mistermikev

good to know... have never played any of them, but it def looks nice.

sorry to hear about the back... here's to mending quick. your headstock always reminds me of the ankh. Of the three... I like the middle shape best in the first photo. Think it looks better in the cherry burst than the 'tv yellow' but black is always a popular choice. "is it normal" - well I hope so... but if not then we are both abnormal so at least we're not alone!

your 2 cents is always welcome and probably given the idea exchange rate - worth at least... well... lets say 89 cents. 9 degrees was just me being silly because I have a "9 degree sized beer belly" (see scottr post b4 that)! actual was 4 deg altho now you've got me thinking perhaps that'd be kinda cool. as you've stated... hard to predict the 'feel' as for me it requires actually playing - not just sitting with a mocked up dummy - to tell if I like it. Might have to entertain bigger angle on a future build - maybe not 9, but perhaps 6 or 7 just to see. good info regarding two possible planes... I think ad may have mentioned this as well... didn't realize it was a thing. Something to remember for future builds for sure. thanks for the reply.

wutRuTryinDaSay? on an unrelated note going with a 9 degree neck break angle here...

as mentioned by many I'd def work off of some sort of plan - a lot of your fretboard length questions can be answered (with no math!) via the 'fret2find' portlet here on the forum. Its a browser app that will calc out fret sizes ect and create a pdf/jpg. I'd start there... create an image of your fretboard and build the body around it. I've build a 32" scale bass, and it's awful comfy compared to a 34... a 30 should be pretty small. I don't think reinforcement would necc be required given such a short scale... but it probably doesn't hurt. I would think your big hurdle is going to be 30" scale + low b string - she is going to be very low tension. at that point you start thinking about really high gauge strings and we're back to needing reinforcement. anywho... welcome aboard!

well... I would find which part is out of spec... is the actual pocket wrong, or is the heel of the neck wrong? whichever part I'd measure how far it is off and mark that as a line to correct to. I'm not big on using hand tools to fix things because I just think it's harder to be consistent... but plenty of folks make that work for them. if pocket - I would use my router plane. If I didn't have that I'd just put a piece of mdf on the top of the guitar and use a shim to get the right angle. if the neck heel... again I'd just use my router plane but I've seen a guy take a vise, put the neck in it with just a smidg sitting proud of it and use a belt sander... the vice preventing the belt sander from going lower than the plane you want.

well fsb members generally don't regard this circuit so much as good... but more the idea of posting something new and interesting (back 6-7 years ago?) gets hoops and hurrays. I think part of it is they just love to debunk that anything with widespread commercial success is anything more than "magic beans". I know there were a few well known members that chimed in on the thread at the time, but no one even mentioned this so... suggests it may have been right then. then again... those guys abso hate the clapton mud boost... yet a lot of great guitar players love it so... sometimes I think they are the reverse of folks who think "it's expensive and well recieved so it must be good" in that they think "it's expensive and well received so it must be bad!".

right on... I have drooled over many-a-ebay-listing from kimbal. Haven't snagged anything as I've got similar deals elsewhere but one of these day's it's bound to happen. They do seem to regularly get amazing stuff! I def appreciate you sharing! also... is that paul bunyan holding an axe in one hand and... well... an axe in the other hand? cudos!

well... catching it now you have lots of options to correct so... perhaps for once my musings actually had a positive impact! cheers

holy crap... excuse me while I recover from that flamed maple... SOURCE PLEASE! Like what you are doing there with the binding too... that all is going to tie together nicely. Vcool. Look fwd to watching your build.

thank you both again... thank you very much for the replies!

https://www.emgpickups.com/pa2.html well... you can see it is physically different on rcustom's layout... and this was posted in a place where it got hoops and hurrays by some folks whom I KNOW know what their doing... so it gave me pause, then mentalpause, then self doubt. Usually someone would catch something like that so I wondered if perhaps they changed their quick connect connections at some point. oh, I would not use quick connect... it's not even on my board... it was more me being unsure of myself and not wanting to go thru an entire etch and assembly to find out I had something wrong... which I totally anticipated doing... but am very thankful for the feedback/confirmation.

hehe, in laymens: prevents poppy.

for the record I would toss likes on all other replies here but I'm out again. originally my link did display and once I actually posted it dissappeared... I just assumed for some reason it couldn't display it - sorry - missed that one. Hehe, you are a smarty pants. I actually did the entire layout and had omitted the second half(buffer) and it's parts but decided I'd add it back in since who knows... maybe I start playing arenas and have 50ft cables to endure! so stupid... I'll actually populate those components and never use them altho i could just skip that section. input resistance... could be raised to 1m - good call. that's a pretty detailed interpretation. thank you for that. opa chip... would have to check the pinout but it's pretty std. I think many would work... 2134? but may opt for the lower draw as in a tl062 a battery will last years and I oft forget to remove the cable... and I have a gaggle of them. thank you again for the reply!

thank you very much for the reply and detailed info. The reason I won't use their layout is A) it's SMD and gosh I hate working with that stuff with my sausage fingers! and B ) a layout is protected as artwork by copyright. - Don't want to go there. C) I don't want to use a toggle, nor do I want to have their buffer on when not in operation... I freq use fuzz pedals and want to be able to completely hardwire bypass the circuit and maintain the passive sound... plus wanted to have access to the crazy amount of boost via a vol knob (push pull) wow, you actually digested my layout... cripes... that makes my head spin! Bravo. Yes, I'm completely bypassing the buffered part and would send pin 5 to ground (prob not even nec)... but who knows, perhaps in some circuit I want to add a toggle and put in three wires - replacing the jumpers, and be able to go to buffered.

funny I saw this on facebook earlier today and was like "I like what you did there with the fork and knife"... shame on me for not throwing a like at it (I might have... don't recall). long story long - I like it.

so jacking around tonight working on my own push/pull version of the pa2. There is a well known schematic and layout link below. Here's me admitting what I know and what I don't know about the schematic... so the thing I'm unsure of is the sv1 which is an emg quick connect. I have no use for that so don't want it in my layout. looking at that pin header here's how I understand it: sv1-5 appears to be the output which is selecting on s1 between a amp that is boosted via R4 resistance, and another amp that has no boost factor between pins 6 and 7 on the TL062. So that amp is functioning as a unity buffer. on sv1-4 and 3 are obviously to ground. sv1-2 is on the back side of a polarity protection diode that would feed any further circuitry 9 volts. sv1-1 is our input as it seems to have a pull down resistor of 499k going to ground, then a hi pass filter followed by vb... then feeding into both the buffer and the booster. so my question is: do I have those connections right because according to the commercial version website that quick connector on the below schematic is wired wrong. Perhaps they were wired dif in the past? below is my version setup to work off of a 500k push pull pot. EDIT: corrected layout here: EDIT: doh... doesn't count if no one else caught it... my two 1uf electro caps on the buffer side of things were backwards...

for some reason I always have to fight temptation to constantly clean my slots... probably because once you have binding on (if you do binding) you want to have them clean. I usually blow them out repeatedly, and freq go in with a razor blade that I've dulled down. ok, ok... perhaps it's just because I'm ocd about it. If you ever want talk about it... you know... just rap... I'm here. (Fret dust haters anonymous - I might be the only member).

looks great with that color on it. Not being critical, and perhaps it's the pics.. but is that neck sitting reverse angled in the pocket? I know sometimes perspective gets warbled looking at pics on here... but couldn't help but notice. edit- I think it's just the shadow at the bottom making it look like that to me. ROCK ON.

what I think would work well here is if you bought some clear knobs... perhaps the bell type? then take some whatever dye you used on the body and mix it with something... maybe tru oil or perhaps mix it with white paint? and apply to the underside of the clear knob. get some color matched knobs... that'd look pretty nice. another option might be to go with some chrome dome type knobs to match the chrome hardware. Might look nice with some chrome knobs with the black inserts to tie to both the pickup covers and the chrome hardware.

shot of my setup to add the taper to the back of my necks. I started out with a common neck profile drawing for a late 50s tele. I have marked the neck with the depth from the top down at the first fret and the 12th fret... then I set the depth of the router to go right up to the mark at the 1st fret... and raise the other side of my planing rails until the blade of the router lines up with that mark. and here's the product of putting in that plane... and he is my tuxedo neck with the grade planed in. shaped my neck for the les flaws... my first experience with wenge and sharp corners right on end grain. installed my truss rod for the tuxedo... and installed my truss rod for the broadchaser: decided I would use some offcuts from my tuxedo top to join together for a headstock overlay: cut the 4 degree slope in my les flaws... had to go snag some 6" bolts to get the correct rise/run... then feathered that into the rest of the body: did a test fit for my 4 way switch on the tuxedo and found I needed to remove a little more material... also have carved in my belly cut and neck transition (will show that later)... final weigh in before adding the top: so was thinking tonight... about a jig I might make to cut the 94 degree cut into the back and sides of the neck where it meets the body and it occurred to me...why not just make it easy on myself and cut a 90 degree transition from the 4 degree plane? This would be 86 degrees relative to the body. Then I can simply make all my cuts on the neck at 90 degrees. Skip the need to build a jig, skip that pesky sanding to match the angle... and since this isn't a traditional les paul build... no reason to not hit the easy button. Here's my 86 degree line:

talk about documenting your build... lots of good stuff there. thanks for that.

i just meant my young sense of humor... that rest of me is old as f!

hehe, just realized I cut my tele jack hole on a guitar I'm going to do binding on... doh. will have to get a 1" dowel and stick it in there... or cut up to it and just make the necc transition by hand. Scrambling to find work to do while awaiting parts has thrown my whole thing off... so don't do THAT! edit: perhaps the best advice would be - just don't listen to me or do anything i would do!

I spend a lot of time thinking my next moves through... not in any sort of organized way... just trying to anticipate issues. For instance, On my radius top builds... I generally put a belly cut in... but if you make that too extreme and don't leave enough material... there won't be anything to ride a bearing on to do binding. However, if I ever make that mistake... I could simply cut a piece the right dimension and sticky tape it back on... so for every 'mistake' there is a workaround... and I'd say learning these workarounds probably does more to make you a good builder than actually not making any mistakes. that said... all of that info is specific to the type of guitar I build... and how I accomplish the binding. The things I think we'd all agree on are so obvious they aren't worth mentioning but here goes: def have to cut the truss channel and put in the truss rod before putting on the fretboard (this rule can be broken... even with a dual action truss... I've seen a thread where a guy installed one in a back channel like a 1 piece strat neck). for me... I have to have a fretboard on a neck before I place my bridge. You can draw it out based on the centerline... but if you make small mistakes like glueing the fretboard scale on a little different... it can change the intonnation line. also if your neck ends up a little 'off' center, your strings can end up too close to the edge on one side. So I always get the neck almost done, then use the sides of the fretboard to draw lines going back to the bridge, then find the midpoint between those two lines... THATs my centerline (usually the actual centerline). you shouldn't do finish before you do binding... but I recently did a guitar where it had a roundover edge, and binding sitting below that. I didn't want to have to wet sand right up to the binding as I recognized that that would be hard to do well. So I finished the guitar and then put binding on. my point is... try to think ahead, try to avoid pitfalls, certainly make use of the many fantastic and talented builders here who have experience - ask them specific questions... but know that any mistake you make can be overcome - if you are willing to do what it takes.