Ripthorn

I'm contemplating building guitars for my two little ones for Christmas. I was looking around but can't seem to find hardware for child-sized guitars anywhere. I am primarily concerned about the bridge. I wanted to make the necks a little narrower so that they were just a little easier for little hands to play. Any ideas? Anyone have any other tips or possible pitfalls related to building a child-sized guitar?

That's a great top, where'd you get it, if you don't mind my asking?

Surely you had to work from a schematic to get the layout. You will have much more success if you post the schematic along with the layout. Usually the output from your circuit is at one of the lugs of your switch, especially if you are looking for true bypass. From what it looks like, I would run your pcb output to lug C1 and then your total circuit output to lug C2. That gives you true bypass. Best of luck. Just an observation, those traces look mighty thin and having such a long trace from your switch to your pcb input will have a higher paracitic capacitance and higher noise susceptibility than if you put the switch closer to the pcb input, especially since you are running right next to a ground path for a while.

My one suggestion from an aesthetics standpoint, I would do away with the tele control plate and do a PRS-style rear control cavity. Also, you don't have to worry a ton about pickups playing with pots and switches nicely, because pretty much all pots function on the same basic principle. You can mix and match pots and pickups and switches with relatively low risk. Now you've got me thinking of doing a PRS body with 6 in line headstock...

I certainly like the look. If you really want to do it, I would buy the neck, cut out the body and route to a template for just the outer profile, then route the neck pocket and place the bridge, etc. Just make sure you are very careful and measure a gazillion times before actually cutting, routing, drilling, etc.

PRS and telecaster guitars have different scale lengths, neck pocket types, neck angles, etc., so you will have to put in a lot of leg work to mix two different styles of guitars like this relative to doing a straight up clone. Don't assume that any holes will line up or anything like that, you will have to do all that from scratch, preferably with parts in-hand. If I were doing a first build again, I would do a clone or very subtle variation of a well-known guitar instead of the full blown, designed from the ground up build that I did. I made a lot of mistakes and ended up scrapping the guitar (it played, but was not particularly well done). You may be different than I and are welcome to try, but my suggestion based on your questions (I'm not putting you down, just saying that based on your questions there are lots of things you need to read up on, we all have to) it might have a pretty good chance of not turning out quite as well as you would like. Then again, you might be the type who studies and researches everything to death before practicing which you do before actually building. I'm much more of a fly-by-the-seat-of-my-pants type guy who likes see what happens.

Hobby shops will usually carry razor saws, and 0.020" is a fairly common size, if I recall correctly.

This is a pretty simple situation, actually. What I did on my bass was to use a blend pot that blended my two magnetic pickups together. The output of that blend pot went into another blend pot where it was blended with the piezo output. Then I had a master volume and tone. That setup allows for changing the relative volume of all three pickups to have an infinitely variable mix. That would allow you to do away with a gain control on the piezo amplifier (which you will need to avoid a large impedance mismatch on the amplifier end and get the proper sound). It would be a matter of resoldering perhaps a dozen wires and putting together a little preamp (I like the Cafe Walter PZP-1, which has a schematic at his site). It might take a couple hours, tops, and the electronics would cost about $20 - $25 not including the piezo pickup.

Not sure what is referred to by the "monopole" in this case. However, if referring to the 0th-order mode of the top's vibration, then I agree. However, if you still use kerfing, you also risk increasing the natural frequency of that mode due to the reduced surface area. If you don't use kerfing, you might get approximately the same natural mode, but your directivity pattern of sound radiation will differ as well. Other possible outcomes that could happen: - a slightly less complex harmonic spectrum, since you are restricting more surface are to be more rigid (and thus more closely approximate an ideal Helmholtz resonator) - some unforseeable consequence due to changing how the front and back are coupled (could be good or bad, no way to tell without doing it) - a possible change in sustain due to increased mass and top stiffness - a heavy beast as mentioned by WezV Of course, when it all comes down to it, it all depends on what you want. We can discuss what the change would do from a physics standpoint, but an experiment is the only way to really konw for sure what the sound and your perception of it will do. Let us know if you go through with it, as I think it would be fun and interesting to hear about (and hear).

I did something like inlace on one of my builds (just epoxy with stuff mixed in) and quite liked the results. Inlace is used a lot in turnings and is sometimes used to fill burl voids while adding color and such, so I think it can handle thumbnail markers no problem. This should be a fun build.

This should be fun to watch, since you have a way of putting a creative twist on whatever you take to. The Gretsch shape I want to build is the corvette. We'll see if I ever get to it, though. What are the finishing plans, etc.?

Just a tip for some who might be wanting to build this, I found I didn't even need the crank, I could just push the fretwire through and the two brass roller wheels roll along just fine. Worked great.

The clear coat would be something like shellac and then waterbased lacquer, which I have spray equipment for. I am just thinking that the paint might be a little too thick to go through my sprayer and was curious if anyone had tried this. Again, I'm not sure that I am going to try dipping the guitar to paint it, but I ask more out of curiosity.

Run the signal to an external amplifier as opposed to the onboard preamp.

To clarify, I'm not looking for a swirl pattern, I'm just wondering if it would make doing a single color body any easier. It was more a question out of curiousity as opposed to anything else. But thanks for the replies. So KP, is it always oil-based paint for swirling? See how little I really know?

Very cool. I am having a littl bit of a hard time getting past no lower horn, but other than that I really like the curves and how it all flows. The finish on the body is really cool too. I especially like the rear scoop on the body where the treble side of the neck meets. I might have to give something like that a shot. Thanks for posting, and welcome to the forum.

I might have some 4/4 offcuts out in the shop. I'll take a look and see what I find. Where are you located?

I've got a build coming up that I am going to do a solid color and wondered if anyone has done something like a swirl, but with a single color. If so, did it look ok? I just thought that would be easier than brushing (I'm thinking of using an acrylic paint like is used in swirling). Anyway, I just thought it was an interesting idea and wondered if anyone's done it.

I would say take the output directly from the film pickup and see if there is buzz there. If so, the element is either fried, wiring is frayed, or some other problem with it. If not, there is an issue between the preamp and output jack.

That is a great looking first build. Much better than mine was. On my first, I carved the neck pocket with a chisel. And you wonder why that guitar made it to the firewood pile...

You would apply the epoxy locally, but after the gaps are all filled, then you would sand the entire surface to maintain flatness.

What pedal are you engaging? If it only happens when the delay is engaged, then there is your problem. If the delay is disengaged and the wah is engaged and it's still a problem, then there is something more nefarious going on. As I recall, wah's are very finicky beasts in terms of getting loaded down, but I don't remember why or if that really is the case.

It depends on the gaps. If they are very large, start by filling them locally. If they are very shallow, then you can coat the top and sand back.

The first obvious question is whether it does it again after you pull the pedal back out of the chain. Is the increased treble always a problem, or only when the pedal is engaged or disengaged? Are there any buffered or not true bypass pedals between the two?

To me, it's almost like watching a car blow up. It makes me go "whoa" but there's no way I would want to be near it . I am interested in what the ramifications are of not structurally coupling your "headstock" to the rest of the neck directly. Of course, I am more interested in it as a physics problem than a guitar, but then again, I have a more conservative aesthetic preference.