daveq

I'm not worried unless I'm called to tour with G3 next summer. I guess I won't be worried then. It was interesting that neither glue is resistent to movement although the original is commonly thought of as a much better glue to use. Not what I was expecting.

This was started in another topic concerning body blank joining. The issue of glue types came up and it was said that TitebondII may not be a good choice. To sum it up for those who don't have time to read everything - Titebond (original) is not any better at avoiding "creep". I asked the manufacturer about this and got some interesting info. The first message was in reply to my question concerning "creep" associated with TitebondII: Thank you for your inquiry regarding Titebond II. Titebond II creates a strong bond, but not one that is rigid or brittle. Titebond II can creep if the glue line is under a long term high load. This creep could be aggravated by high temperature and or a thicker glue line. A thicker glue line would have less strength and be more capable of movement. The recommended service temperature for Titebond II is between -20°F and 120°F. At temperatures around 150°F, Titebond II can begin to soften and lose strength. We would not expect a guitar assembled with Titebond II to creep while stored in good conditions. I hope this information is helpful to you. The next is the reply I got when asking if using Titebond (original) would help prevent the "creep": Titebond Original Wood Glue would not be any more creep resistant than Titebond II. Although, Titebond Original is used by many guitar manufacturers. A wood glue of ours that is considered creep resistant would be Titebond Extend Wood Glue. This product is used for assemblies where the glue line is under a lot of stress, like bent handrails. I hope this helps. Marc Bergdahl Franklin International

Here's what the Titebond people had to say. Now I can see why people say it's OK for guitars already built but maybe try Titebond (original) for future guitars. Thank you for your inquiry regarding Titebond II. Titebond II creates a strong bond, but not one that is rigid or brittle. Titebond II can creep if the glue line is under a long term high load. This creep could be aggravated by high temperature and or a thicker glue line. A thicker glue line would have less strength and be more capable of movement. The recommended service temperature for Titebond II is between -20°F and 120°F. At temperatures around 150°F, Titebond II can begin to soften and lose strength. We would not expect a guitar assembled with Titebond II to creep while stored in good conditions. I hope this information is helpful to you. Sincerely, Franklin International

The stewmac pattern cutting bits are great because of their short depth. Pattern cutting bits are very hard to find that are less than 3/4" in depth. KrazyDerek found a place that sells them for less than stewmac's huge price. I have not bought them yet so I don't know what the quality is. Let him know if anyone plans on buying them - I guess the shipping charge to Canada is large. Here's the place Derek found: Pattern Bits

Thanks for the info. For the stacked type, would I need to route deeper than normal? Any idea if the humbucking mode is as good as a normal HB? (This is for the neck position pickup.)

Setch, yes I am a member and I'll take a look. Thanks for the info. I've also requested some info from Titebond on this (who knows, maybe it will be worth it?). The only reason I am asking all of this is so I can sleep at night knowing that my first guitar isn't going to fall apart on me (it's my favorite so far). The joints were very hard to see and I thought I was in good shape right up until I saw that chart in the mimf FAQ. That's when I asked about it and got that reply. Jehle, what do you think happened with the first attempt?

I'm not arguing for using Titebond II but after reading the mimf info I got the impression that each "common" glue had issues that made it not suitable for guitar building. I asked if I should be concerned since I built one using Titebond II and they said it would be fine. Maybe the person who told me that was wrong. I haven't seen any problems with it yet but who knows. I'd really like to see some hard facts on this topic if anyone has them. The reports of the glue failing are reason for concern. It would be nice to know for sure. The block plane or jointer seems like the right answer for the joint though.

I'm looking for a passive pickup that may act as either a single or humbucker (in a single coil size). I know EMG has a pickup that is a single coil size that can also act as a humbucker but do other mfgs. have them also? If so, what do you think of them?

Wow, that's great. Thank you. I was really hoping for something a bit less than that in terms of $$$ but I guess you get what you pay for.

Has anyone here played a PRS with the PRS trem? If so, what do you think of them? I'm not looking for a dive bomber but I would like to have something that can add a little expression. I've been looking around for what I can buy that would be similar to the PRS trem but I'm not sure what to expect from something like the Wilkinson or others.

The Kotch book verifies what was said above pretty much. He says to place all of the saddles towards the neck and then place the bridge at the scale length. The saddles are then moved back when setting the intonation to make up for the increase in pitch caused by pressing down on the strings. I guess the major manufacturers like the one I posted a link to above use the slant to gain a little extra room for intonation?

Here's something to look at in the mean time. I apologize if this is information you already know and I'm not helping. This is a picture of a bridge which I think is mounted at a slight angle : Pic of Bridge I will check my books anyway.

I don't have any experience with that type of bridge but I will check my books in about 1 hr. and let you know if I find anything. My concern would be that a straight bridge (perpendicular to the center line) would give you max adjustment for the lower E but not for the upper strings since they are typically set close towards the neck. I think this is why some hard tails are mounted at an angle further away from the neck for the low E. Again, I don't know this for sure but I will look into it and let you know what I find. Dave

What type of bridge are you using?

Does anyone know where I can buy a truss rod cover similar to the Ibanez type? The covers sold by stewmac don't work well with a string retainer bar and the Gibson style doesn't look right for the guitars I am building. The Ibanez cover can be removed without having to remove the retainer - that's the biggest issue I have with the stewmac covers. I guess I could just make my own, but I wanted to see if anyone knew of some other options. Thanks, Dave

I have Melvin's book and a book by Martin Koch. Having both of them has helped me out of a few jams since they cover things a little differently. There are also some videos available but I don't know if they are worth the money. The Martin Koch book is available through amazon and stewmac. I don't know if those places are any good for someone in the U.K.? The people here at ProjectGuitar have given the most valuable advice of any of the resources I have. There are other guitar build sites but this one is far superior in my opinion. One thing that always kills me when building - don't rush! Pretty much avery time I try to hurry through something, I screw it up and have to start over. Good luck with your project, I'm sure you will love it.

OK, thanks. I guess I have a hard time understanding your comments. No "pique" happening here - just trying to make two points - maple could work, distorted sound isn't without tone. The god and barrier comments lead me to believe that I may have offended you - my replies were not intended to do this.

I guess I don't understand what that comment meant then. If you are saying that you cannot hear a difference in the maple bodies, that's fine, but it sounded like you had a problem with the "highly distorted" sound. I felt the need to say this since it sounded like you were putting down the heavy distortion sound as if it has no tone worth talking about. Maybe I misunderstood? I don't know if a maple body will make a difference. I am willing to accept George's comment as truth when he says it does make a difference and I wanted to help bring this up since it is such an unusual body wood for that style of music.

Everyone hears music a bit differently. I'm not going to drag this conversation out since it was supposed to be centered on the type of wood to be used BUT since someone felt the need to slam on that style of music: I'm sure you realize that whatever your favorite style of music or favorite "sound" from a guitar is, there will be others who will not think much of it. What I find boring and lifeless may be what you find to be tone-rich and exciting. I happen to enjoy listening to older Lynch music and players like Joe Satriani. They both use the "saturated" sound but I personally don't think that makes their sound any less special than a cleaner sound. The first person to post this topic was asking about a "Heavy" sound as I recall. My replies were intended to help this person with ideas on what wood can be used for what I consider to be "Heavy". My point, again, was to consider Maple even though many would discount it for a heavy sound.

If you have George's Bible video, he describes how he gets his sound and he attributes most of it to the maple body. This was before he had the screamon demon pickups - he was using a SD distortion with some mods. Check it out if you are into George's music at all - it's very inspiring.

My point in my earlier reply was that a "Heavy" sound can come from wood that is not supposed to be a "Bassy" wood. George Lynch uses maple guitars and you can't tell me he doesn't have a heavy sound (at least he did back with Dokken). If I were to ask if I should use maple for a metal guitar, most people would probably say no, but it works. My vote would still probably be Alder since I know it sounds great for that style, but don't be afraid to try something else.

I have built a guitar with a maple neck, brazilian rosewood fretboard, alder body, with EMG 81/85's. It blows my Ibanez away - it sounds and feels great. I'm two more - one with a mahagony body with maple top, and one with a maple body and maple neck. The all maple body will be similar to George Lynch's guitars (George's Guitars). The terms people use to describe sounds make it impossible to have an intelligent conversation about them. I wish there were some standard such as a frequency response curve similar to what is used in the audio industry - oh well. My idea of heavy is George Lynch's Dokken days. My Alder guitar does a great job and I am looking forward to seeing what the Maple/Maple combo does since this is what his guitars are made of. My experience has also shown that pickups play a large role in the sound produced. Everyone has their own preferences - I took a chance on EMG's and I am very glad I did. Good luck.

I have a guitar that I built with an EXG in it with an 81 and 85. If you are still having trouble, I can at least tell you how the EXG is wired (hoping that the SPC wires the same way). It's a bit of a pain to get at it so let me know if you still need help. Dave

Aw, crap! That article is right here in the tutorial section of ProjectGuitar. Since I started this topic, if anyone has used this method and has anything to add or say about it, please let me know. Sorry for the confusion on my part. Dave

I thought I read somewhere that it is common for maple tops to be stained with a combination of black and whatever the main color is? If so, do you know how you keep the black from dominating the finish? From what I remember, I thought they said you should try to get the black into the "lower" areas of the maple and get the main color everywhere else but I don't have any idea how that is done. Does this sound right? Do you know where I can find more info on this?