SwedishLuthier

Yes and no. I have seen that design. Can’t remember the guy’s name. You take away the stress on the bridge to top joint and probably activate a larger part of the top. But the main fault is that a flat top guitar works MOSTLY (not entirely) by introducing a rotating movement in the top that makes the top acts like a air pump, rocking forth and back with the bridge as the axis. By mowing the string fixating points to the edge of the top the bridge will not act like a lever anymore and you will loose the rotating movement. Then you depend on the up and down movement (exactly like an archtop). But on an archtop the arch, the high bridge and the tailpiece produce quite high down pressure on the top. This makes the top MOSTLY move up and down, pretty much like a speaker cone. With the described design you will not get any of that either. So we have a design that removes the rocking movement, and doesn’t produce very much downwards pressure on the top. So what makes this guitar sound at all? I haven’t read any trustworthy reviews of this guitar, but I am very curious about the sounds. My guess is that it isn’t very loud, but even a whisper can sometimes sound good.

I never said that I was going to use a Kasha bracing pattern. I'm just picking up a lot of ideas from him (and others). And yes, Kasha is a “non-builder” but Leo Fender was a non-player! If I can reduce the weight of the top with, let’s say 5% that will in return boost the volume. I cannot say how much, but if will indeed affect the volume. And I have never walked down the tried and safe path. Why would I? If I want a standard dreadnought or jumbo I can go out and buy one and it will cost me much less then the wood alone. In addition I can try out dozens till’ I find one that is “perfect”. Experiments and people that don’t know exactly what they do is one of the most important things that drive development. The fact that the X-brace was developed for gut-stringed guitars (a flop for those guitars) but proved to be superior to the lattice bracing used on contemporary steel string guitars of that time proves that it pays of to be non-traditional. At the same time I’m very aware of that I might end up with a guitar that sound like no other, and quite possible down right bad, but I am willing to take that chance to be able to create something unique.

I also started out with a triangular file. It works fine too, but I prefer my diamond coated crowning files, because it is way faster. If you decide to use a triangular file, please be sure that you grind away the sharp corners of the file and make them really smooth or you will make a big mess out of the fretboard. An alternative is to use metal fretboard protectors.

cSuttle, that was some really nice inlays. Good work.

I have a StewMac straight edge. When comparing my steel rulers to that I found out that the StewMac straight edge was a complete waste of money. My steel rulers, even the cheapo ones, were all perfectly straight.

This cost you only 41 bucks and works like a dream. It takes like two seconds to nip the tang of with this. I have had mine for over five years and don’t think that the saving of 41 bucks is worth the work involved in making a special tool or grinding the tang of with a dremel or similar.

Yes you will probably do. I have read a book that describes an experiment were a traditional flat top steel string bridge is held in a fixture that is similar to what shorty does. That experiment showed that the volume of the guitar was considerable lower with the “flying brace” (as I think that it should be called) compared to without. The way a fixed bridge is transferring energy into the sound board is by transferring the string energy into a rotating movement of the top with the axis roughly through the bridge. A flying brace is effectively stopping that. I have done a lot of reading up (I admit that this is only theoretical knowledge) for my first acoustic and I have decided to move the soundhole. Traditionally we put the soundhole in the part of the top that is supposed to carry the string force. To stop the top from collapsing Martin came up with the X-brace. The X-brace allows the top to rotate and many people like the sound of a X-braced guitar. But the X-brace add a lot of mass to the top and a heavy top need more energy to drive it (get it to vibrate). My plan is to move the hole into the cutaway area. This should in theory mean that I don’t have to brace the top as much as traditional. This also means that I can use the braces as tone-shaping devices compared to structural devices to stop the top from collapsing (yeah a lot of Kasha-ideas here…). But then again, this is only theories. I’m in the process of building the side bender and the mould and the hollow forms and… It will probably take me a lot of time before I know if my ideas are right or if I’ve wasted my time and some nice wood.

You will probably NOT have to replace the frets. But you will have to do a complete fret job. Only a crowning isn’t enough. . Have a look at the tutorial section, or more precise here: http://www.projectguitar.com/tut/tutorial9.htm and you will find all info you need.

OK, Kidmag. Here are some leads. Is the first fret very worn? A worn nut gets flatter and that moves the breaking point up the neck, hence pushing the note into the sharper range. Take a look at the nut slot bottoms. If they are worn out and not perfectly shaped they can move the string break pint towards the head and by this elongating the string scale. When you then intonate the guitar you will get good intonation at the 12th fret but progressively worse intonation when you move down the neck. And what is the correct shape of the nut slot bottoms? If you look at the nut from the playing position the slot should start out perpendicular with the fret board for about 1/3 of the nut thickness. Then it should gradually “bend” toward the head so that the string leaves the nut perpendicular to the head surface. Tricky to describe in words… The most important thing is that the nut slot bottom isn’t rounded in the first 1/3 towards the fret board. It should be perfectly flat. If you have checked these things and found no problems, then it is time to pull out your ruler. Measure the distance from the nut to all the frets (ok the first couple of frets anyway). Make a table and compare it to what you get using this tool: http://www.stewmac.com/FretCalculator/ If the nut to fret distance is to long on you’re guitar the nut is misplaced. Then you need to get the nut moved. If all these things checks out you might consider a compensated nut. What a compensated nut does is to move the nut closer to the first fret than the stewmac calculator tells you. The theory is that the nut is actually a bit higher than the frets and fretting the strings at the first couple of frets stretches the strings a bit more than when fretting on the higher frets. And everyone knows that stretch = higher pitch. There are a couple of systems for compensated nuts, but only one that I know of that is for retrofitting by a DIY. It’s the Earvana system. I use it quite often on my builds. More info a www.earvana.com

Anybody that has seen my posts know that I realy like the Earvana system. Its a retrofit system that works without shoping of a piece of the fretboard. Check out www.earvana.com The main disadvantage is that it is made out of plastic, and I prefer bone nuts on acoustics.

If you are willing to sacrifice you’re squire I don’t se any reason why this couldn’t work. Just take your time and read the scalloping tutorial again and again and when you think that you have memorised all details… read it again. Regarding the oil: You can use almost every type of penetrating drying/curing oil. Tung oil, true oil works fine. I have used teak oil, which basically is just linseed oil with white spirit added. Not the best oil to use for this, but it worked.

I have a model (nothing like a Strat) that is about 2/3 of the normal width of a Strat. To make it hang nicely on a strap I have a longer upper horn. It’s usually made out of mahogany with maple top and the sound (unplugged) is very similar to a standard LP. Especially if it’s combined with a mahogany set neck and a stop tailpiece. So you probably don’t have to worry too much about changing that sound if you just make it skinnier and keep everything else standard.

Did you hammered the frets in or did you pressed them in? If you hammered them in and didn’t pre-bend the frets they will almost always spring back when you hammer the middle of the fret in. There ate a few ways to fix this: - Refret using a hammer. Probably the simplest and cheapest (no extra tools needed) solution. Remove the frets, measure the fret slots and use a fret wire that will let the barbs on the tang bite into the slot sides. Remember to overbend the frets and tap the frets in without excess force. - Refret using a fret press system. My preferred way to fret. Much more control and a uniform pressure that minimise fret end spring back. - Use a Fret press caul in an arbour or a pillar drill and glue the fret ends down under pressure. Run a tiny bit of water thin CA glue under the fret and use the arbour/pillar drill to apply pressure to the fret via the caul. Lock the fret press into place and let the clue set for much longer time that you think it will take. CA binds in seconds, but takes much more time to get really hard. I personally don’t like to use CA for fretting, but the few times I use it is to fix your type of problem and I do it this way. Having said all this I think that you will have to find out way the frets doesn’t stay in the slots. The only way is to remove at least one fret and measure the slots and compare to your fret wire. And remember: All this is a learning experience. Like soapbar I had this problem on my first neck. I had to fret it three times before I got it right.

I'm totaly convinced that a proper setup, without fret leveling will do wounders. Worn out frets will push the notes into the sharp region, so thats definately not the problem here

Rule no:1 when it comes to intonation is to use new strings. Be sure to let them streach some before you check intonation. I always put on new strings, tune up, strech the strings a bit by pulling them, tune again, let the guitar sit on a stand over night, and tune again. NO PLAYING, just tuning. As soon as you start rubbing the strings against the frets (thats esentially what you do when you play) the string is deformed by that contact. That deformation affects intonation.

Either a router with a straight edge to follow (don’t need a template) or gouges. I wouldn’t use gouges. It’s hard to cut a clean pattern at an angle across the grain.

Agree. You only have to do this if you feel that the screw doesn't pull the neck into the pocket with suficient stength

I had the idea of a drift wood guitar body (still on the list of "want to do" guitars). I investigated the sandblaster method and it worked pretty well. Another method is to use a rotating wire brush in a drill. Used along the grain it makes it look like a realy old worn piece of wood. That method worked better on ash.

Get some good quality wood of the same species as the neck (maple I guess). If I you cannot get your hands on ready made dowels you can do them yourself, even without a lathe. Chuck the wood up in a pillar drill (or handheld drill) and grind it round starting with a flat file switching to a larger hard block covered with sand paper. Grind it down to a reasonably diameter (6.5 to 8 mm will do, depending on screw holes) and cut it into dowels. Measure the dowels and drill NEW holes in the neck. This will give a clean gluing surface. The best way to drill those holes is to lay the neck flat on the pillar drill table and use a cam clamp to stabilise the neck (to stop it from rocking from side to side, laying on the fret board). Get a drill the same size as the dowels (or only a tad oversized). Drill new holes and glue the dowels in the holes. Trim everything when the glue is dried and drill new holes for the screws. This is the best method of fixing this problem. The “toothpick and glue method” is the second best, but the way described above is a dead sure fix that will hold for ever (or until someone really over tight the screws). PLS stay away from wood putty or epoxy. It might work, but it might as well fail really badly.

The Fender Rosewood Tele was made out of two halves that were hollowed out. Iv'e done it on a 5-string beech-wood bass. And that bodie were damn heavy despite the chambers. I gave it a sunburst with a solid color on the edges to cover up the joint. The "weneer between that halves"-idea is great. Whish I had thought of sutch a simple solution...

http://www.guitarbuildingtemplates.com/ EDIT: Noticed that they don't carry Tele bass templates. Sorry

Try www.skguitar.com and click Custom Pickups, Rewind & Repair. If you scroll down you find a VERY interesting pickup that is designed to fit in a P-90 rout. It should be possible to add a P-90 cover on that one. Drop Steven a mail and ask. He is usualy very quick to answer.

Do you have a battery in the guitar? If no, there is no preamp. There is no such thing as a passive preamp! I think that I once saw a drawing showing the construction of a Lace sensor. It had a lot of magnetic fields “combs” that shielded the coil and directed the magnetic field towards the strings. If it was in fact the Lace sensors I saw I would say that it is impossible to rewind it. And just for the record: I wind my own pickups. But I would stay away from a Lace Sensor. Maybe someone with extensive experience of winding/rewinding can give you a better advice.

Razorblade held with fingers. Light touch and a few passes. Works fine

Just to encourage you a little bit more. A few years ago I helped a local bass player convert a no-name 4-string P-bass to a 8-string using your suggested method. We didn’t need to reinforce the head at all, and it worked fine. It’s not the worlds finest job, but it was fun and actually works better tan I thought.