theodoropoulos

very impressive and clever!thank you for sharing it with us..... i tried it and works great!!! thanx again!!

http://i939.photobucket.com/albums/ad236/theodoropoulos/DSC03616.jpg this is my pattent based on the previous suggestion using the stew mac router base.. the screw matches with the stud thread... thank you!

i have big problem with new renewal of the site and i cannot view it normally... what is going on?do i need new windows or something????

i just made a patent based on this stew mac product..i will post it tomorrow

thank you for reply

This helps you to remove the knobs....i want to remove and to install the STUDS!!!

how do you install or get out studs of this kind?? My link i could not think something different from this patent in a scrapre wood. My link THIS IS MY ALTERNATIVE...ANY HELP???

I think you must check all parts to be well tightened....i dont think it's an issue of resonance....

how does it work???????????????????? very interesting....

ok,thanx for your time!!

my friend my calculations show about 3.9 degrees............ big difference....so which is correct?????????????????

thanx for the response.I would like to double check the equation with the drawings....i would appreciate to see some plans to have a better idea and check it better...My all concerns begunn with my project which demands to find the correct angle to have the best action..... neck scale 24.562" height of the bridge 16mm fingerboard thickness 6mm the neck meets fretboard at 17 fret(or L=25cm) i would like to have 1-2 mm wood over fretboard(w=1) not as Les Paul with no wood i was just looking for the angle............. this is the target guitar sincerely, Dimitris

it's a pitty that instead of helping us each other ,many clever people here try to put the dialog into very low level.... IF YOU HAVE NOT TO SAY SOMETHING USEFUL PLEASE DONT WRITE NONSENSE... SPEAK WITH NUMBERS,INFOS,PICTURES AND NOT WITH IRONY..... IS THAT ALL THAT YOU HAVE?????????????????????

congrats!!!!!!!!!!

I did not had intention to continue this dialog but as far as i can see some people are open minded so its my pleasure to discuss in DEMOCRACY.. @Ken Bennett OK,the equation works to make an angle and to check it..you see its just what we see... @ooten2 i think i transformed the triagle to trapezoid just because i think we must put there the action ,the fingerboard thickness and the wood that gets over the surface.... this diagramm i had in mind could we confirm this type for another guitar?its seem ok to me..

EXCELLENT!! today i worked with my router and everything went well.you know why???because i had the router in my hands and not upside down in router table.. with some experiments the table destroyed all the woods i worked(and my rosewood tele ) so working this way helped...i will wet the area next time.... thanks for this info my friend!!

Scratch that first post.It sounds aggressive...Let me just say that trying to downgrade a simple straight line diagram as something "inaccurate",and implying that it is for simpler minds or some such is only making you look like you are awfully defensive...it is not actually making anyone else look silly... You always stick with the simplest method for YOU...personally,I think you just like math...in this case there is no need for it as the first step to building a guitar should be to draw up plans of what you are building to check all of your work from.And when you have all of those plans that you already made drawn full sized in front of you,then all of that fancy math and those equations become redundant.My "plans" are only two diagrams..one of the neck angle,and one of the fretboard taper...everything else is "art" Some people mistake math as logic...keeping it simple is ALWAYS the most logical way.When you figure out your angle via your equation you still have to set up your tools for it,draw templates,or draw it directly onto the wood...every single part of which is going to put you more than a pencil width out of accuracy.. So if you take the guitar you build and measure it for accuracy,it is going to be no better than those done with the simple straight line method...and the straight line method is much simpler,therefor more logical in this application. I THINK I WASTE MY TIME HERE.IT WAS MY MISTAKE TO SHARE MY THOUGHTS WITH SUCH PEOPLE WHO THINK I OFFEND THEM.... SUCH A PITY... PLEASE CASE CLOSED....DONT CONTINUE THE CHAT...

my personal opinion is that drawing the angle will take about 15 minutes and id the pencil line is thick the angle will not be very accurate.It all depends on the ability of drawing EXACTLY....On the other hand a luthier knows exactly what he has done,knows the constants and if you look it carefully its only a division ...it takes about 1-2 minutes..... but its matter of taste and habbit.....We are all here to say our opinion in democracy and make a dialog to gain experience..isnt that we are looking for???

Yup...one small mathematical error and all of the sudden the guitar is junk.Just for the record,Perry's method lays it out stone cold accurate. look guys,this is an effort i made my self.....I just want to understand what i do,and if anybody whants to chat feel free to do it.. It's not an equation of the univercity ,its just an equation for childern and the mistake is zero......If you double check it it's ok. You can combine it with drawing..... Look,i just made a proposal.If you disagree it's ok,just forget it....

Of course my friend,i accept your opinion,and i will be glad to find if it is wrong....It is just how it is easier for every luthier.... But for Les Paul it gives correct results,and for some prs style... i dont like drawing ,i prefer calculating...just taste.....the issue is if it is correct......... thank you for your time

NECK ANGLE EQUATION a:action of the strings f:fingerboard thickness w:thickness of the wood over the top surface* h:height of the bridge y: the levels distance from the bridge’s bottom level to binding’s top level L:distance from the point where the neck meets the body to the bridge φ:the angle of the neck tanφ=[(h+y)-(a+f+w)]/L *if the top surface is angled (in φ angle) the w is constant.If not then as in the photo the w is not constant PLEASE TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK

i hope next time i will reply here to have the fingers to do it LOL

? damp the wood....... ....... I dont really see how you can create an accident by putting some water on a cloth and damp areas of your guitar body before routing.... maybe I used the wrong word... ok,ok i got it...in other words you mean to wet the area which is supposed to be routed...interesting.... i bet it works....

you mean dampening by pussing with your hand against the wood just over the spinning router bit??? to be honest i am afraid...we just mentioned 2 accidents,with much luck..i won't risk it... do you have a protection for this dampening to propose??

If I can add my 2 cents.... I dont recommend that you route the body shape if using ELM, ELM is one of the toughest woods out there at least the european one, it also has a tendency to burn even if your tools are very sharp. Best way to do it is to carefully outline the shape from the template onto the body, bandsaw it out and then sand the sides flush. I dont know why you think that its less accurate, because you simply go up to the pencil line if you did a good job. you are absolutely right...I am not just used to sand with this way...but i just did it today to fix the tearouts and did an icredible job..This will be my next friend.... btw i think i found why i did those terrible tearouts...I wanted to share it with you... 1)the router bit's razor had a length 30mm and diameter 19 mm.ALL the lenght cutted the strong ELM..i could not work gradually up to 30 mm.I had to do it once... 2)i did not follow the instruction #2 and generally this philosophy of this article http://www.ehow.com/how_2215700_control-di...king-power.html i was working AGAINST the grain(anti clockwise) BECAUSE I WAS FAMILIAR FROM HOLDING THE ROUTER INSTEAD OF HAVING IT IN ROUTER TABLE.This way router spins by opposite way ....