Stolysmaster

If you're going to Kinman for the noiseless design, there's something you should know: Bill Lawrence holds the patent for the SCN Noisless design. He designed them for Fender, makes his own brand of them, and Kinman uses the same concepts. Now, I'm NOT bad-mouthing Kinman at all. I'm sure his pups sound great. All I'm saying is if it's nosless pups you're looking for, you might be better off going to the guy who designed them. They'd be a dang-sight cheaper as well. Bill Lawrence does not make a P-90 type pickup, to the best of my knowledge. And for Strat style, having played two of his models and played Kinman's too, I prefer the sound of the Kinmans. Thanks for the input though.

I thought the rout for a P-90 was longer (E to E) than a humbucker? Maybe I'm wrong about that.

Michael has used different pickups at different times through the years. I'm not sure about No. 1, but the info on that website mentioned is what I seem to remember as well. Although, his UFO sound is very different from his MSG sound sometimes. A lot of the MSG stuff was done with Duncan Custom/Duncan '59 pickups, and you can difinitely hear that Duncan Custom (bridge) ceramic magnet sound with a lot of the MSG albums recorded in the 80's. Interestingly, when he re-joined UFO in the mid 90's his sound changed back to being similar to his sound on the last few UFO albums in the 70's, but even better! Check out the "Walk on Water" CD...his best sound ever, I think. That is my favorite of his sounds, personally. That might be either a stock USA Gibson Alnico low-mid output pickups, or the ones that he had made in Japan that are basically slightly hot Gibson PAF style pickups. I would be surprised if his UFO sound is from a Duncan Custom...but it might be!? And I think his current sound, using the Dean pickups is his WORST sound ever!! But really, Schenker could play a cardboard guitar with lipstick pickups and still make it sound great, in my opinion. Good luck getting him to tell you the actual truth about what he used when, even if he can remember.

Yeah, me too....because if I rout for them and install them, then don't like them, although I can sell them on ebay and take a financial loss, I will have pickup cavities that will only accomodate a P-90...and I HATE TRUE SINGLE COIL HUM!!! I'll be screwed.

Definitely, I will Keegan. Joe at Kinman just wrote to tell me that they will probably cost about $160 each (WOW!!) when they are available in about four weeks. It will probably be about 2-3 months to completion though. Seeing how you live just down the road from Firestone, I could even let you see it person when its done if you like!

Thought I would post some pics of my current project, as the body and neck are close to completion. The penciled in pickups on the body may be premature, because now I'm thinking about using the soon to be released Kinman noiseless P-90 Hx pickups for the bridge and neck, with a Kinman AVN-69 Strat P/U in the middle; controlled by a 5-way Strat switch. I should mention that the neck was just made by Doug@Soulmate with the Triqueta inlays by Brian England's Custom Inlay. Great job Doug! The penciled in Thor's Hammer will be made of some VERY, VERY thin MOP veneer I've seen for sale on ebay. http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1274_edited.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1272_edited.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1271_edited.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1277_edited.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1280_edited.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1278_edited.jpg

Wow, Terry. You're the man! That's just the anwer I was looking for, Thanks so much. I'm guessing that by "center of treble side of bridge", you mean the center of the travel screw of the high E saddle, right? That would be a straight line to the pole piece. When it's done I'll certainly post pics. I have not decided on the finish color yet. The 1/4" thick flat top is a pretty flamey curly maple. I am thinking about a wine red top, natural faux binding, and natural back and neck. My other choice is dark brown stain on the top, then sand back and re-stain the top in yellow/gold. Also, don't know whether to go with cream or black pickups. I'm open to suggestions. I will now try to post some pics of the body and neck so far on the "In progress" section of the forum.

Thanks for that info Keegan. I'm just wondering if that differs from the measurement on a full size (you know what I mean), carved top Les Paul w/P90's?

And I gave a simple, and reasonable answer. I am not trying to "copy" a Les Paul w/P-90's guitar. I believe I used the term "close to". If I was trying to "copy" that guitar, that is what I would be building. However, with the Mahogany back, Maple top, and mahogany neck w/rosewood fingerboard, TOM bridge, aluminum stop tailpiece, P-90 PUPS, and 24.75" scale, etc., the odds are that it will sound somewhat close to a Les Paul with P-90's when I am done. Probably more so than it will like a Strat, SG, Flying V or Firebird or 335. I did not set out to "copy" that particular style of Les Paul or sound though. I am just trying to get the bridge pickup position close to that type of Les Paul, because the guitar is being designed to sound "more like" a Les Paul w/P-90's rather than say, a junior or SG with P-90's. I think that Gibson got the P-90 bridge pickup position pretty much "right" with the P-90 Les Paul. Thats all. I am fully aware of all of the components that make up and contribute to the overall sound of a guitar. And, my 40+ years of playing experience and experimenting tells me that bridge pickup placement can certainly amount to more than "small stuff".

just more to cut, ugh Yeah, the more time I spend with a mower in my hands, the leass time with a guitar in my hands!

i used the junior as an example because it shows what was influencing gibsons decisions. it certainly wasnt sound! your best bet would be to look at some photos of a les paul gold top, measure a p-90 and compare the distances in a few photos to the known width of a p-90. at least that is what i would do if i was trying to be exactly like a vintage gold top without having a vintage gold top to measure Thanks for this suggestion; I have determined distances for things in the past by using good pictures, taken straight on before. I was just hoping someone here might have a P-90 equiped Les Paul of this style to measure quickly.

It's a Texas Mossman, built in Dallas (fairly humid) in 1985. I moved here in 1987, 1 1/2 years later. But it has been fine this long though, so... Yeah, about the recent moisture here, my grass is loving it!

Why? When I said "exact distance" I meant within about 1/16". Because I have found that changing the distance from the bridge pickup to the bridge (at least with HB pickups) makes a noticable difference in tone depending on where it is placed, all other things being equal. I have only experimented with humbuckers in this regard, and this will be my first P-90 style guitar. I know that Gibson has used different distances as noted by someone else's post, but I would like to get close to the sound of a Gold Top or equivalent P-90 equiped Les Paul (not a Jr.).

I just got my second neck from Doug at Soulmate; beautiful wood and work! He made the custom headstock on the first one just like I wanted. I wanted the neck back shape on the second one a little rounder and he got it perfect. I highly recommend Doug, and he is just a great guy as well. Robert

I've been here (Boulder/Denver/Firestone) for 22 years and the top on my acoustic has not cracked yet. But now you have me scared!!!

I've tried to search for the answer here, but I'm not having any luck. Can someone please tell me the correct location for a P-90 in the bridge position of a Les Paul? I'm going to be routing for pickups soon for my Explorer EC project and have decided to use the new Kinman P-90 Hx pickups in the neck and bridge positions with a Kinman 69 Strat P/U in the middle position, in conjunction with a 5-way Strat switch. I am looking for the exact distance between the middle (length & width) of a tune-o-matic bridge and the axis line connecting the centers of the pole pieces on a P-90. Any help? Thanks.

Thanks for all the ideas guys. In the end I decided to sand around the guitar with 60 grit, then 100 grit to remove enough wood and get rid of the gap. It worked, and the body looks fine. I will now be able to use my natural binding idea as originally planned. It took me three hours...then four ibuprofen and 4oz. of vodka mixed with cranberry juice for my right elbow! Thanks again for the suggestions, it gave me lots to think about. I will catalog those ideas for future projects. Now, if I can get someone to answer my question in another post about MOP veneer, and whether anyone has ever used it...........

I like that rolled edge on your guitar, however, if I did a rolled edge like that I would have to start at least 3/8" down from the top, and I just don't think that is the look I'm after on this guitar. I do like the idea of a thin strip of black in the gap, but I would have to rout for it evenly all the way around, as my gap does not even exist all the way around. So, if I'm going to rout for binding of any sort, I might as well just bind it from the top of the side down to where the bevel starts on the mahogany. BUT, 3/8" is pretty wide binding! Even if I could find it, I''m not sure I would like the look. Maybe I'm back to routing for the black stripe between the maple and the mahogany. Or, just try sanding the sides down far enough to remove the bevel. I'm not sure what is the least amount of work, while maintaining an attractive outcome.

Here is a link to two pictures showing the dried glue in the gap. The gap is not as wide as you might think on the first look, the dark streak in the mahogany is misleading. You can see that the gap is really only as wide as the glue that is visible. I don't want to rout a binding channel all the way around the guitar. I'm planning on having natural "faux" binding using the maple unstained. http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...1245_edited.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j34/Stol...44_edited-1.jpg

No separating, just the remaining original bevel on the mahogany creating a gap when the flat maple piece was glued on top. Should I fill the gaps with sanding dust completely first, then try and get it to absorb the CA? Seems like I would need a lot of CA to absorb all the way into the dust and stick to the insides of the gap...?

What about peanut butter? Should I try that? OK, I know...I just said that to try and generate some responses. Any ideas?

I recently saw some genuine Mother of Pearl "veneer" being sold on ebay. The auction says it is .2mm thick and can be covered with a few coats of finish, then sanded level and recoated to desired finish thickness. I'm thinking about trying to use this on my current project to cut a small "Thor's hammer" out and glue it to the stained body below the tailpiece before finishing with clear nitro. I have never done any inlay work before and would not want to attempt using a dremmel for inlaying on this project...too easy to screw it up without any prior experience! So when I saw this MOP veneer I thought it might be an alternative; all I would have to do is cut out my shape and glue it on! I worry about it being so thin though, would the stained wood show through and give it a darker look? Any comments? Has anyone ever used this stuff before?

I'm in the middle of my Explorer EC project and I have a problem. The twenty eight year old one piece mahogany body I'm using started to warp after it arrived here in Colorado after many years in a humid environment. That was about six-seven years ago. When I finally got around to starting this project it was so warped that I had to have it sanded down on the top side significantly. I wanted a finished thickness of 1 5/8" so I bought a very nice piece of 1/4" AAA flamed maple to put on the top. The original beveled edges around the top side of the mahogany had a very large radius, and the the guy doing the work thought it was more important to end up with my stated desired overall thinkness after the maple top was glued on, than to notice that the mahogany was not sanded down enough to totally remove the bevel. Well, now there is a gap around the sides of the guitar body (in some places, but not all the way around), between the mahogany and the maple! In some spots it seems to be at least 1/32" deep into the body. Now, I could try to sand the entire body down all around the edge to get rid of it, but that would make the body smaller and I might not be able to have it sanded uniformly all the way around, causing it to look slightly "off". My thoughts are that the simplest solution would be to fill the gaps with some sort of permanant wood filler that would remain hard and intact. I plan to use a transparent stain on the guitar, so if whatever filler I use does not take the stain the same as the mahogany does, I will just make it dark enough on the mahogany so it will not be noticed. What type of wood filler should I use to accomplish this? Any suggestions please??

I thought that you would have located the bridge and tailpiece, and drilled holes for their studs, before routing the bridge pickup cavity. That way the bridge pickup is the exact distance away from the saddles that you want it to be. Maybe you just marked for the bridge with a pencil line and located the bridge pickup cavity from there. Obviously, you are a lot more experienced at this than I, but I was just wondering how you went about locating the bridge pickup cavity.

OK, I'll use superglue. But,...which one? I believe it comes in several viscosities, even at Home Depot. Any suggestions?