G_urr_A

Nope, but if your experience is good, I might get some... I've only built one body so far, and for it I used wood that I got through the "träslöjd" (wood shop classes or something like that) in school.

Then living in a desert might help to get that superlow action I've always been looking for!! *gets ready to move* (or not....) Hoser Rob, there are a few things in your post that I find rather strange. 1. "Low humidity'll cause higher action by flattening the top too much" If the action is raised when the top is flattened, the top must have been concave to begin with. I've never seen an acoustic with a concave top. 2. "Oh, BTW, you never, never, NEVER use the truss rod to adjust action" If the neck is bowing to the front, a truss rod adjustment will be needed to get proper action. I don't see how you'd solve that any other way, except for installing magnets on the back of the neck to pull the strings to the necks curve. Answers, explanations or anything like that are warmly welcomed.

I'd love to hear how it works out.

On a semi related note, where are you getting your wood? And in case you're wondering, I'm in Sweden too (Slabbefusk and vendelcrow are too. Haven't seen vendel in a while though).

Your neck angle depends on a lot of things. You see, the point of having a neck angle is to make sure the strings will be able to stay nearly parallell (sp?) to the fretboard all the way. So if you have no neck angle, and a high bridge like a ToM, you'll have to recess the ToM. Or you can put the ToM on top and have a neck angle. Or you can put the ToM on top and rout your neck pocket very shallow. It'll look goofy, but it'll work. With a lower bridge, like a strat hardtail, you're not very likely to need a neck angle, even though you don't recess the bridge, since it's so low. Some people here draw it up full scale and measure. I'd prefer to do it the "other pen-and-paper" way, i.e. some maths. I'd suggest you read and think about neck angle until you can figure it out yourself before you go ahead building something with a neck angle.

Lol. It's not until I read Joej's reply and had a second look at the pic that I realised there is a pickguard on that guitar. Even though that's the whole point of the thread. I guess that says something about how well you matched the fabric...

I've got One humbucker template (planning to make an extra piece to allow for convenient ear routing) And an Original FR template (just the outline of the front. Might make extra pieces to conveniently route the different depths) Made from 4mm plexi. So far I've only built one guitar body, and this is what I've needed so far. The body in question is however badly planned out, so it will be scrapped, and I'll go through another one, so I guess I'll get more templates.

How's this project coming along?

Even though you haven't so far in your building attempts shown your ability to build high quality instruments (hey, I just noticed instruments....), you've shown something else, that is very useful. Maturity. You have yet to flame us for critisising (sp?) your work, you haven't resorted to comments about how dumb we are or anything. You've shown that you're willing to accept mistakes and do things differently/better the next time, and to use the advice of others to do so. That's a truly great thing!

Hehe, I just caught my mind thinking stupid things. I'm in Sweden, so I thought shipping for those fret files would make it pretty expensive. Then I realised I'd be buying a truss rod from *cough* somewhere *cough* and fret wire too.... So the shipping wouldn't be that much of a problem... Thanks for the help wes! And thanks to everyone for letting this semi-hi-jack go on.

Radiused sanding block and a straight edge. I can see how you could do the leveling with those, maybe. But crowning would AFAICS (can see) require some fretfiles. But maybe I'm all wrong. If so, enlighten me if you've got the patience.

A question that is sligthtly related to the topic: Is it an OK idea to build a neck yourself, and fret it yourself, but have a shop or a luthier you know doing the leveling and stuff? (From what I've gathered, the tools needed to build a neck and fret it are not that expensive/difficult to get (if you have the stuff you use for a body), but the stuff you need to do the levelling yourself is)

I can't see what Gibson could possibly say about the Tremonti. It's a very different carve. I mean, I can't see Ford going after Volvo because they've got rear view mirrors sticking out from the sides of the cars. Or because they too have four wheels. As far as I can see, that's about the length to which the similarities between a Gibson LP and a PRS Tremonti go.

I've got a Strat copy 25.5" scale tuned to C strung with 0.013-0.056s. Feels a bit tight on the higher (pitch) strings and a bit floppy on the lower strings, for me. To give a frame of reference, I use 0.011-0.046 in E and Eb. About using a 27" scale, how does that affect the feel and playability of the neck? Obviously, you're going to have to stretch more, but do you notice that? Is it awkward to switch from 25.5" to 27"?

I can only help with one thing... Double insulation ("dubbelisolering") means that the transformer has no electrified parts inside it that can come in contact with conducting pieces on the outside. Thus, you don't need to ground it (part of the reason you have a ground is to make sure that if a part comes lose and electrifies the outside of a piece of equipment, the current will go to ground, thus effectively removing the hazard). Förresten, pratar du sån där typisk Norrköpingsdialekt?

To avoid problems with the paint drying too hard and thus cracking when you try to remove the tape, I would guess.

Hmmm.... something tells me #21 is about something that a Tremol-No can help with....

Mmm, nice work LGM, and thanks for the pics! It's kind of scary, because the lightning that your paintjob implies doesn't match the lightning in your shop (which is the way it should, since the plane is going to be outside), so the plane looks kind of "cut 'n' pasted" into the pic. Really nice detail work! And, to avoid getting into the HiJackers Hall of Fame, I'm going to say that my shop was very messy (as in you could barely get from the door and to the "back" wall), but me and my dad decided to clear it out this summer, so now I've got about 1.5 square meters of work bench area, and more than that of empty floor. So now I can move around and work in there. It's quite nice, really.

I'd vote for no monkey grip. I've just never understood why they exist.... As for the bevel, I'd suggest doing it the way it's done on my Jackson KE3. Nearly no bevel far from the corners, more and more bevel as you get closer to the corner. Your shape is not as easy though, but I think if you use the above as a rule, and then just "go with the flow", you'll be fine. Nice guitar, keep the pics coming!

LGM, I'd love to see pics of that P51, if that's possible.... Pretty please!!!

Well, I was kind of talking about both the issues you guys mentioned, but primarily the one that RGGR didn't touch. But any advice is appreciated! So now I know it can be done. Then I just have to decide on woods, and figure out how much I need, and find a place to get it, and get it, and [i hope you get the point] Thanks for the advice!

I'm currently contemplating building a necktrough guitar, but I would not have easy access to the "big tools" that I often see in descriptions about glueing two pieces of wood together. I might be able to get my wood already planed on the sides where I need it, but I would very much prefer to be able to do it myself, but, once again, without the big expensive tools. So what I'm asking is how would I go about planing/jointing (is jointing the right word? I don't really know, I've seen it around, but I don't really know what it refers to) big pieces of wood with some rather simple tools. I would think that if I could get one piece of wood (say 2"x4"x16" or so) planed on one side, I could use that (and some sanding paper) to do the other pieces. Would that work?

I should perhaps have noted that by "you" and "your", in the second paragraph of my most recent reply before this one, I was not referring to you, JPL, but you as in just about anyone. As in a statement like "You just don't go out and kill someone". My second paragraph was not directed at JPL specifically, but anyone, and not in the narrow perspective that JPL interpreted it as, but in a much wider perspective. Now, to go on with the debate (I do sadly have a very difficult time letting something drop if I feel like I have something to say), I completely agree that growth should not be feared. However, I think that a lot of people make the same mistakes as someone else already did, only because they think "hey I can do that" and they try, and they fail. I find it to be a waste of useful time, and useful resources, to jump into things without properly assessing (spelling?) your chances of success. And, as a response to your words about assumptions; the way *I* see it, you made some quite reasonable assumptions about what I meant, because I did not express myself properly. I would not agree that I made assumptions about you, but I can easily see how you took it that way. For my unclear reply, I do apoligize. For my choice to post the OT reply I posted, I do apoligize. Now, I would hope this thread could return to the topic, because it doesn't feel to good to know I helped hijack it. For that too, I apoligize. It may be worth noting, however, that I still stand by my opinion in the issue at hand.

I very much disagree with your attitude. I'd say that instead of diving in over your head and failing, possibly messing up someone else's plans by not doing your part, and becoming very unreliable, it's a better idea to "lift your head before you dive in". Not sticking to what you've proven you can do, but making sure you will not fail when you attempt something new. It's really not that difficult.

Sorry to complain about grammar/spelling/punctuation, but between [$200] and ["there" known...] would be a good place to put a full stop, to make the post more easily understandable. Right now, it seems like you shouldn't pay more than $200, because these guitars are known for having many colored knobs...