Mattia

My advice? Either get a vacuum system, practice a lot, and work your way up to veneering curved surfaces (compound curved after simple curved), or just don't veneer and simply carve out of solid wood.

Not quite that simple with all the curves involved, since the offset will move things around. It's almost that simple, though: one template and one router inlay kit (see routerbits.com, woodcraft, rockler, MCLS or any number of other router parts stores.)

One of my quilt sapele acoustic sets. Depending on how you look at it, it's either Darth Vader, or a Ninja Priest.

Axminster.co.uk, and any good local paint store will have stains and dyes.

should be fine.

After. Get the fingerboard on first, otherwise feeling/measuring the right thickness will be a lot more complicated.

Lots of glue joints in the fingerboard, which shouldn't necessarily be an issue, but might be if the joinery's not perfect, glue joints aren't spot on, and/or you have a truss rod that's not done with a fillet strip that applies pressure to the glue joints directly. Only issues I can really think of, and the reason I haven't done bookmatched fretboards yet - I may do in future, as the Allied truss rods are installed with a fillet.

Dugg: I agree the out of phase sounds are very distinctive and very different - the guitar I did them on had Duncan 59's that I could split, parallel or series wire (vintage/low output pickups), but the thing is, while series, parallel and single, and putting the pickups into series (with each other) all work great, as do individual volume controls, I just don't like any of the OOP tones; thin, nasal, hollow. I don't have much use for a old timey radio tone in a live setting, and a good EQ can take care of the rest. Try it out, see if you like it, but I still feel series switching and parallel/single coil options give you the widest variety of useful tones that maintain similar volume levels. Phase switching just didn't work for me, on the guitars I tried it on (the second also had buckers, BTW). May try a brian may style series/phase switching scheme with some brit-style pickups when I get around to it, as maybe it was 'just' the wrong electronics, but I'm not terribly optimistic.

I tend to use rasps for this kind of thing, although I'd probably route it a little thinner if it's a bolt on neck and easily jigged up. To within 1.5mm, anyway. Get the back thickness right, dead on, mark a line down the middle with a pencil, and then shape the curve/neck shape to your liking WITHOUT TOUCHING THE CENTER LINE. Check for straightness with a short rules/straightedge, keep things straight with short flat sanding blocks, and remember that a scraper is a great tool for refinining a carve at the last stages.

Google 'Scary Sharp', and/or look at Ron Hock's website (makes great replacement irons for planes) for information on sharpening. Machine tools are NOT required to keep a tool in tip-top condition, although they can make it an easier job in some cases, and serious regrinding is more fun with something other than your arm doing all the hard work. Assuming your tool is in good shape (ie, the back is perfectly FLAT and polished, the bevel is accurate, and for my money, flat, with a microbevel at the end), 'sharpening' it isn't difficult. I use a combination of diamond stones (flattening), sandpaper and japanese waterstones (honing, depends what I'm in the mood for really/what's around), and a scrap of 1200 grit paper stuck to a scrap of glass on the bench for touch-ups. Because if you want a seriously sharp edge, particularly on a chisel, you need to occasionall (during use) hone the edge just a touch. Makes all the difference in the world. Total investment? Cost of a few sheets of sandpaper you may already have lying around anyway, and some scrap glass from your local glazer/window company if you want a flat bottom. You only need to really flatten the back of your blades (chisel, plane) once, and then 'merely' keep them maintained and flatten them as part of working on the edge. Re: hollow grind, I wouldn't bother, but I don't to machine tools. What the hollow grind does is give you a thinner edge and shallower angle, both of which make the edge MORE vulnerable/prone to dulling/chipping. A microbevel does the opposite, giving you a slightly higher cutting angle and more metal behind the sharp edge - if you can't cut arm hair with it, it could be sharper. Remember - lutherie is different from regular cabinetmaking. It's even more nitpicky than most fine cabinetmaking, and shares a number of characteristics with machining (ie, what other woodworker uses calipers quite so regularly).

Nice work! A query on the side braces: are they tucked into the lining or not? The first ones I did weren't, but I soon changed that after a few people mentioning that they'd had cracks on reinforced sides happen right next to the edge of the lining, which a brace that isn't tucked won't help stop. I personally also thin the ends of the braces (X) down a good bit more (about 1/16" - 1/32" thick) at the ends in the lower bout - I've done it progressively more on each guitar top I've done, and it does open up the bout a decent amount, without really negatively affecting structural stability/strength in the area.

Need pics for repair advice, but the right neck angle is the one that gets your guitar playable, assuming the neck's not twisted/warped/bent.

For german web sources, check holz-faszination.de. Excellent stuff, one of the only suppliers of quilt maple at normal prices in the EU. Any decent lumber yard should stock a few standard guitarbuilding woods.

The three sets screws and a bolt system is rock solid. No less than a regular bolt or set neck system.

He's also in no way the first to do this; there are viennese guitars (Stauffer) from the late 19th century with adjustable necks with single bolt adjustments, and more recent incarnations predating Kelly's mechanical system include Mike Doolin and Harry Fleishmann, and a very similar system to the Kelly one is being used by McPherson Guitars. And plenty of acoustic builders (smaller) are building some version of an adjustable joint. My current acoustic (thred in the acousttic section) has 3 setscrews to ride on and two fastening bolts, which allow side to side and angle adjustment.. The advantage for an acoustics are real and multiple: 1) No need for neck resets 2) You can set the saddle height optimally, exactly how you want it for best downward pressure and tone, and adjust the action without having to file the saddle 3) As the top moves after stringing up, or over the seasons due to temp and humidity shifts, you can easily fix the action. It's unnecessary for an electric; you've got an adjustable bridge. Acoustics don't, so having a system that allows easy, gradual, precise adjustment of neck angles is a definite benefit.

the intonation adjustment at the nut is useful and effective on a guitar, and is not snake oil. What Buzz feiten has done is create a very specific set of measurements and patent those. No need to use it to get good results, though.

apply, level, repeat until it's perfectly smooth and level.

Oil gives it a nice, woody feel, although I am quite partial to grain filled high gloss on swamp ash...

If you want stabilised wood, contact Larry Davis at Gallery Hardwoods..

Yes, top of the bridge, no saddle installed. I'm still a bit confused about what kind of neck joint you've got...have a picture?

Shim to set the action right, assuming the bridge is where you want it - at least 1/8@ of protruding saddle, and at least that amount (preferably more) embedded in the bridge - and then shave the neck/heel until it sits properly. At least, I'm assuming you have a mortise/tenon bolt on joint and not some weird Fender-style bolt on in an acoustic setup, in which case shimming would be a good option. For future reference, draw out the side profile. I've yet to see an acoustic guitar without some sort of neck angle. They've pretty much all got some back set. I usually final-adjust/set the neck angle when the bridge is glued on, and set the straightedge to hit the top of the bridge when its resting on the fretboard (fretted).

If you shorten the top part, you risk having to re-thread/deepen the bolt holes that fasten it to the plate. I'd work on the bottom. Easier to drill a couple of spring holes deeper than it is to re-tap. Also, you want to make sure the plate/block joint remains perfectly stable/square/solid. I wouldn't trust a belt sander to do that. Just to state the obvious: don't use dust collection when you sand metal. Not unless you want to ignite the airborne sawdust in your collector with sparks.

I sometimes make templates, and sometimes freehand cavities that aren't going to be visible. Templates is safer, though.

1. Don't use pumice, just sand the oil (ie, wet-sand with oil) so the sawdust slurry gets into the pores. 2. No need to finish the inside.

Easy enough to shorten, and it doesn't mean you're going to hit the pickup cavity - the Explorer I'm building is a little to thin to fit the springs AND a recessed trem cover, so I've filed the block down a little. Only possible 'problem' is that you're decreasing the length of the lever arm the springs are acting on, ergo more springs may be required/stiffer springs may be needed.