komodo

If you read that rambling psychosis above, good for you, Just trying to keep up to date, and I'll do more pics and less chatter from now on. Tonight I did final shaping to the top binding channel, and top carve some to even it and prep for binding, Good news is it's better than before. I sanded the top again, did the amber /black for figure and will do final amber after binding. Because one wood patch breached the edge of the top horn, I will edge bind the horn points too. A little fussy work, but should look good.

#QOTD

I've been completely remiss on updates, and unfortunately haven't really documented this with pictures. It's been comforting to read others builds and see accident /saves as that's what I'm going through. Nothing catastrophic, but plenty of heavy sit down and think think think times. After the final dye, the sides were still virgin swamp ash and I hadn't figured out exactly what to do with them yet. My thought was dye of some kind, possibly tinted lacquer over that or ? Also, I was pretty set on not doing a burst after the top and back dye. Well, after thinking for a bit I thought "I wonder if I can mix a dye to match the rosewood neck?" Then the sides would blend into the neck. In my heart, I didn't think it possible, but after one or two tries I hit it DEAD ON. I was shocked how close it was actually. This was applied on to one of my test pieces that had some black sand back on it, and the black ash grain looked exactly like the rosewood. Excited, my first step was to dye the ash black, and sand back . . .which I knew would be tricky because it was already bound. Well, ash takes the black SO well, not just in the pores, sand back was very difficult. Also, the sand back creates a nasty grey mess of dust that works into the large pores. So, I tried scraping with very sharp scrapers, which created some nice areas, some nearly bare areas, and some crap areas. Lesson #1: THE GRAIN OF YOUR TEST PIECE, IS NOT THE GRAIN OF YOUR ACTUAL PIECE. Esp, with large grain wood. OK, don't panic. think think think First off, let's scrap the dyed rosewood matching idea. I'm going back to my original plan of dye the sides amber like the rest of the guitar. Then. I can use tinted lacquer later if I want to burst or darken the sides more. Course of action, I need to get the black off to bare wood. Again from observing test pieces, this means I'm going to need to take a layer of wood off, not just sand. The binding already thin in places, I'm going to need top remove the binding. Sigh. Good news is they came off really easy. Next course of action, sand the sides to remove the black, which is basically taking off the wood from binding channel to binding channel. The outside of the guitar was easy on a belt sander. The inside horns, since the neck is glued in, was by hand and chisel. Not easy, but sharp chisels and patience worked fine. Scraped clean. Next course of action: recut binding channels. Hmmm. Back is flat and easy. Top is carved and dyed. Luckily I had an overhead pin router I had previously made and never used, and tests with scrap looked promising. After strapping on my extra cajones, I recut the top binding channel. Good news: it mostly worked. Bad news: The depth varied probably due to combo flex of the router and pin(?), even though it feels rock solid. Also, the neck, at an angle, made contact with my table and slightly pushed the guitar UP, making the channel height around the upper horn much deeper. CRAP. OK, don't panic. think think think The varying depth wasn't that bad and was easily evened with a chisel. Fixing the top horn was an exercise in patience and wood grain matching / patching. What I did was actually carve out the area much larger than the deep channel. The area was carved specifically to match the ash grain line. This was done on the top AND the bottom of the upper horn. This was done after I found a piece of cutoff that came from the same area, and had matching grain. I'm afraid my glue lines aren't perfect, but they are good and on the grain lines. Recutting the back channel was no issue. My plan was also to then dye the sides amber, then glue in new binding (rosewood this time!) using wood glue. The Duco left small patches with no dye at all, and I wasn't a fan. Well, then I noticed there were deeper channels in the upper bout as well, not bad but deeper than the .25" of the wood binding. Arg. OK, recut some rosewood binding? Again - think think think. All along, I have had a thought in the back of my head that the tiger eye dye, esp with burst, looks great with cream binding. Even with the black binding, I liked the idea of the cream outline from the front facing guitar. So, another quick order to Stewmac and I have the cream binding in the higher dimensions so it can fill in the extra .5mm of the deeper channel. Also, I have some binding glue made with acetone and binding scraps to make it perfect. Fingers crossed. If something happens to the dye, sand back and re-dye the amber is really not a big deal. BENEFITS OF THE MESS: I'll have new fresh binding that should be full thickness and no thin areas. Binding should be near gapless with new glue. The color scheme may actually end up nicer with the contrasting cream. Learned a lot. I'm thinking it may look a little more like this when done.

Thanks! I was doing a Tele / strat / LP thing, and the little one was sort of a prototype for a larger one. That one is a neck-through, all korina. Really this thread should be called "Set neck AND bolt on", as I wasn't really trying to debate which is better but just to start a discussion on fundamental differences, pros and cons, etc. It never hurts to revisit basics and challenge traditions. For me, the ability to remove a neck for body refinishing, neck repairs, neck angle setup. bridge replacement and many more things - really makes the case for bolt on. There are so many really clean and low profile bolt configurations, that it seems like a preferable way to go. That said, I would never build a bolt on LP? It would seem out of character.

Awesome. I think the black MOP makes it.

I totally hear you and concur. The wild cards for me are the very smooth bolt on joins with inset ferrules, and the ability to remove a neck for bridge replacement, body or neck work, etc. My next is a bolt on and a through body, so clealy I have no preference LOL.

I love the body cut and the way it spills out from the upper bout. Also the interplay of the heel cut and the body cut. The headstock really adds another dimension too. Very nice!

First thought, high nut. Second thought, wrong scale length for bridge position.

I'm no stranger to guitars and building. I've been doing it since high school, and have played most of my life. I'm familiar with the arguments for or against one or the other, as well as the traditions and history. As I progress on my current build, my wife asks me why I would glue it in and not just bolt it on? Strangely, I had no good answer. There are so many benefits to bolt on that I had a hard time justifying why I would do a set neck other than "perceived quality difference" or a tiny bit of extra sustain - that honestly I believe to be negligible after all the pickups and electronics. I thought I'd ask the group for their thoughts, even though this has probably been discussed before in multiple ways. PS - And just for a tiny wrinkle, here is a picture of a mini-guitar I built for my son that has NO joint, but was cut from a single piece of white limba (korina).

Spectacular. The only thing I don't like is wasted material, since it costs so much. I can be pretty careful in placing pieces on a sheet of pearl to get maximum yield. That said, the accuracy and speed might be worth it. I'd also be pretty worried about using a fan for evacuation, since you don't want that fine shell dust in the air. It would be super cool to have a vacuum somehow. After watching that vid, it's clear that accurate depth adjustment is critical. Also, a really well made template from acrylic. I wonder how much time you would end up saving in the end? If it's a repeatable, logo or something then the benefit would be awesome.

One more quick thing, doing a very similar concept to yours but with a sled that rocks back and forth on an arched surface can make a fretboard radius jig. I was fascinated with creating a radiused body for a long time and intended to build a larger version to do just that. Just search DIY radius jigs in the Google to se some fantastical ones. The bass I posted a week or so ago has a radiused body and dished in the back, but it was totally hand done. After doing that, even using a flap sander, the idea of building the body radius jig has reared its head again. LOL Really though, mostly it's about consistency, not really ease. But when you build several of these large jigs, then it becomes about SHOP SPACE. We should have a large jigs in my shop thread. Ha.

So, this was thrown together to prove concept and hasn't even been tested yet but you get the idea. It had a very low clearance as it is, the only thing it was going to be used for was body side shaping with a template. I might try building another using a trim router. Cutting height is adjusted with the plunge, and width can be adjusted with the bearing sleeves the pin fits into and the bit size. I didn't mean to hijack your thread, but the sled you were showing reminded me of this. Another way to make a DIY pin router is table mounted router, then an arm to hold a pin. Many people use drill bits as pins which gives you a lot of adjustability in your cutting widths. The weight of the router hangs under the table, and is probably more stable. BUT, I have figured out one thing this pin router can do that a table mounted pin router can't. Working much like the LMII and Stewmac binding routers, allowing the bit to "come out of space" into the workpiece, it isn't constricted by requiring the piece to be on a flat surface. You could cut a binding channel on a carved top guitar as long as the back was flat, or if you created a sled much like the LMII binding router uses it could have a non-uniform back.

I've cleaned the shop creep mess from the table saw, and mounted the pin router. It's a lot more robust than I remembered. It doesn't LOOK like it, but it will not move once it's slid down into it's locator holes. The two interlocking bushings corresponded to two router bits giving me a 1/8" and a 1/4" flush cut with the pin, if that makes sense. But, I have just come up with another fantastic use for it out of necessity, and will document it well. I'll have pics of it in the next day or so.

Amazing black! I'm about to spray a solid black one, and have another one coming up (very similar design) so this is encouraging!

D-day.

I don't think I could get them out. Before I glued the neck in, I wanted to do a dry run to make any minor neck tweaks for the action so I put thrm in. Maybe I made rhe holes too tight, but actually I haven't tried pulling them.

Then the sandback and black. My fingers are about to fall off from sanding. I'm feeling much better about progress now. I've read a lot more about lacquer, and it seem that people regularly spray in slightly colder conditions, so I should have it finished this year. My birthday, Christmas and this should all collide around the same time, so I'm picking out a birthday present for the guitar. See what I did there? I'm thinking about a Strymon Mobius or a Deco.

D-day.

Neck glued in. Big moment I guess? Was anticlimactic. I realized that while finishing the cavity cover separately is fine for the gross dye and sandbacks, but will have to be installed for the final bursts. I'm thinking brass inserts and small machine screws. I also realized that I haven't drilled and countersunk for the screws, and that will need to be dyed the same so I need to do that ASAP. Also realized that the thickness of that cover will likely need to be changed because of the clear coats and shielding, so it will sit flush with the back. I'm not sure how to approximate that. I guess I'll make sure not to do shielding on the cover and body at the mating surfaces, so it will just be finish thickness. Also, I had always referred to this guitar as the Dragon, because of the inlay, but then thought that was silly since that's PRS crazy Dragon guitars name . . . but then I thought that was ridiculous to be worried about. So, I'll call it the Dragon once again, because it will breathe fire.

Hahaha I love it. I have a feeling that the results of that test wouldn't necessarily scale up. Imagine the talk with the fire marshall when you tell him you did a small scale test to make sure it was OK. Ha I think you are right though, and my instinct is that the real danger is in the atomized nitro, not the solvent.

I'm aware of the flammability of nitro when spraying, but can't find anything on this. I've got a temporary booth where I can spray outside but after I spray a coat and it has initially flashed off and then bring it inside to hang - how flammable is it while curing? I've got a largish shop with a strong fan that feeds positive pressure into the room, ejecting through another vent. The fan is made for a sauna and should have enough power for several exchanges an hour, and can be left on indefinitely. The fan is mounted up in the ceiling (was a darkroom), but is not explosion proof, and the shop heater is open flame. I'm really wondering about fumes from curing. All help is appreciated!

Amber sandback, then black. Also, while I feel I have a handle in the blacks, browns and ambers with my testing. I never really got the yellow/gold center wash of a sunburst. Even a tiger eye amber burst has some yellow in the center. My straight thin mix was very bright yellow, vibrant but wrong. Today I added a TINY pinch of amber and POW! I've labelled the jar "magic yellow". I started wiping it on every test sample I had. Black sand backs for a wicked black gold quilt, the tiger stuff looked way more vibrant, even the amber/red stuff I hated cause it was pinkish or just too red - suddenly popped in a swirly wickedness. The scrap pic here doesn't do it justice because it dries too fast and it doesn't look the same as when its wet.

So I tried to peel off the quilt maple using a pair of rusty shop scissors and ... j/k copper side dots

Ha! No worries, I'm just considering all options. The way I see it, I've got two viable options: 1.) Nothing 2.) unbind everthing, steam off the top half of the back plate, scrape and reglue 1.5mm forwards. Then recut binding channels all around to take up the extra space behind the top and back curves. I could have a slightly deeper rear binding than the front so it doesn't upset the top carve much. While that's work, the only bad part is potentially jacking up the plate steaming it off. Rebinding slightly thicker using rosewood to match the neck would actually be pretty sweet.

Prostheta - the initial side dye will be the same as the back, but I'm doing it in stages. The ash won't be done with the same schedule as the maples. I've racked my brain thinking of a way I could re-align the back, but I just don't think there is. Even if I pulled the binding, and steamed off the plates, when you aligned them they wouldn't match the body anymore. You could split the difference, but It would still change the shape, and the cavity wouldn't be aligned. If anyone has a suggestion, I'm all ears. This isn't the only mistake and none are huge deal breakers, just an incredible annoyances. But I'm learning tons, this is more than I've done on any other build. For the maple top/backs, typically you would glue up the plates using the two caul technique, and I remember why I didn't. The plates were very thin, and JUST fit the body shape. Because of the heavy quilt, they had a scalloped, non-square edge that i couldn't plane first because it would've made them too small to fit. When I glued the second plate on , I wanted the side to side pressure as well as the top cauls, and you couldn't see if the plate shifted from the top. Lesson learned. I should have created custom cauls to fit the plate edges and still glued them up first as you would normally do.