bluesy

Do you mean different value caps? You'd be created a switched tone control - might as well use a pot and have it continuously variable. If you mean caps, all the same value, but different brands and types, e.g. polyester, ceramic etc, then the effect is very subtle. Some doubt it can be really heard even in hifi, much less for a guitar. Is it worth it?

Wire nuts will probably work fine for wires, yes, but won't enable you to connect wires to the control pots and switched.

I like it. Particularly the differently shaped f-holes. The right hand end (as you look at the drawing) reminds me of a tele, but the left hand, with the more curved sweep, looks a bit es-335'ish.

My QLD maple neck blanks will be arriving soon I hope, so I am interested in this as well. Maton probably know, because they use it in their guitars. From their website "Queensland Maple has become the backbone of the Maton sound", but I guess we may need to experiment on a test piece.

Aah the obscuring mists are parting. I noticed one can off polishing stuff announcing "silicone free" and I see why now. Armed with more knowledge now, I think I will try some sanding sealer under my poly coats, and then see what improvement I can make at the end with some non-silicone polishing compound. Thanks again.

Does it help? Sure does. It did provoke some more questions though Firstly, Tru-oil. Sounds like a brand name. My local H/W store had things like Tung Oil, Danish Oil, Scandinavian oil... Any idea what's in it? How shiny is it, I mean, do you get that deep, wet looking, mirror finish with Tru-oil? "Sanding Sealer = (typically) shellac, water and soap (to make dust)" Soap dust? Is there a formula you make yourself, or is it a commercial product? I am sure I have read of people just using shellac alone. So can any type of top coat be put on top of shellac, e.g. poly, nitro laquer, wax? "Wax doesn't really help on poly, polish does." I am a little confused about the difference. I thought most "polishes" contain wax? btw: thanks for taking the time to help us out here...

Sounds good. I have never come across sanding film though. Is it a specialist thing, not something your local hardware store carries?

I am pretty much at this same point with regard to finishing. I am reading a lot of stuff, but it is difficult to understand (for me) the required prepping before applying the gloss coat. Things like sanding sealer, grain filler, and which is appropriate under what top coats, has my head spinning at the moment. Let's say, like you, I want to use poly with no stain (to keep it simple). Firstly is that poly, one part or two? Easiest for me would be a one part poly from a rattlecan. Wipe-on also interests me. OK, so what goes on the bare wood? Some type of clear sealer? Is this the "sanding sealer" or is it "grain filler" or something else? Is it, perhaps, better to just keep applying the poly, straight onto the bare wood, and sand flat every 2 to 3 coats, until the desired finish is achieved? How porous, or open-grained must the timber be, before some prepping coats are mandatory? After a flat high-gloss surface is acihieved with poly, is further buffing recommended? Is waxing useful on poly, or is that just for bare or oiled woods? These are just some of the questions I have

OK, so I needed some f-hole templates. This turned out to be trickier than I thought. I printed out the shape and cut out the hole with a knife. I then traced around the hole in the paper onto 5mm MDF. Then I drilled some holes at all the points that I though might be difficult, to allow room to turn the jigsaw. I fitted the narrowest (front-to-back) jigsaw blade I had to my electric jigsaw to allow max manouvreability(sp) and very carefully started cutting. At times it seemed I was just turning the saw on the spot as the front edge of the blade ground round the tight circles at the ends, but I got there - fairly neatly too. A minimum of filing had it looking good. Then, just to prove the template would work, I used it to cut some 12mm MDF. I had to pack the template up a bit, but I got there, and now I have 2 neat templates at different thicknesses - plus I've had a bit of practice using an f-hole template before I attack a real guitar with it Here's how they turned out

Hey, not bad for $4.50

Using the opposite lug on the tone control will make it work the other way, i.e. backwards. I scraped the powder coating off one groove of the bushing to make sure it got good contact, when I grounded my painted tailpiece.

If you mean that you connect the signal from the volume pot to the tone pot via a cap, that can't work, because it will form a high pass filter, not a low pass (tone control). but it's hard to know without a diagram

As I'm doing a degree in Electrical and Electronic Engineering I'd like to see that 'evidence' connecting to ground is connecting to ground. I agree. The metal casing on all pots should be electrically connected to ground, therefore, they are also electrically connected to each other. It will make not one jot of difference to the tone whether you ground the cap on the volume or the tone pot. Just some comments on other stuff in this thread. The value of the tone pot and the cap together form a low pass filter (as someone said, it 'bleeds' the high frequencies to ground). As you turn the tone pot, it's value changes, because you are using the wiper (centre) lug and one of the fixed end lugs, and this changes the frequency at which the filter starts to cut off the highs. One thing that will effect how quickly this is heard as you turn the pot, is where, in the audio frequency band that the guitar produces, that variable frequency actually falls (if it falls outside that band, e.g. higher, little difference will be heard as all the guitars sound is let through), and as said, this is determined by the resistance of the pot and value of the cap. (eqn's and diagrams here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-pass_filter) Another thing that will effect it, is the "taper" of the pot. They most commonly come in linear and logarithmic (also known as audio taper). For the volume control, you need the audio taper because your ears perceive the change is sound level logarithmically

I think I found my back plate, a piece of Lauan ply. I really like the look of it.

I love the simple methods!

Answering my own question here. I found a pdf from gotoh that specifies 3.175mm offset. So I guess that's all I need do.

As I am building an ES-335 style body shape guitar, I have been googling around and looking at various examples of these guitars. I have noticed that most have what lookes like a TOM bridge and a hard stop tailpice, and that the bridges all seem to be mounted at a slight angle, with the treble end of the bridge placed slightly forward. Now having had problems in the past with intonation on a Les Paul copy that I owned (couldn't get enough adjustment from the TOM style bridge) I am suspicious that they all need this angle to get the intonation to work. So does anyone know what the actual placement of the bridge is on an ES-335? Also, are there alternative bridges with more adjustment that would be better for me to use instead?

Yep, I guess that's what I'll do too, thanks

I need to make the fret bevelling tool described here http://www.projectguitar.com/tut/beveltool.htm What is the best way to cut the end off the file as in the first step. It looks like they used a dremel tool in that photo. I am surprised that that would work. What type of cutting bit was used?

Thanks. Yes NGR can be very pretty. I am thinking of a natural finish for the top and sides, now the issue of back routing and a back plate is pretty much sorted.

No, the neck is raised above it's normal position by the shim.

Yes it is the same size. Weight and sound are the two reasons I started to consider chambering. I feel happier now that I have pretty much decided to chamber from the back. I think I'll make it a large U shaped chamber, just leaving the neck through to the bridge solid. I am currently deciding how much I will shape the top, or will I leave it flat. I might have to practice a bit on some scrap to see how easy it will be to put a fake arch in it. I don't want much, just a few millimetres or so. Maybe I can just sand the shape in with some coarse grit? I wanted to leave the edges flat(tish) to make it easier to route for the binding. Thinking as I type again, I can probably route first instead, to the 6mm for the binding plus whatever depth I want to carve the edge down. Then I stop carving when I have only the 6mm left.

I am putting binding on both front and back edges, so even if I use ply, it won't be easy to tell, because, yes, as you say, the binding will hide it's edges. As for using the same wood, I can't get a thin piece of the same wood, and I'm not able to (nor would I want to) reduce a thick piece down. I have been thinking about this more, and I think that I will chamber it from the back, and use something cheap like ply for a rear plate. Then, I might use a solid colour for the back, that matches the darkest parts of the grain of the front and sides. With the white/cream binding to separate it, I think it'll look good.

Just remember I am only a beginner. There may be better ways - but at least no-one has yet replied to my suggestions saying I am doing it all wrong

Way more high tech than the white cotton thread I used. I just ran 2 threads, one for each E string, from the tuner, over the nut and down to the bridge saddles on each side. I then locate the bridge laterally so that the space on the outside of each thread, at the bridge end of the fingerboard, is equal