are people who seem to regularly use this technique of introducing fall-off - so there might be something to it. Sorry, but I am just trying to understand this properly.

Here's another shot

I have been reading about a fret levelling technique that includes "fall off" on the high frets. Here's a link to a page that mentions it. http://www.stevesguitarsite.com/FRETLEVEL&CROWN.HTML I was wondering if this is a common thing to do, because I think it might help on my newly finished guitar. I can set a super low action, and it is nicely playable everywhere up to about the 15th fret or so. Above that, the strings start to contact the last frets (frets 21, 22). If I raise the action a bit, it is just about all playable. So the last frets seem a bit high? I should stress that this is just me fine tuning, but I like to tweak my guitars to as close to perfect as I can. Some people wouldn't like the action that low anyway I expect. Now, I have not levelled the frets at all yet. I didn't need to, there were no high frets, just as I hammered them in over the main part of the fretboard. More luck than skill I imagine But after reading that page, it seems a bit of "fall off", just on the high frets, 16 to 22, might allow me to set the super low action. The technique discussed, involves adding tape to the 10th fret and I am wondering exactly how this works. If I picture the geometry correctly, the leveller would sit on this high 10th fret and the last fret. Because of the angle, it would take more off the last fret, a bit less off the second last, less again off the 3rd last and so on, until taking practicallly nothing off the 11th fret because it is right beside the high fret. Looking at the picre, it seems he might only have sand paper on the part of the leveller for the last 6 frets or so, in which case only those last ones would get reduced - which would suit my situation. So, does this technique have merits? Should I attempt to do it?

Is that better ( I think so) ?

Here's a pic of the controls Yes, I don't like the pickguard sitting on top of the pickup rings either. At the moment, I have it secured by one screw only because I haven't decided on it's final position. I will probably have to add the conventional cut-outs for the pickup rings so it can sit down further around them. Here's a shot of the guitar turned over.

It is virtually finished - the guitar I have been building from New Guinea Rosewood body and Queensland Maple neck (see http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=37360). There's a couple of things I may change, but it is looking good and is nice to play right now. I might alter the pickguard a little as I am trying a design where all the controls are on the pickguard (you can see the slide switches and might just be able to make out the volume and tone control wheels poking out from the underside just above them), and I might position it a little differently. Also I am trying a slightly thicker neck. I am used to modern, thin necks, but have read that something a bit thicker might cause less ache in my hand when playing for a long time (the start of carpal tunnel? I hope not). Anyway, I can always thin it down a bit mor later after I have given it a good try.

I have the same problem. I have tried spraying the guitar while it is hanging on a clothesline in my back yard. This works, as long as you live in a fairly dust free area, and don't have trees with leaves that will blow onto it, and it doesn't rain. For work with brushes, I have been working on a table on the back verandah of my house. This is more comfortable than out in the yard, and has the advantage of having a roof over my head. For drying, I have been hanging them in a spare bedroom away from any high useage area of the house, particularly the kitchen. Seems to work well.

The only issue that can arise is, sometimes, the preamp will need extra power supply filtering and isolation from the signal that the power amp will impose on the power supply rails. The preamp circuit you linked has a capacitor to additionally filter the power supply, and my guess is that it'll work OK.

Nearly there. Just a coat or two on the neck, make a nut, add the machine heads, and wire the controls on the pickguard, then mount the pickguard - and I'll be just about done!!

I have a Japanese pull saw also, but this is much smaller. Same idea though, just built to cater to the scale model hobbyist market. The finest blade is something like 54 teeth per inch IIRC. Perfect for extremely fine work.

If you don't have one long enough, you can get away with 2 shorter ones. I use a template follower to get about halfway through the thickness of the side, then flip the guitar over and use a flush trim to take off the other half, trimming flush to the cut I just made from the template.

I was at a hobby store, the sort that sells high end model planes and cars and stuff, and the bits to make them, buying some brass strips to make pick guard brackets from. I noticed a small tool that they call a razor saw. Basically a handle with interchangeable 5" blades. The blades are thin with a metal backing, and they cut on the pull stroke. They had 3 sizes of blades and they were only $7.50 for a replacement blade. So, I bought a blade just to try it, and when I measured it, it cuts a 0.02" slot approx. Perfect for cleaning out existing slots. I think the 2 sizes were one bigger, and one smaller than the one I bought. Maybe you could even cut new fret slots with the bigger one. The handle with 2 blades costs only $21, so I think I'll go and buy the whole setup. A handy tool for other things besides frets too.

Thanks mate. I am right in the middle of coating it with poly. Finished my second coat, and it's really starting to shine! Won't be long now...

that's good, thanks

I have sprayed my headstock black with enamel paint, and faded it into the neck (which is just sealed). Can I just apply polyurethane over the top of everything? I'm just not sure about the compatibility of the two.

more progress... - back glued on - rear binding appplied - sanded and sealed with sanding sealer/grain filler - (also not in photo - side dots added and seal coat applied to neck as well) You can really start to see how the colour and grain are going to look when finished.