Jump to content

MiKro

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    3,634
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    66

Posts posted by MiKro

  1. 3 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

    What would you think about making a flat top with braces heavily radiused to the inside? Lacking the words let me draw it:

    image.png.0adc80d1507b4156db4f63a0cb476ed2.png

    Would that be enough to keep the top from sagging or do you think the overall curvature with braces radiused against the top (and maybe bottom too) would be more rigid?

     

     

    Tried it and it does not work as well as you would think. I would go for a large radius say maybe in the 50 inch range.  Most acoustics are in the 30 plus range if memory reminds me.  That may be for the back though? Either way it should help if used on the top. LOL!! I have slept a few times, as well as aged since then. LMAO!!!!

  2. On 2/22/2024 at 12:38 AM, crazyrees said:

    Did anyone attempt to make the acoustic flying V boris dommenget? I know you can get plans for electric flying V on electric herald. I know the dean acoustic flying v has 2 1/4 inch side walls edge to edge including the binding. The Boris dommenget flying V side walls look wider than that in pictures but it is hard to tell. I wonder what the internal bracing looks like on an acoustic flying V vs a dreadnought. I am note sure if the side walls taper down towards the front or not. This guy makes a acoustic/electric but he doesn't bend the sides. His side walls don't look that wide nor does he had internal bracing. His top and bottom of his guitar aren't dome shaped using a radius dish. I am sure his guitar sounds good plugged in. If anyone has plans for a build let me know. Or more details on side walls for me let me know.

     

    I know from experience that one should use a radius on the top and some form of bracing. I was working with the Tele Style acoustic and the flat top bowed in because I did not use that. Having made acoustics before though I did have an understanding of acoustic design, The Tele did not use it and was a failure in that regard. Just my 0.02cents.  MK

  3. They are missing the tail part  ( cutout ) of the extension, thus making it shorter. Why? I have no clue.

    Also there are four ways to measure on a set of calipers, not three. Using the step on the back side as well for depth or width.

    Watch some videos on YT for more info. MK

     

  4. 29 minutes ago, GenerativeGuitars said:

    Sorry, Im in mm land... I started doing woodwork in 7/16's measures so I totally understand!
    I use mostly 2 flutes - 1 flute if plexiglass (lessons learned)...
    For feeds and RPM speeds, I listen to the sound of it believe it or not! Get's tricky in wood knots (for the pun!)
     

    Yep I get it and yes sound is a GREAT indication for wood routing. I wish that was true on metals all of the time. I also understand the one or what we call a zero flute end mill here in the states. They also work for Aluminum. :) MK

  5. 6 flute is a little much, 2 flute and three flute will serve you better in wood. MK

    Ooops I misread that as 6 flute when you said 6mm LOL!!! Im Bad and my eyes are old without my glasses. MK

    PS. end mills are better than router bits most times. :) I have used the ebay cheap ones as well with no issues. Just make sure you are trammed and the steps are correct. Check your TIR on the spindle when using very small end mills mk

     

     

  6. 1 hour ago, GenerativeGuitars said:

    The whole guitar is made based on 2 CAD curves from an old plan (I can add, change these at will). I used the plan's shapes to make the body and head-stock shape and set all the dimensions.

    Doing this as a total guitar idiot, I learned a lot about build techniques, guitar types, scales, scarf joint shaping with GH. And between the time I started encoding all the plan's measures - and today (about a year after) - I'm adapting the model using planes for references, automating the CAM job as much as possible. Created a nice system to test cavities to avoid wasting valuable wood.

    This model is based on that 1950's plan's dimensions and some are completely off like the control box is wrong size, screw holes dont work with this Fender pro neck, different bridge. Thanks to GH, I just change a number in a dial and fixed. Sometimes, I have to rethink how a part is supposed to fit offset to this or that point (nut, bridge, neck pocket etc. Adding one or two more pickups is easy. Will it sound right, I dont know yet...

    Im 2 features away to be cnc tested for tolerance - will the HW fit? Bridge cavities and positions already had to be edited which was just 10 minutes to prep for next cnc test. Now it's 2 minutes to test...

    I still dont have a pretention to become a luthier or a CNC god - but I love the details of the craft! I just love design :)

    My guitar playing ability = Im still learning the James Bond theme. Im getting the sound at least!  :)

    Then I would add the basics, Single coil, Tele style single coil and Humbucker. Make the parameters changeable and location changeable, they all would be good. Also the ability to use one or more of any type or combo of those on the guitar.  If also possible make it so that they could mount from the rear as well. MK

    Examples of Tele bodies that would require or might go against norms.

    The black one may be used with a TOM bridge or String thru Strat bridge. It would also require a set neck. The other allows for any approach.

     

    orgtele1.jpg

    S-Tel_2.jpg

  7. 23 hours ago, GenerativeGuitars said:

    Hello Mike,

    That's very kind of you. Thanks.

    Alas Im not looking forward to do support for the code yet as I enter the CNC testing phase.

    I dont have issues "coding" in Grasshopper although I have to admit that making the neck joints (between body interface and headstock) was a real pain - luckily a friend gave me some valuable tips and now I have 3 versions with varying results. Im re-writting the code as I go back to adjust tolerances for the CNC'ed body right now.

    Actually, where I could use help is whether making cavities in the body could help and the trussrod design...

     

     

    I am not sure I would worry that much about the pickups and truss rod. These are mainly done using a 2d strategy and subjective to the individual. Neck pocket, placement and bridge placement are the real show stoppers. The rest is just glitz.  If you were to add them, use standard CAD drawings and just move them around using GH. LOL!!! MK

     

    • Like 1
  8. I have been impressed with this approach using Grasshopper. I too was working on a solution at one time. My health has made it so I cannot do wood working anymore so I stick to metal now. If you would like I could look at your grasshopper code and layout and make suggestions if you are willing to share with someone. I have no desire to sell this or use for my purposes. If you are interested let me know and I will PM you.

    Mike

  9. 10 minutes ago, henrim said:

    I don’t use CAD at work that much these days. So I can pick whatever suits my personal needs. That is Fusion360 for technical stuff and Modo for everything else. SubDs are great for quick sketching. I use Illustrator for 2D drawing and in many cases I rather draw shapes there and export to 3D software. Old habits die hard.

    I still use ASPIRE for my 2d CAD. It works fast and accurate. I guess because I started using it at version 3 now at 11. It makes since to me. LOL!!!!

    MK

    • Like 1
  10. @GenerativeGuitars, I agree I like Solidworks even better, but the cost, like you said is an issue. F360 is not intuitive to me, the CAM in it has some good ops though that Rhino CAM does not. 

    SubD has been a game changer to some extent

    I have been working on a GH for necks but left that in the design stage and quit messing with it last year. UGH!!! :)

    I use a Prusa Slicer right now with my FDM and only step files. STLS are old tech and not as clean in my opinion.

     

    MK

  11. 1 hour ago, Asdrael said:

    >snip<

    Ghost has the acousti-phonics which seems like the best option but the diagrams provided either force the mags to go through the preamp even when used alone, or remove the option to mix. Now I suppose someone smarter than me has already figured it out so I'm throwing it out there: I need help 😛

    >snip<

    I would go with the ghost setup. You can always put a switch inline with the mag pickup to make it bypass the board.  MK  just my 0.02cents  :)

    • Thanks 1
  12. 2 hours ago, killemall8 said:

    Thank you sir, i hope you are doing well!

    >snip<

    I'm doing as well as I can expect. LOL!!! Getting out of woodworking slowly. My health is not allowing me to move around like I want to. So it is slow selling off equipment due to me being slow. LOL!!!! Then I have to get to the wood shed and go through it all. OMG!!! 20 years of collecting luthier wood. LOL!! What a PITA!!!

    You are doing fantastic work my friend. Keep it up. :)

    MK

  13. I agree with @Bizman62 on this. How many of the same do you need to make. The advantage of CNC is the ability to repeat accurately more that anything. Drawing up the plans should be done no matter what. CAD has it's advantages. So does doing it 1/1 scale on paper.  I use CNC, so I have made many of the same instrument so I could sell them. So what are your goals? I also do things by hand as they are one offs . I may still use  CAD for the drawing as I usually do not need 1/1 scale on paper to understand what I want to do..

    MK

    PS, The Fox Alien is belt driven don"t waste your money. Go with Ball screws and linear rails or stay out of the CNC adventure. The low end stuff will be more trouble that it is worth.

    mk

    • Like 1
  14. @mistermikev, Just an FYI, you may look into the recon stone type you are using, as it may be this same type of process. MK
     
    FAQ · Turquoise · Jun 01, 2015

    Is Reconstituted Turquoise Real Turquoise?

    Reconstituted turquoise

    Natural stones are formed in the earth over thousands of years and were formed in a very different way. Although we at Turquoise Skies do not feel it is ethical to call it real or genuine, these stones can technically be called “Turquoise” because the manufacturer actually uses a small amount of real turquoise in the composition.  A very rough low-grade version of turquoise in the form of chalk is crushed into dust and mixed with plastics, dyes, and resins to form the compound known as reconstituted turquoise. Using machines and special techniques, the factories can create matrix looking patterns such as the spider web to make the finished product look more natural. Reconstituted turquoise also has a plastic look and feel to it.

    • Like 1
  15. 3 hours ago, ScottR said:

    Thanks Andy, but you're going to have to. I'm still about two and a half years from retirement, so unlike you and @MiKro I still only have weekends to work on this.

    I am sooo looking forward to being in you guy's shoes....timewise.

    SR

    I would have traded places with you Scott many years ago if it meant I did not have the disabilities that I have had then or now. ;)  

    MK

  16. 1 hour ago, mistermikev said:

    still struggling to get my top processing to align with my bottom processing despite using location pins.  at the step where I glued the top to the body... the pins are really tight and I think this is due to my practice of securing non-flattened material and then flattening it via cnc as part of my process.  since my planer is only 12.5" wide I didn't have another solution until now... 16" wide drum sander I had to literally run to get... $300!  all my troubles are over (doubtful but perhaps some of my troubles are over lol)

    <Snip Image>

    still 

    Mike I got rid of my drum sander. I use my CNC router to surface things. I clamp and shim to start one side and get a flat surface, then turn over to get the other. They are then parallel to what ever  tolerance your spindle tram is.  :)  I know your machine is smaller than mine but you can still use a 3/4" or maybe a 1" surface router bit with a 1/4" shank.

    NOTICE I said SHIM this will account for the cupping being flattened when you clamp it to a Surfaced spoilboard.

    MK

    • Like 1
  17. 3 hours ago, peachtree said:

    Thanks everyone for the replies! I've stumped up the courage and below is what I have so far - I don't know if it's super clear from the pic but the fretboard laid across the neck plane basically comes in just above the bridge when it's sitting on the body (which is a clumsy way of saying a straight edge across the top of the fretboard extended over the bridge clears the bridge by 6mm, if it's just sitting on the body.

    I think this is usable but probs not ideal - especially after frets/action etc my bridge is probs going to be sitting a little too high. I'll decrease the angle a bit I guess. Do you guys agree?

     

    IMG-6184.jpg

    First off you have no posts in bridge, so that will help add height to the bridge.

    If the bridge is too low then In reality though I would maybe look at it like an Archtop style bridge setup. using some type of wooden saddle to raise the TOM bridge to spec. This would add visual continuity as well as fix your issue.

    If the bridge is too high you can always recess the body some.

    Just  my 0.02 cents though.

    MK

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...