Crusader

When I was about 15 I was told that Fender and Gibson have different methods in their fret spacing but neither is perfect. I thought this had to be rubbish, I thought there has to be a perfect mathematical formula to find the right pitch for each note. There actually is, but about 15 years ago I started looking into it and found I had opened such a "can-of-worms" it's best left alone! Now I have learnt about "Just Intonation" and the Tempered tuning system and have conceded defeat Now my aim is just to find a fret spacing that will intonate to the tuner a little better than production-line guitars. A couple of weeks ago I got my latest build to the stage where I can start doing things. Making it was just an annoying process I had to go through to get to what I really want to do. Experiment with fret spacing. This may all seem pointless to some people because I know men like Novak and Anders Thidell have gone down this path but its what makes me tick, its my hobby Here is the guitar in its current stage with a few frets with the tang removed and just glued on To do my experimenting I ground the tang off some fretwire and bent it over at the end so it hangs at the correct angle. So far I have only experimented with the 6th string. I shall show results of this later Other experimenting I have done is to find out how much each string increases in pitch when bending at the 12th fret. A string under low tension will increase in pitch more than a string under greater tension and these tests might help make some decisions Long before the guitar was built I realised string gauge is important and I went for a 46-to-10 gauge set. I have compared the increase in pitch of the 46 set with a 52 set which I have on the LP Focusing on the 46 gauge string I did these tests where I bent the string as far as I could Thats about all I've done so far and I hope it has been interesting. I will post up more results later

Not sure which you are referring to does this help? On the original pic there is a pencil line that you can barely see

Well hey, I thought it was hilarious One man's food is another man's poison

Ever seen one of these? Its from the Renaissance era http://www.cittern.theaterofmusic.com/old/...er/CL139_21.jpg

I agree that its complicated but is the formula from a book or have you made it up yourself? I'm just wondering because I do these sorts of things myself. If you have come up with a formula of your own it is not very likely that someone else has done the same thing I recently made a "Les Paul" body and the fretboard sits flat on the top because the end of the body is routered to the angle. I copied this straight off an LP and I took many measurements. I think the main thing you have to concern yourself with is the thickness of the fretboard and the height of the bridge. The rest would just "fall" into place, like I don't think it matters how much of the neck shows between the fretboard and the top If you are interested in other pictures of my build. It has a few frets on it but its not finished http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=44436

Lol, yeah even I don't want to read some of the stuff I put up de do de do - Welcome to my Nightmare - de do de do - I hope you will enjoy it - de do de do

So it didn't make you laugh? I thought the pictures spoke for themselves, it was a failure and I had to start again. Btw the one-piece body from Exotic Woods is still safely in the cupboard

When I had my first Les Paul I complained it was hard to reach the high frets, then someone explained how to pull your thumb around from the back of the neck. Years later I went to see Julian Bream in concert and realised you don't need no cutaway. For a few years all I had was my Washburn accoustic and I've been practicing that method. So compared to the accoustic this should be a breeze to play the high notes Thankyou, yes it pays to make notes and take photos. I've kind of got a library of info Hey you know people, I thought someone would have commented on the 4th picture in the 3rd post...any comments?

Thankyou Yes I have it strung up for two reasons, one to see if the trussrod works and two, I'm doing the same thing that Kingfisher was doing a while ago. Although I have done this before, place the frets by the tuner Those frets btw are not properly installed. They have the tang ground off and have just a dab of glue at each end Its a long slow process but I find it quite interesting. I intend to post up some results later. Like one thing I did was to find out how much a string increases in pitch when you bend it

Yes point taken, I draw the line when people start talking calculus, everyone has their limits

Here it is so far. I am currently working out where I'm going to put my frets...long story Its been a long hard day Now this is a pose

Ha ha No hes not And now I shall continue with my story

About three years ago I had my eye on a big chunk of Brazilian Mahogany but it was $940 so I said I’ll come back later. I left it too long though and some guy in a yellow Monaro came along and bought up everything over 2 inches thick. So about a year ago I bought a body blank from some place in New Jersey. It was like $120USD but after the exchange rate and all the bank charges I reckon it cost about $400. That big chunk doesn’t seem so expensive now! So in any case for my first build in about ten years I decided to leave this in the cupboard Es demasiado caro I think the following pics speak for themselves

For a long time I've had the idea of making a Les Paul with no cutaway just to be different So here’s the Les Paul Copy 1 I am doing a 3-piece neck This is my Trussrod jig. I made it so I can go under the fretboard or from the back of the neck like a Strat. I’m doing this one from the back like I have done before

I shall have to try some one day About a couple of months ago I was drooling over a Gary Moore LP but it had a combination of a bridge HB and a neck SC and I didn't like the asthetics very much I have this expensive habit of buying a guitar before I copy it...lol

Working 7 days lately sorry for late response Yes I think in the first two quotes they could have used better words. But the second one is just pointing out that the thicker 4th string has less compensation than the thinner 3rd string. With an Accoustic guitar the 3rd string is usually the first wound and has less compensation than the second. Imagine if all your strings were plain. The compensation would be so great at the 6th string that it would be impossible to intonate Yes I'm trying to achieve improved intonation and here's something interesting. On one occasion I put a set of 52 to 11 gauge strings on one of my guitars and had to wind the 6th string saddle way back to get compensation. I put a 52 to 11 set on the LP recently and found quite the opposite! I had a hunch that the core wire on the 52 was not much thicker than the 46 and I was right. Perhaps it was a different brand, I can’t remember but its all relevant to my current project The other reason I brought this up is I scratch my head and wonder why so many people say that stretching of the string when fretting is THE reason for compensation and this is what I have to say about it If you talk to a Luthier I’m sure you will find he will be rather tight-lipped like any tradesman about his trade. On the other hand they might just want to keep things simple and not want to go into lengthy explanations. Like when I fix-up a door, it could be because the frame was out of parallel, the hinges were binding, it was scraping on the bottom and the striker-plate was too high. But when the owner comes along and asks what was wrong with it, I have learnt to give one or two simple reasons that the average person can understand. I don’t want to get caught up for 20 minutes explaining every detail – which they probably won’t understand anyway! I believe perhaps this is why so many people only mention the one reason that you need compensation, to keep it simple and in any case the playing action is more relevant to the average person. But on this forum we are not the average person, we are interested in making guitars and I think it is an advantage to understand these finer details, even if we never make use of the knowledge, its good to know more than you need to I found this web page last night and I picked out a few paragraphs that say things better than I can. It re-states things a couple of times which is quite annoying but it leads to what I want to say at the end. If you read the whole page the paragraphs are not in this order btw http://www.acousticmasters.com/AcousticMasters_Tuning.htm InharmonicityIt is a common scientific approach to use simple models to explain the behaviour of physical systems, because it’s easier to understand basic behaviour when using simplified components. Factors that give rise to very complex behaviour, or only have a small effect, are often just ignored Stiffness is quite a major factor that’s missing from the simplistic approach and is one of the major problems that string technology has had to minimise…strings don’t flex freely at the nut and saddle…their vibrating length is slightly shorter than their physical length. To complicate things further, stiffness has a gradually increasing effect on the higher harmonic modes of a vibrating string. Also, as the higher notes are played and the vibrating length of a string is shortened, because the stiffness is a constant, it becomes gradually more significant. This effect is known as inharmonicity Scale LengthAlthough it is often described as vibrating length of the strings this isn’t really true, since string lengths are always slightly longer than the scale length to allow for intonation compensation... The most accurate way to determine the scale length of a (conventionally fretted) guitar is to measure from the nut to the twelfth fret then double the measurement…even this isn’t accurate for those very few instruments that have nut compensation 18 RuleThis method was in use in the 16th century…Although it isn’t as precise as calculating fret positions using the pure form of equal temperament based on the twelfth root of two, in practice, the error it produces results in some degree of intonation compensation, because the higher frets wind up further away from the saddle… This is what I believe the Gibson 24 ¾ scale is all about; some degree of compensation built-into the fret spacing. I figure the SG I used to own had the frets calculated by 18.0077 (which is more than 18) The 12th fret lands 12 9/32” from the nut but because its not “conventionally fretted” it doesn’t mean its a 24 9/16” scale (A point I’m trying to make here is that I don’t think Stewmac and other Luthiers are telling lies, its just another case of wanting to “keep it simple”) Also to say that the 18 rule isn’t as precise as using the twelfth root of two – I don’t entirely agree. That SG I used to own intonated 'perfectly' on the 3rd and 4th strings and was very good over-all. My experience with Fenders and Epiphones is they intonate perfectly on the 1st string and gradually get worse up to the 6th string; depending what gauge strings you use This was brought up by Kingfisher a few months ago and I've been doing the same types of experimenting and will post some of the results later

I am currently researching topics that involve compensation, string gauge and so forth. There are two reasons we need compensation at the bridge but I found about 9 out of 10 web pages only mention one reason, stretching of the string when fretting a note Here are three pages where the other reason is mentioned and it is also why thicker gauge strings are wound. Remember you can use the “Find On This Page” function if you want to quickly find the paragraph. Just search for the first 2 or 3 words http://www.guitarnoise.com/forums/viewtopi...f=3&t=14587 “The whole reason for compensation is to make up for the extra stiffness in thicker strings. This makes the endpoints at the nut and bridge less than perfect nodes or "pivot points" for a vibrating string. The result is the vibrational length of the string is effectively shorter (sharp) than the bridge-to-nut physical length would indicate Note how the compensation makes the thicker strings longer ... except in one case: The reason there is a significant change in compensation at the G string of an acoustic, is that this is the first wound string, and it's core filament is actually smaller than the B string, making its endpoints more flexible than the B -- so the G actually requires less compensation than the B” If you read page two of this discussion some guy has shown some calculus but I’m not sure if its on the topic http://gretschpages.com/forum/general-tech...ry/21473/page1/ “The reason for compensation is a combination of the imperfect flexibility of the string (which you mention), and the action of fretting a note. First, as you fret a note, you stretch the string to some degree - this effect gets greater as you go up the FB, and the compensation also becomes a larger % of the total string length - which is fortunate. Second, as the vibrating part of the string gets shorter, the imperfect flexibility has a larger practical effect on both the primary note and the inharmonicity caused by the imperfect flexibility. This second effect is a double whammy, AND is the "art" part of piano tuning and guitar intonation” This last one talks about piano tuning but is not very long and has an interesting variation of the fret-spacing formula so it would be good to read the whole thing. The part I was most interested in is what I remember Ripthorn talking about I think this is translated from Swedish so the wording is unusual http://www.sternercapo.se/Compensation/Rea...definitions.htm “Inharmonicity is caused by the fastening fault in the string endings. A string is fastened very hard in the nut and the bridge, and because of its stiffness it can't vibrate all the way to its ends. Close to the nut and bridge there are short parts of the string that does not vibrate properly. It is said that the effective length of a string is shorter than its geometrical lenght. The stiffer the string the longer the non vibrating parts” The reason that the ends of a string do not vibrate is because they are nodal points and I have always understood this to be the primary reason for compensation. For example if you have very low action you still need compensation, it cannot be eliminated I hope people will find this interesting and also I am not trying to shoot anyone down in flames. After finding 9 out of 10 websites that only talk about the one reason for compensation I can understand why some people think fretting is the only reason for it

I just loved that page posted by GEO... good laughs In this neck of the woods I know Perry makes P90's Seen them at Mega and Kosmics Have often been tempted to see what they're all about but always steer toward Humbuckers because of their versatility Its also a case of having time to do things. Which I don't have lately because I've been working 7 days It raises the question, do they have an advantage over split Humbuckers?

I usually buy the guitar I want to copy ha ha...a bit expensive lol

Well a ring modulator is electronic so it’s not what I thought, but the circuitry seems similar to what they use for Equalisers in stereo equipment which is a kind of ‘filter’ after all. One of my brothers is a technician who also plays keyboards and he knows a lot about synthesizers so I’ll ask him about it if/when I see him again Looking at my last diagram, to add further explanation; also look at the “Linear Superposition of Waves” demo http://pages.physics.cornell.edu/courses/p...01/6/demo2.html When two antinodes coincide they “join forces” and when two nodes coincide they do much the same…except the opposite. Diagram 16 depicts two wavelengths which have a node quite close to each other and I believe would still have some of this effect A couple of other things that I hope will clarify what I’m saying When playing the white strat-copy pictured in my first post there is a constant ringing which sounds quite horrible. After some investigating I found three of the strings from nut to tuning peg just happen to have the same pitch, the second octave of the first string E 1320Hz. The headstock has 12 degrees angle which is about the same as my Washburn acoustic so it has nothing to do with that After studying my Washburn and Gibson I found the pitch of these string lengths flatter or sharper to each other and some of them nearly match harmonics but much higher like the sixth, ninth or eleventh. Obviously it’s a slightly different issue but it’s still “string behind a fretted note” nonetheless Now the only other thing is the baritone guitar This red guitar has a scale of 27 ¾ inches so it’s 24 ¾ inches to the second fret (same as a Les Paul) I originally made it with 27 frets which correlates to the 25th of the white guitar and as you can see I also gave it the chop-chop I did all my experimenting with a cappo on the second fret and on the right you can see I left the 25th fret. This kept the pickup 4mm away from the 26th fret node. Later on I chopped it out and got the pickup right on that spot and I tell you I could hear the difference. When I took the cappo off there was a slight change in sound just like when I did the cappo experiment with the white guitar. This is why I am so adamant that the string behind a fretted note affects the sound, and that the pickup sounds better when it’s at the 24th fret node I have no doubt that you would hear a big change in tone if the pickup was moved to the 24th fret on this guitar. However that would be quite impossible and I am happy with the sound so there you have it, a 24 fret guitar with the neck pickup on the sweet spot! One of the things I think should be discussed is the definition of “sweet spot” The way I see it there are two distinct meanings in this scenario 1. The pickup produces a very unique sound in a certain spot 2. The pickup is in a position where it sounds good to a particular person and/or for a certain style of music After all this experimenting I have learnt to understand so much more about pickup placement. Consider the pickup placements of the Telecaster Strat Les Paul and SG. The Tele has a single coil right on the second octave. The Strat has a single coil about 6mm closer to the bridge. A Les Paul has one coil of a humbucker right under the node, while the single coil version has the pickup about 9mm closer to the bridge, right in the middle of the humbucker…where the 25th fret would be. And the SG has a humbucker with one coil under the 26th fret node Each guitar has the pickup placed where it sounds good for a particular reason. I believe you could say the neck pickup is in the sweet spot on the LP for lead and the SG for rhythm. Other people might have different ideas but they’re the conclusions I came to from my experimenting. But still it’s not just distance from the bridge; let me put forward my explanation for the position of the Les Paul pickup If a P90 or the centre of the humbucker was right on the node the sound would be much warmer at the open string and 12th fret, but might lack in-between these points. Moving the pickup a little closer to the bridge “diffuses” the sound – and - the guitar is made with such warm-sounding timber that you could afford to sacrifice some warmth at the open string - so –you gain a better balance of tone over the fretboard When I type-up a post I go over it and make sure it’s as concise as possible. Sometimes I think I could explain myself better but it all takes so much time. There are still a million things that could be discussed I’m sure, but in any case I probably don’t have all the answers. The main thing is I heard a difference when the pickup was at quarter of the scale (24th fret) and I know it’s to do with cancelled and muted harmonics I hope all this has made sense to someone and anyway folks my internet connection is about to expire again and I want to stop talking about guitars and actually make some (a couple at least) so I won’t be on here for a while cheers

Mmmm.....you're making me stay up late again, ha ha, but its good to have your response I'll have to research that one but I have been thinking along the lines of how bagpipes have that continuous tone. All the notes it plays are in harmony with that tone. And is it anything like what I'm saying in this diagram? I mentioned this before and I think I'm going into too much "nitty gritty" but when you play fretted notes that don't have a node directly over the pickup there is really not much difference between the harmonic mix if you move the pickup away from the 24th fret node, yet it still sounds that little bit sweeter if its on the node. The diagram could require more explanation but I hope it will give the idea of my theory

Hi welcome to the forum To post pictures you have to register with something like http://photobucket.com/ and put your pictures on there, then get the IMG code and post that on here Hope that helps

Something most important I forgot to mention. The further the pickup is from the bridge the sound is warmer but at the 24th fret node it is EXTRA warm and not just warmer its "sweeter" You might need to do the first experiment I did - moving the pickup between middle and neck to really believe it. And when I did my experimenting I spent a lot of time on it. Some days I got home from work and couldn't tell the difference between a neck and bridge pickup. The sound of power-saws and buzzers ringing in my ears renders me tone-deaf for a while I'm not out to prove this to the whole world and I don't see how I can. If you really want to find out if what I'm saying is true, like I said you would probably have to do some research and experimenting of your own. Or you could just take peoples word for it. Here is yet another person who says the same thing I am saying, but he's made a few mistakes by saying "overtones" when he means "harmonics" Post 4 and 13 http://bbs.espguitars.com/showthread.php?t=10692

Before I continue… I thought I may have been heavy-handed with my actions in my second-last post and I showed this thread to someone and they said it sounds like I was really “going off” but I have just plainly stated my case and I’m not “yelling” But the other day I decided to see what this sustainer gadget is all about and when I looked at the thread I noticed it was closed. Then skimming through it I found other people had similar complaints to mine so I don’t know, I think I may be well justified And in general I feel that I am being told I am wrong by people who have done little research or experimenting and it’s like I can’t say I’m right, but you can say I’m wrong, it just doesn’t add-up Now to continue In my previous post I said the sweet spot for the open string is not necessarily the sweet spot for fretted notes. I forgot to mention I would also say the sweet spot for a guitar is not necessarily so for a baritone or bass guitar. If you had a pickup at the 24th fret on a bass it would probably sound too ‘boomy’ All three bass guitars I owned over the years only had one pickup and they were somewhere in the middle So it starts to sound like its just distance from the bridge but lets look into that a bit further. People say things like “It has nothing to do with nodes and antinodes its just distance from the bridge” But this statement contradicts itself because the bridge is a nodal point and the further you get from it is closer to the antinode of the Fundamental The antinode is where the string has maximum displacement so the closer you get to it is louder. The node has no displacement so the closer you get to it is softer But why is it also warmer and brighter? If I may quote someone from another thread we see part of the answer But to explain it in more detail the reason a neck pickup is warmer and a bridge pickup brighter is because of the overtones. Without them you would only have a single frequency, a pure tone and it would just be louder and softer and once again it involves nodes and antinodes A Neck pickup is warmer because its closer to the antinodes of the Fundamental and Lower-order harmonics where they have much greater displacement and amplitude than the higher harmonics The Bridge pickup is brighter because the Fundamental and Lower-order harmonics are close to the node and have much less displacement and amplitude while the Upper-order harmonics are still at their antinode and achieve maximum displacement and amplitude So the sound you get has everything to do with nodes and antinodes when talking about warm/bright soft/loud and it has everything to do with what I am talking about here. Looking again at what I said in my first post To explain it better I made this diagram All those missing harmonics must have a great influence on the sound. The numbers down the right hand side show how many times the harmonics go from the bridge to pickup and notice how mathematical they are And for the open string Now surely these missing harmonics would give you a unique tone at the 12th fret and open string but as you play up the fretboard you get close to the same thing. Starting at the first fret again At the 8th fret the third and second harmonics nodes are fairly close to the pickup but the fifth node is right over it so you still get a full cancellation of a fairly low-order harmonic. In any case the antinode of the fundamental is closer to the pickup I haven’t made a diagram above the 12th fret but I have these charts which show the whole lot and this is why I put the numbers down the right, they indicate how close the nodes are to the pickup These charts show how it would be for a Fender Telecaster. The numbers in red are where you get most cancellation If you look at Tillmans demonstration applet that Fresh Fizz brought up you will eventually see that the numbers from my chart correspond to it With a 24 fret guitar you might have the pickup where the 26th fret would be and all these numbers would be the same except two frets up, and the cancellations would occur for slightly higher harmonics. You get a warmer, sweeter sound by canceling harmonics of a lower-order But for example if you had the pickup at the 19th fret it would cancel every third harmonic at the open string and that would not sound quite as nice because it won’t cancel the octaves of the Fundamental. I think its important to get the sound you want at the open string because it sets a “precedent” for what the guitar sounds like To help explain about Traveling and Standing waves have a look at this PhET string-wave simulator Can be used Manual, Oscillate, or Pulse With Fixed End, Loose End, or No End In manual mode you grasp the “Wiggle wrench” with the mouse and move up and down http://phet.colorado.edu/sims/wave-on-a-st...-string_en.html More about harmonic series etc http://hendrix2.uoregon.edu/~dlivelyb/phys152/L4.html Linear Superposition of Waves http://pages.physics.cornell.edu/courses/p...01/6/demo2.html I hope that explains what I’m trying to say a bit better but I could still go into more detail on certain points