bluesy

I just started inlay not too long ago, I've been doing pretty good... but when I route into the wood so it will accept the inlay I am finding it difficult not to have any gaps here and there. Is there a trick to doing it?

I'm using a dremel with the correct down cutting bit & the precision router base from Stew Mac.

I have been inlaying MoP and Abalone Shell mostly.

The method I use right now is after I cut out the piece, I set it on the wood and scribe around it with an exact knife showing the edges. Then I route away the wood inside those lines. But then to get it to fit, I have to make the route slightly larger here and there and I usually end up making gaps here and there.

Thanks in advance-

I am about to start trying to acquire this skill also. I looked at the router bases for the Dremel, and also the one Stewmac sells. It seems to me that accuracy might be hard with something so big. I am designing (in my head at the moment) and device that will accept the small 'pen' on the end of the flexible shaft from my Dremel-copy device. The pen is much smaller than the Dremel device itself, and hence a much smaller, more accurate, router-jig should be possible.

I suspect also, that much practice will be required

Picture what happens when a string is stationary, but the wood, and the pickup mounted on it, is vibrating. The pickup 'sees' the distance to the string as changing in time with it's own vibration, hence a signal is generated which corresponds to the vibration of the wood.

Now imagine you have plucked the string. The string also vibrates the wood via the bridge. Now the pickup 'sees' both the vibrating string, PLUS the vibration of the wood relative to the string. Note that, due to time delays in transmission of the string vibration to the wood, and the colouration of the vibrations due to the properties of the wood, and the whole mechanical transmission system, the two sets of vibrations are different. They add together forming a total that is richer in harmonics.

Thanks Bluesy. I get it. So I think you are agreeing with me that those Fret Rocker gauges might be OK as a guide if you know what fret to level, otherwise not the best approach. As you mentioned, leveling all frets makes sense, but then you are going to have some frets that are much wider in crown (the ones that have the most crown removed) as oppsoed to those that just get lightly taken down (the low frets). Even with recrowning, the radius would have to be different? Man..maybe I am over analyzing this?

I am sure there's plenty of people who use rocker gauges, and may disagree with me, but I don't bother - for the reasons given. If someone hands me a guitar, I spend just a few minutes going over the general setup, and fretting up and down each string. It is usually soon obvious where the problems lie. This is why, on the necks I have made myself so far, I put on a set of strings and try them out before I think of touching them up with a fret levelling file.

Well, just to confuse the issue, if you colour all the fret tops, and there is only one high fret, when you put a straight-edge/file on the neck, you will find it marks 2 frets - the high one, and whichever one is nearest one end (or the other) of the edge/file (depending on which way you "rock" the straight edge and how long the straight-edge/file is). Also, with 2 high frets, if they are close together, you may still only find one of them, because the angle of the edge/file makes it climb over, and miss the second high fret that is hiding just next to the other high one..

When I read that back, it sounded confusing, so I'll try some (poor) ascii art showing exaggerated high frets. Picture the straight edge contacting frets at the two x's below and extending on. The 2 high frets are shown with h below them. The straight edge will miss the leftmost one in the diagram.

                    x

                  | |                    x

             _|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_

                  h h[/codebox]

Guess I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, so excuse the question. I blame it on the 60's, and some of the 70's too. I've used small straight edges before to do the same thing, but never trusted that I understood the difference between finding a high fret with the rocking vs. a low fret? And so this question. Say you are bridging the first three frets with the tool and there is no rocking. Unless you check the middle fret with a feeler gauge (which I have never see shown on the videos), how do you know that the middle fret isn't LOWER than the two end frets? If the two end frets are level, no rocking would occur.

Then you move up one fret. Now the "low" fret is on one end. If the other two frets are level wouldn't the tool still rock some since one end fret is lower than the other two? And if you start leveling based on measuring three frets at a time, seems to me you will never get all frets equally level?

Seems to me that unless you straighten the neck, color the tops of all frets, and then take a 18" straight edge across the entire fret board and look at the marks left by the straightedge, you really won't know which frets are really the high ones and which are really the low ones?

Since "real" luthiers (I am not) use these tools they must work...but I just don't get how you can be certain you have a high middle fret and not a low end fret? What am I missing?

Well, just to confuse the issue, if you colour all the fret tops, and there is only one high fret, when you put a straight-edge/file on the neck, you will find it marks 2 frets - the high one, and whichever one is nearest one end (or the other) of the edge/file (depending on which way you "rock" the straight edge and how long the straight-edge/file is). Also, with 2 high frets, if they are close together, you may still only find one of them, because the angle of the edge/file makes it climb over, and miss the second high fret that is hiding just next to the other high one..

I read one description of fret levelling, that puts it differently. They said to mark the frets, then file them down until the marks disappear off all of them. The lowest frets will retain the marks longest. When all marks are gone, they are level.

But the majority of them, I've marked my cuts with a scribe or a knife, and cut them out with a steady hand and a stiff pullsaw. Cleaned them up with a block plane. Not the quickest way if you're doing lots of production, but it works quickly enough and well enough for me.

I know I've posted about this before, but that's what I do too. Works quite well.

Any advice on trimming the fretboard prior to gluing it on (seeing as it's a neck-thru)?

I haven't done this, but I'd be trimming it to the same routing template that I made for the neck.

I prefer to think it is the prep work I do now combined with the patience and care I take to fret properly(for me)

Exactly ...

If you start out with a perfectly straight fretboard that's been properly radiused, and you cut the slots to the properly depth, the only way I can see it needing to be leveled is if the frets weren't radiused and/or seated properly.

It won't be comparable to a "Plek" job, but if done properly, I don't see where it would be a problem.

Another beginner's point of view. I found the same thing. I was very careful building my very first neck (I am on my third now), and much to my surprise, it played like dream. I now attribute this in part to the quality of the pre-slotted pre-radiused rosewood fingerboards I have been buying. That, plus I was very careful to clean the fret slots, and to hammer and glue the frets in (after bending them first) making sure they seated perfectly. After a normal setup (relief and bridge adjustment) it had a nice low action - better than most 'shop' guitars I pick up.

My second neck was also good - except that the very highest frets would "fret out" - which triggered a discussion here about adding fall off to the high frets. I am just about to add frets to my next neck, and hope/expect it to be similarly level. Meanwhile, I have fret levelled some older worn necks successfully, so if it doesn't come out perfect, I will have no problems running a levelling file over it to correct any problems.

Ahh, I get it, makes perfect sense now. Sounds like a pretty slick method. I should be putting the board on it tomorrow, so here's hoping it comes out as well as it sounds like all of yours have. Thanks for the input everyone.

One more thing, when I drill the holes, I wiggle the drill a bit, because I want the brads to be fingertight only. They are used as locating pins, not nails

I was looking at this project today...

I think I will go with the original strat idea...when checking out the variations possible, I found that the tradional strat pickup placement has these weird sound holes where bluesy put his neck pickup exactly a pickup space closer to the bridge...

Well, for me, the ultimate jazz sound is from one of those little floating neck pickups that strap onto the end of the neck itself. So, close to the neck is good

I'm a little edgy about routing this plywood top, might be a job for a drill bit, sharp knife and files...

Maybe I shouldn't mention that I attacked mine with an electric jigsaw !

So you just drill into the fret slot? It seems like most bits are going to be larger than the .023" slot for the fret, no? If such is not the case, then I will do the locating pins with brads as suggested, I just don't want to widen the slot at all so that the frets seat nicely.

The 1mm hole is slightly wider than the fret slot, but it is completely covered by the fret top. As it only makes the slot wider for 1mm of the slot's length, and chances are that will be between the tangs of the fretwire anyway, it is not an issue. I used 1mm because I could buy brads the same size. The bullet head on the brads I bought make it easier to remove them after the glue has dried.

I have used Gotoh tuners on a Tele and they seem to be essentially the same as Grovers. Both work well - so maybe Gotoh is another brand to add to the list.

Thanks for the suggestions. I think for the "locating pins" I might just use the trick that I saw one custom bass builder use, and that is putting in a staple or two and cutting off the part that joins the two points. Kind of like really tiny brads, but he just leaves them in there.

Try it, but I found it much harder to relocate the holes. You see, when making the neck, I ...

- carefully position the roughly cutout fingerboard to align with where I want the nut on the neck and so that the fingerboard is parallel to the neck centreline,

- then drill and insert the two brads so it can't move,

- then flush trim the fingerboard to the neck using a straight cut router bit with template follower bearing

- I then remove the fingerboard again,

- put in the truss rod, and cover it with a narrow strip of masking tape, then spread the glue.

- I then remove the masking, and

- put the fingerboard back on, positioning it with the brads (this is the step that I think you will find hard with just tiny staple points).

- Then I clamp, clean, and wait :-)

After staining, i scrape back the binding so its nice and white again.

Have you any tips on the best way to scrape binding? What tools do you use?

Can I do this rather than mask the binding when I am spraying undercoat and colour coats as well?

I am about to glue on a new fretboard (slotted and radiused) to an already shaped neck (fretboard replacement job) and was wondering if I need anything special. I have a ton of spring clamps at my disposal and several bar and pipe clamps, too. I know StewMac has fretboard clamps, but I don't need anything else from them at this time and was hoping to get away with just using what I have. Are there any particular techniques or tricks?

I was thinking of just putting the clamps on so that the lower pad is on the center of the neck, but then this doesn't put any direct pressure on the area of the fretboard where there is neck material underneath due to the truss rod channel. Will this be a problem? Thanks for any input.

In my opinion it won't be a problem. I glue my fretboards on while the neck is unshaped, BUT the fretboard is already curved. I just put clamps down the centre line. After all, it's quite narrow, and I don't think the wood will flex in the sideways direction. Pressure from the clamps should be quite uniform. I use 2 trigger clamps and 4 large spring clamps and that seems to cover the length quite well.

I also use the trick of drilling the first and 12th fret slot (offset to the side to avoid the truss rod channel) through into the neck wood, with a 1mm drill and inserting a 1mm brad as a locating pin to stop the neck sliding on the glue as I clamp it.

Seriously though...why a "foot stool?"

I could see a stool to sit on and record leads or something...but I don't get the foot thing...ever think about making them to sit on?

I use one. The reason is that, on nearly every seat I have used to sit and play guitar, my leg angles too far down when my foot is flat on the floor (I have short legs). I find myself holding the guitar higher by raising my foot onto my toes - and that gets hard to do for long sessions.

So an adjustable foot rest is nice to use. I have one that has 3 positions - good for when the chair is not adjustable.

I just did my tele headstock last week. I did it before the fingerboard was on, but after I shaped the headstock.

I needed to take 8 or 9 mm off the front of the headstock, so I turned the neck face down on the router table, and adjusted a straight cut router bit to protrude up from the table surface the required amount. With the neck lying face down on the router table surface, there's no way the router can take too much off. So, moving the neck slowly back and forth, I routed a strip at a time from the end of the headstock, working towards where the nut will be, but stopping well short of it.

Then , just a few seconds with smallish sanding drum in my drill and I have I nice curve to ramp the headstock face up to the fingerboard.

My mates got a load of flouresent pink wire and has promised to use it next time I send a guitar to him.

He should change the cover plate to a clear one so it's easy to see the wiring. Maybe add some lights like they do on gaming PCs as well

3/4" melamine/ply/mdf with a hole cut into the center is all you need for a router table. A straight chunk of wood and two clamps are all you need for a fence.

Basically what I was saying. I would use thinner wood though, because the thickness of the wood is reducing the reach of the router bit. In some cases, especially with small bits, it makes a difference.

I can't afford a router table at the moment,

All it costs you is the price of a piece of MDF and a couple of screws. I attach my router to the wood, and clamp it in an adjustable workbench. Fences are just spare bits of wood, or, in my case, some aluminium angle, clamped to the wood.

Haha...I guess I am the only one using a router with an edge guide...I get a straight line every time though...

Nope. Thats the way I do it also

Me too, although I have also used a table with a fence. However, having the cutting action all happening underneath where I can't see it makes me nervous. I like to be able to see that the little router bit is chewing up the centre line exactly ALL the time

I used a router with a edge guide. I learned on my test pieces to buy a differnt router next time. I have to take my hand off the handle to reach the off switch. Not good when trying to hold a running router steady.

Yep, having the switch right under your thumb while still holding both handles is the way it should be. In fact, most tools these days seem to have a button that you have to hold down with constant pressure. Just release it, and the router stops. To make it stay there, you need to press a lock-in button.

With all my great experience (3 necks ) ... The neck outline is cut exactly to size firstly by flush trimming against a template . I then rough cut the rosewood fretboard with a jigsaw, glue it to the neck, then use a flush trim router bit to make it match the neck exactly. I don't round the neck until after the fingerboard is on, so the parallel sides of the neck make this easy. In fact, I also put all the frets in before shaping the neck, because this means I am working on a neck that sits nice and flat on the bench while I am hammering in the frets.

i did it with plywood instead of MDF.... simply printed the shape to scale, glued it with spray adhesive on a thicker piece of cardboard, fixed it on the piece of ply, traced it with a permanent marker on the ply (the edge of the cardboard was about .5mm thick which was good enough for the marker to trace) and voila! i rough cut then sanded with sandpaper and a sanding block.... i got a pretty good template!

I just print it on normal printer paper, cut it out and fix it too some MDF (or whatever you want for the template material) with a couple of pieces of tape, then go around the edge with a permanent marker. I use a wide tip and keep it about half on the paper. If you use a light touch, you can feel the paper thickness with the tip and mostly follow that. When you remove the paper later you have half the line you drew, with the inside just about the perfect shape of the paper. Then I cut it out carefully with an electric jigsaw, and finally smooth/correct with a file.

I've been a bit busy with other things, but I have managed to squeeze in some work on the tele

- neck roughed out

- neck pocket routed

- truss rod channel routed