JonnyC

Absolutely fantastic. Your son will be thrilled i'm sure. Bring on the next creation Love to see a PRS 7 string

Don't patronise me If you ask a rhetorical question, you shouldn't expect an answer. But as you're asking, i'll entertain it.

Yes, my signiture is there to show support to a good group of guys of which i, and many others here share a similar interest.

Its hard to imagine you're actually an adult rhoads56. Bum slapped in other thread? By who...

You're someone quite special, you really are. Any form of confrontation on these boards and you're in there. Even when theres nothing going on you'll start all the same.

And whats this about advertising? Whats that under your name? "Mods confirm" Jeez, you really do sound like the kid at school with no mates except teacher... Tbh, i'm really suprised you'd want to advertise your business when you're attitude on these boards stinks.

oooo nothing like a bit of suspense.... i bet he'll sleep well tonight

Interesting results, thanks for posting pictures. To me it looks a little messy. I know it was one of your first attempts using the machine, were you rushing at all? There seems to be quite a few deepish passes on the right half of the pic. The centre to left looks a lot cleaner Also, i could be totally wrong here, and i'm not sure if it would make much of a difference but i notice you routed length ways on the neck? Although i don't own or have never used a dupli-carver, from any videos of seen with one in use they always tend to use small pass side to side over the profile.

Very impressed. I've been looking into making one of these for quite a while now. Just outta interest, where did you source the hardened rods and bearings from?

Sweet job on the inlays, very clean

Very nice work!

just wondering if you be rounding off the top of that carve at all? I think it would look nicer with one smooth consistant contour across the top, looks a bit flat atm.

Great looking instrument, very nice work! Just wondering what happened in the first attempt to finish the guitar? Pic 76 etc, did it get dropped? :o

I did make one screw up though. I was using a 24.75 scale layout and the board I got from stew mac was laid out to 24.562. Anyway I have a couple of fret markers that will be off center. Oh well next time I will slot my own board.

Yeah the 24.562 had me stumped for ages. I just finished building a Les Paul and i bought an ebony fingerboard from Stew Mac. For ages i was trying to think of workaround as Gibson state a scale length of 24.75. It's amazing what stupidity can do though, i own a Gibson Les Paul, and it didn't dawn on me for a long time to actually check the scale length on it! Turns out Gibsons use 24.562 and the 24.75 is just a reference really. http://www.stewmac.com/fretscales

I must say, CNC produces some very clean work, i'm very impressed with your work so far, looking forward to the end result!

Nice job on the guitar, thats some exotic wood you've got right there , i too would love to know what she sounds like

No no, i didn't mean to confuse. I wasn't setting out to make a true replica of a 59, just took the long neck tenon, which i consider to be the most characteristic aspect of a 59, and conbine it with the large head on a deluxe with a studio type body

Right okay, after much thinking, i've decided i am going to contact the guy thats finishing the guitar to get the Gibson logo taken out. I will however keep Les Paul model on there unless anyone really see's a problem with that too?

I recognise both sides of the argument but the bottom line for me is, i like it here!, i plan to make more guitars, and i don't want my name tarnished because of my first build.

Also, i'm not desperate to have Gibson on the headstock, as i already own Gibson Les Pauls.

I will be sure to post pic's at the end of Jan, early Feb when i get her back. (Nitro takes some time )

I hope you all will no longer have an issue with this..

Here's an idea: if you don't want to catch a bunch of crap over using a stolen trademark, just don't show pics of it.

I can agree with that. Didn't realize how upset people would get about this. I've learnt my lesson on that one and for that i apologise.

Great story....

To me there's something more important than the name here with regards to fraud, the guitars shape / build contours etc. The essence of the actual piece is more important than the name, the only reason you're picking on this is because it's the only thing you can as the LP / Strat etc has been copied a million times over already and to attack from this angle... well, where do you begin? Other than aesthetics, one of the reasons the Les Paul had a carved top in the first place was to make it harder to copy. I suggest you get down from your high horse for a second and look at the guitars you have on your site. As much as i respect your work as a luthier, the majority are copies of already successful brands. Just because they have Ormsby on the head, doesn't make it any better in my mind.

Don't just jump on the band wagon attacking one element of copyright, because you missed out the main bit, the design. Because you are guilty of this yourself, i really don't think you should be giving lectures on the matter.

Why do you have a copy of RR Polka Dot on your site? For the same reason great guitars get replica's made, People wanna live the dream!

Thanks Matt for your kind words.

And i do appreciate comments good or bad, thats why i am here. Although i haven't posted much, i've used the forums extensivly for research / techniques etc for a while now, and for that i thank you all. I just didn't want to get into a debate over a name and rather more focus on the build.

Anyway, tis all good learning. My next creation will be a cross between a San Dimas and an N4 (as Bill Lawrence sent me the 500XL not long ago ). So to keep all you professional luthiers happy, no controversial names will be placed on this one

rhoads56, i appreciate your comments and understand where you are coming from, but quite frankly there's no reason to talk down to someone treating them like a kid.

The reason this guitar says Gibson on the top is precisely because i respect the brand. You talk about professional luthiers not having respect for the heritage of a brand, quite frankly, thats a bit deep, i'm just asking the guy to paint something.

Theres absolutly no point spouting out stuff to do with heritage etc when you're talking about big corparations though. They are there to make money, from selling a quality product. The only time Gibson mention heritage and their roots these days are when they are trying to sell you a Custom Shop/Historic model.

Another reason your comments frustrate me is because being a left handed player, it is very difficult to get guitars i like, most of which aren't even produced, why? becuase it doesn't make good financial sense to companies, hardly fair on the consumer though.

Slash played a replica Les Paul with Gibson on the headstock for years, i don't think Gibson lost much sleep over that. Because of him the amount of money Gibson must have made is immense.

With regards to fraud etc, you have a valid point, but it is only valid if i sold the guitar without telling the buyer it wasn't actually made in Nashville, or if i was a company churning these things out under false pretences.

I have a whole lot of respect for the original Les Paul era, i just wish they put as much time and effort into their Standard lines these days. Everyone knows the 59' was a cracker, so wots with Standards these days having weight relief holes in the body and not having long neck tenons?

My name will not be on the head purely because i believe it is just as much as a crime. The design is that of an exact Les Paul, with my name on the head it would be suggesting i came up with the guitar. If i had altered the shape etc then yes my name would be up there but Gibson / Les Paul deserve the credit, it would be like putting a Fiat badge on a Ferrari.

It an age old debate i don't think will ever be settled, so lets just leave it at that. Everyones entitled to their own opinions. Comments/critism on the build would be much more useful. Thankyou

Removed due to people crying to much...

Just for reference

Gibson Logo To Be Removed

Thats great Rokeros. Very informative, thankyou!

I'm just searching for a bit more information on this matter as i can't seem to find the answers to my questions.

One of my Les Paul's Clicky is currently in the spray shop. I've always wondered about the headstock on them. The guitar in the pick above was in pretty bad shape, there are several chips to the finish on the headstock. This reveals that there seems to be some sort of cover (about 2mm thick) that goes ontop of the head which has the Gibson, and Les Paul Model logos on.

For this guitar its not a problem as it will just be refinished, but for some of my other guitars that are in a bad way, are these Clicky sort of things the same material Gibson themselves use?

Or maybe even Clicky

Does anyone have any thoughts towards restoration on LP heads?

Many thanks

I'm no wood expert but i've had a look through the reference section trying to determine which wood this may be.

Clicky

Obviously African My question is do you think this would make a nice wood for a LP type guitar?

Thanks

Nitro 3 - Poly 0 :o

Thanks for your help guys. Just to clear up, i'm not doing this bit of work myself, it is going to be professionally done. I'll let ya know how she turns out

Tnx

Howdy folks

As the title states, i'm currently debating whether to have my LP refished in nitro cellulose or poly. I've had a few goes at building guitars myself and finshing has never been my strong point. Haven't got the patience As she's my pride and joy, i've decided to send her in to have the job done professionally.

Ive heard the downsides to nitro, that being it fades over time (is that really a bad thing? :o) and also chips and marks very easily. On the other hand i have the option of Poly which isnt exactly authentic to Gibson but is a lot harder wearing.

Any thoughts are very much welcomed on the matter

P.S. This is what she looks like atm

http://www.jc0r.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/lespaul.jpg

Sad i know Please don't ask about the sanding on the top, only that the guitar used to belong to my younger brother :/

And heres the finish i'm going for, being plain top n all.

http://www.jc0r.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/2001-...paul-classi.jpg

Its a guitar im currenty renovating. Only just started applying the primer but i gonna make her white anyway.

It's and old Jackson PS4 similar to

http://www.acclaimedart.com/ps4.JPG

except left handed. Neck and middle pickups suck so bad and i figured i could use a guitar just for shredding to add to my collection. So why no go for the minimalist look.

He's what she looks like so far

http://www.acclaimedart.com/white.JPG

Thanks for your help by the way

Yeah its a X500 XL from Bill n Becky I haven't got it yet still waiting but im told the Reds the output, Blacks the ground and i link White and Green together. Do i just connect the ground from my trem straight to the jack?