henrim

44 minutes ago, Akula said:

Double sided tape with tape loops either end should hold pretty good. Get some 357 Gaff tape, that stuff holds entire concerts together. You can also route for a small length then re-tape past the part you've routed. That way you've got an indestructible tape at either end of the leverage, if that makes any sense. 

Yeah, I'm positive it holds. I have done sheet metal constructions with tape. With stuff that they use for taping fire engine panels together. Can't remember exactly what it was. Anyway, I know these tapes can hold pretty good. Still it feels "wrong" to feed a taped piece to a high speed machine. Tape is needed to keep the board flat but I think I would prefer some kind of mechanical clamps in the ends. Though vacuum would nice alternative to tape. I guess tape feels kinda same as using a magnetic table to hold pieces down in steel machining. It certainly holds well enough in many operations but still I rather bolt the pieces down. So, all in all this more a mental thing.

2 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

If it's not broken there's no need to fix it.

It's probably fine as the passes are light. And there was no problem with my test pieces. Everything stayed well in place. I'm just not feeling comfortable feeding taped pieces into machine spinning 15000 rpm. Only thing I'm more scared of than woodworking machines is a sewing machine. Metal working machines are so much more zen compared to these savage tools. I guess it is because they don't generally spin so fast, everything is clamped down rigidly and you never ever feed anything by hand.

2 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Agreed, you can't use the entire length of the board. Double checking the ready cut fretboard blanks against a 24 fret fretboard revealed that there's not too much extra, a ½" wide tape at both ends doesn't leave any slack.

I cut and plane from larger raw pieces so that is not really a problem for me. But that is something to consider if I ever iterate this jig. I had this thought that because the fretboard is already attached to the jig, it would be great if fret slotting was done in the same fixture. But I won't go there for now. Otherwise I spend next six months perfecting the jig that already does what I want it to do.

I actually built this jig already last week. I had the moving part made of a piece of film plywood. Which generally is fairly flat material. Before starting to cut a fretboard, I realised that, that piece of ply was actually twisted. Although it didn't take more than hour to build the jig, I was pissed, and it took me a week to get back fixing it. Yesterday I planed a piece of pine to replace the plywood part.

It is easy enough to build a new one from better materials some day if needed. And if so, then I may get back thinking about the features the jig should have. 

Oh, and the board is kept flat and in place with double sided tape. Fretboard ends are wrapped with harness tape to prevent the board flying away in case the double sided stuff fails. I really should have a better way to attach the board. 

Back in 2011 when I first joined this site I made a fretboard radiusing fixture for router. I used it on the two guitars I was building then. It worked ok. Couple of years ago, when I started building again, I couldn’t find the jig anywhere. I wasn’t sure if I was going to ever build another guitar, so I didn’t bother making a new fixture. Same happened with the next two necks. Still not sure if I’m going to build more than the two I have in the making right now, but I decided to make a new jig anyhow. This time for a table top router. This is for 300 mm radius but it would be easy to make one with adjustable/changeable radius. Or I guess even a compound radius jig could be made with the same principle. And it could also be used with a handheld router or a plane if turned upside down and there was a board to support the tool.

Worked ok with the table top router but actually now that I wrote “plane” above, I think I would prefer that. I really think I should modify this fixture to use with a hand plane. Sheesh, why didn’t I think that before. I guess there’s a reason to write all this nonsense here!

11 minutes ago, henrim said:

I may check that later.

I took a coffee break and watched the video. That was good. Pretty much how I figured it would be with the biscuits. Although the reason I use dowels (or biscuits when I have access to a Lamello machine) is mainly to keep the pieces in right place in assembly. Any additional strength they give is a bonus. If you have ever made for example picture frames you know what I'm talking about.

Also in my mind biscuits/dowels can help keeping seams more stable against humidity changes. Now there's an other myth to debunk  They probably just makes things just worse because different species react differently to humidity...

45 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

Isn't that a type of a finger joint? And doesn't it work similarly to multiple biscuits? I know it's a common way to increase gluing surface and make huge beams for buildings so it's definitely a valid way to make a strong joint.

Yes, a finger joint. Technically biscuits or dowels would do pretty much the same. That kind of finger joint is usually used when gluing laminated boards from short pieces. By making the seam visible, Taylor has made the technical joint a design detail though. Nice if you like it. I do.  

45 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

But is it stronger than plain longitudinal wood?

That is a question I guess the linked video answers? I may check that later. But I don't think I have ever really thought joinery from that perspective. I only do joinery if I have to. For example a scarf joint. Main reason is to save material. Or if there isn't enough material to begin with. A scarf joint has other properties over a neck carved from a one piece, but they are not really the reason I would make the choice. I know there are lot of stories about cracked LP headstocks. And I know they do crack more easily than some others. I just haven't experienced it myself, regardless of not always treating my LP's so well. So, if I have enough wood I make a one piece neck. If I don't, then I join some pieces some way. Which has been a scarf joint for all the two piece necks I have done. But I would like to try a finger joint or dove tail, just for the looks.

Thanks. Yes, the preamp is rather rudimentary. But that could be tweaked if the principle works. I think it would be fun to test this sometime if I can find some free/cheap transformers. I think all the audio transformers I have are isolation transformers with 1:1 ratio ( like 10k/10K), which won’t be good. I do have plenty copper wire though…

Yes. I guess I was't clear. What I meant is my first concern with direct end grain joints is not the strength but the looks. I don't have to consider the strength because I don't do them. Obviously I wouldn't extend a neck like that. If I had to, I think I would do something like the Taylor joint in the attached picture. Both for aesthetics and strength.

To me, it's not so much about being afraid that an end grain joint would fail. It's more about the unnatural look of the joint. There are of course cases where end-grain joint can be visually appealing, but in general that look is cheap.

Does this work, or is it April fools?
I especially like this sentence: "A large range of bizarre effects can also be obtained by waving a powerful magnet around near the strings".

Occassionally I like to read these old publications like Practical Electronics. Mostly for 70's synth stuff, but there are other interesting articles too. https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Practical_Electronics.htm

That or scarf. Depending on the design. Stacked may be better in your case if you combine laminated neck with solid headstock. Possibly makes the transition easier.

It’s should be ok. When you do a scarf joint to a neck with angled headstock it fixes the issue with grain direction that a neck carved from one piece has. So, technically scarfed neck is a stronger neck. In your case there’s hardly any benefit, but on the other hand with a proper glue job there shouldn’t be any problem either.

As always, when in doubt, paint it black. 

But yes, I think generally the grain orientation should match the flow. Not necessarily be an exact grain-to-grain match, but have the same flow. Visually support each other. Tell the same story. Of course in some cases a distinctively different grain orientation, like opposite or something like that, can work too. Although. personally I seldom even try that as I know I'm not good at it. Some people are, but it's a rare talent. If I have a highly figured piece of wood I usually combine it with tight grained uniform wood. 

Cool. That is a different take. 20 mm rods and you should be golden. 

I have been pondering a neck jig from time to time and made some drawings too. Thing is, I don't do that many necks that I would really need one. As a project of it own it is interesting though. 

Here's one explanation of the more common principle:
https://www.kappi.com/blog/2018/12/diy-plan-for-neck-router-jig/

Construction on that is what it is, but it doesn't require any special tools to build. My plans use essentially the same principle but use a steel frame so the construction is different. 

7 hours ago, Crusader said:

I would think the amount it could move around under string tension would not affect intonation all that much

Yes, technically you are right. I think I'm categorising tuning stability as an intonation issue. And knowing how much slack there is would mentally kill me.

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.

39 minutes ago, MiKro said:

@GenerativeGuitars, I love it, I too have been using Rhino since version 5, Now have 7, I love Grasshopper. Would love to see your GH file on that.

MK

I guess I should try Rhino again. I tried the beta versions prior to 1.0 back in -97. Nurbs was a kinda new thing then. I had  learned polygon modeling and didn’t quite like the workflow. I have of course used nurbs after that but never really got back to Rhino. I guess it is a bit different in today’s releases

Ended up doing a scarf joint. Without it there would have been about 7 degree break angle, which I guess would probably have been ok, but now there is a scarf joint anyway. With a 13 degree angle, give or take. Also installed a truss rod and now gluing some pieces to widen the headstock a bit.

Now I need to decide on the fretboard. I got some zebrano, padouk and maple to choose from. Or maybe order some black stuff. I’m thinking white body and white headstock plate. Blackish hardware. And oiled neck with those skunk stripes. Whatever the fretboard color is will be then used as an accent color elsewhere.

Right, maybe someone swapped the bridge but didn’t bother changing the studs. Sounds like an intonation nightmare. Although it may not be so bad in reality unless the bridge creeps out of intonation while under string tension.

The picture is not entirely sharp but the bridge and the tailpiece look like they are in pretty good condition. Maybe even too good considering the age. Being born in 1973, that was not easy to say

Does the bridge move if you push it? I’m not familiar with that particular model but judging from the fact that the posts are in the middle of the hole I guess it doesn’t. Posts are probably guided from the bottom. Hard to say without taking the bridge off.

8 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

How so?

Word that widely depends on the context. If you talk about motors it’s likely a liukulaakeri. If it’s question about electronics it’s some sort of insulator. What comes to cigarettes I always enjoyed my karvapersekameli’s without holkki. No smokes anymore though.

Well yes, as it appears bush(ing) is a homonym. I have always understood it as a simple bearing. But I see it doesn’t necessarily have to bear radial or axial load to be called a bush(ing).

And now that I checked Wikipedia I see it has even more meanings. And if you think about it, the Finnish word for bushing: “holkki” is probably even more ambiguous.
 

20 minutes ago, Asdrael said:

Looks awesome. The electronics "plate" will not be easy to do though

Why? As far as I can tell it's a rounded rectangle that can be sanded flush in place.

In the end Floyd Rose cavities are rather loose fitting and you can suit them to your needs. About only number you need to take literaly is stud spacing. Depths maybe too. Others you can adjust to your liking. The original drawings are directly converted from imperial, so it looks intimidating with far too fine measurements like 71,12 mm, 20,96 mm etc. If you think metric like me it's better to redraw to metric instead of directly converting dimensions. I have done it for myself with relative dimensions, as a guide for a manual milling machine. It's unfortunately not a useful drawing in your case (measurements are compensated for different bit sizes etc). 

If you have the FR tremolo in hand check the measurements from there. For intonation @curtisa has given you good pointers to get the in place. 

I agree. Like @Bizman62 said, on this top the smooth finish is probably the way to go. But you should really use that beautiful chiselled surface somewhere sometime. I think I saw similar in your burl table and thought, damn that's beautiful!