bluesy

I have purchased a proper fret crowning file - a Hosco TL-FF3. It is double edged, and described as a wide file, suitable for medium to large frets (up to 3.3mm). So, the fretwire I have been using is 2.6mm wide, and this means the internal curve of the filing edges, is just a little larger. I was looking for tips on the way it is supposed to be used. I am imagining that I am supposed to apply the file with pressure to one side for a bit, then use it with pressure the other way, thus rounding each edge of the fret alternately? The 2 small flat edges, on each side of the concave curve on the edge of the file, are rough, so I imagine I need to keep the file from contacting the fingerboard on each side (or at least the tape that I will be putting there ) Is this correct, or do people grind these edges flat to avoid any possibility of damaging the fingerboard?

Yes, I'm embarrassed with riches Still, it's great to see lot's of help, better that than no-one answering at all. (and it HAS helped)

Thanks for all the fast replies. Didn't think of using a knife, but yes, especially one with a snap off end when it get's blunt, should work well. As for tearing it, I have definitely suffered scratches from the edge of heavy grit sandpaper that was not cut off neat. Took a fair bit of sanding to get rid of them too. but again, thanks for the suggestions...

What do you use to cut sandpaper? For example, I have a small electric orbital sander that uses 1/3 sheet paper. I could usually buy pre-cut sheets from the store, but they are more expensive, and sometimes I need a grit that I have supplies of in normal full sheet paper - so it would save a trip to the store if I cut that stuff for use. Normally I just tear sandpaper to the size I need, but I am thinking this will leave and edge that is a bit ragged, and may cause scratches in the wood when using it on the sander. Scissors would work for the finer grit paper, but wouldn't it make them blunt quite fast?

But is a pot, in itself, bright or less bright? Surely the brightness is determined by the frequency of the low pass filter formed by the pot and the cap? Thinking out loud, it just occurred to me that maybe the way it loads the pickups would be slightly different, but then people use these values with all different types of pickups don't they? Anyway, it's an interesting area of guitar construction, and one where it's easy to play around trying different things. I'd be interested in seeing it modelled in SPICE (a computer modelling system for electronics). I wonder has anyone done that...

It occurs to me to ask why they use an odd value? The cynic in me suggests it has zero sonic benefit, and that it is done to bolster their own sales department.

oops anyway I am in Australia. Long Way from New Mexico...

I'm sure you could get someone to do it cheaply. I'd do it for a bottle of cheap Scotch 'cept I suspect I'm too far away down here.

45 degrees is plenty, I used about 35 on mine as per a tutorial I read. If they are bevelled and flush with the wood, just use a sanding sponge, medium grit, and rub it rapidly up and down the edges of the fingerboard, holding it at an angle like the bevel. It will smooth/polish over the little sharp bits fairly quickly. Give a quick rub and try it - it won't take much.

You get an output socket that has a switch built into it (they are commonly available). They have 3 terminals. You remove the 2 wires that go internally from the amp to your combo amp's internal speaker(s) and wire them to the new output socket instead. You then add 2 wires from the output socket back to your amp's internal speakers, but one of them comes from the output jack's switch (the 3rd terminal). The other wire is just commoned, i.e. joined to the same terminal as the original wire coming from the amp. What happens is that, when nothing is plugged into the socket (i.e. no external cabinet) the switch is closed, and so your internal speakers are connect as normal. When an external cabinet is plugged in, the switch opens, thus disconnecting the internal speakers, and connecting the external cabinet instead.

A bit of packing will cure that.

It is the simplest of mods to add a switched speaker output to a combo amp (If it doesn't already have one). The main requirement is that the cabinet load is appropriate for the amp. Obviously a cabinet of the same impedance as the internal speaker(s) is fine, as it replaces the internal speakers (which get switched out) with an identical load, so the amp is happy. A lot of transistor amps just have a minimum impedance into which they are safe to use. Higher impedances are safe, but mean you'll get less power from the amp (all other things, such as speaker efficiencies being equal). Valve (tube) amps are more critical and need the correct load for the output transformer. Some have transformer taps to allow other loads as well.

Hi, I feel a bit cheeky putting my first real attempt up here in the comp, but here goes. I have posted a lot about this as I made it, but here's summary of what it is. - ES335 shaped chambered body, made of New Guinea Rosewood (not a real Rosewood, but so named anyway) - body chambered from the back and top carved and f-holed - Queensland Maple bolt-on neck - Indian Rosewood fingerboard - Abalone fingerboard dots - ply pickguard with black and white purfling as edging - all controls mounted on the pickguard - black side thumbwheels under bottom edge for vol and tone - miniature slide switches, one for each pickup, so they can be switched in alone or together - Epiphone humbuckers (for now at least) Edit: thought I better think of a nickname, how about "Ocean Rose", or just "Rosie" for short, given most of the wood comes from down here in the Oceania region, and the body is Rosewood?

Just ignore it.

You could use those, and they are audio taper - just ignore the tap, and the 350k is so close to the original, you'd use 0.022uf caps (closest standard value)

The taper won't actually effect the sound, just the rate at which the control adjusts. Standard log/audio taper works fine for volume controls assuming you want a control that sounds half volume when it's halfway, 1/4 volume when it's at 1/4, etc. I wouldn't bother hand picking the pot, just choos a cap that results in the same cut-off frequency as the Fender 375k/0.022uf combo. I just plotted the frequency response curve of that vs a 300k/0.027uf combo, and the results a virtually identical ( i was wrong earlier when I suggested a 0.018uf cap - I was going the wrong way with my adjustment - the cap needs to be larger - hence 0.027uf)

I don't know where they came from, as I picked them up cheap from the local guitar shup. Both have "Epiphone" stamped into the metal underneath, so I suspect they never came from a fender.

The difference between 300k and 375k for the volume would be minimal. I am sure you'd never hear the difference. For the tone circuit, that capacitor's value could have a 10 or even 20% tolerance - they don't even bother to specify it, so again, using a 300k pot should be fine, as the final cut-off point for the filter will be very close to what the actual guitars were back then anyway. You could tweak the cap value, and use a .018uf instead if you wanted to make it even closer.

Pots are not made in odd values like that. Why do you need such a specific value? If we could see the circuit, perhaps we can alter it to use a standard value (like 250k).

I have seen some discussion on different resistance, but nothing about any possible physical differences. I have 2 secondhand Epiphone humbuckers that measure about the same electrically, but are slightly physically different. The pole pieces are wider apart on one of them. Measuring the 2 outside pole pieces centre to centre, there is 2 to 3 mm difference between the two pickups. The 2 pickups look identical in every other way. This is about the same as the difference in the distance apart of the 2 E strings when a TOM bridge is used. It changes because the string width tapers down to the 43mm nut, hence they are not parallel of course. If I put the wider pickup in the neck position, it's pole pieces will not align with the strings properly. For example, if I put the bass side directly under the bass E string, the top E string misses the treble side pole piece. My question is whether one is intended as a neck pickup and the other as a bridge pickup, or whether the 2 pickups came from different guitars that had bridges with different string spacing? A related question is, do you need to specify the bridge type/string spacing when chossing a set of new pickups? Edit: I may have answered my question to some extent. I found a few sites that sell pickups that are 2 mm different, intended for neck and bridge positions. Other pickups don't seem to specify (EMG select for example). Is this because they don't have individual pole pieces?

I can temporarily say that I am only playing the guitar I just built. For the last week or so, that's all I have played

It's just easier to make sure it's well seated on the ends, particularly if you are hammering it in, like I do. On my first neck, I just gave the length of wire a bit of a curve by hand before cutting off pieces for frets. It turned out nice and flat, not requiring much/any levelling. As I said in a earlier post, now I just use the tool described in the OP as a template and to prevent the wire wanting to twist as I bend it. I have watched a video on youtube where the guitar maker just bends it a bit by hand too.

Nice. Maybe a bit pricey for what it is, but looks good.

Looking good. What type of bridge is that? I like the look of it.

Yep, I made the same mistake. Large cavities that need to be routed get you in trouble when the router base has trouble spanning the big distances. I got away with it - just - as I see you did, but next time, I'll be leaving some 'bars' of material part way across the big cavities in a few places, to make the router much more stable while I'm working.