mistermikev

hehe, I'm rarely accused of being adult... but I don't mind at all... even if the ot doesn't involve me. This is a forum after all... the whole point is people interacting. I wouldn't dream of attempting to shut anyone down.

there is NEVER any issue with going OT in my threads. Please do. For me, it's all about just exchanging.

well you know what they say... part of your job as a salesman is education! Again, not trying to sell guitars at all, just musing at the silliness of it all. It's a brutal market for that, more inclined to trade guitars for gear I need (rather want... do we really NEED anything?)!

don't get me wrong "saving the world from badly formatted data streams" is no trip to hollywood but I sometimes enjoy programming. When I have a new interesting job to figure out the time goes by fast and I love it... but like anything else - has its down side for sure. I worked as a music store employee for a stint when I was younger... there are folks that just love to talk shop and I honestly don't mind that... cause I love gear. The folks I never could stand where what I call the "hunters". Really only interested in whatever they can't have... so whatever the price is they want it for x-1. Then when they grind you down and you give in... they aren't interested because they only really were ever interested in 'the hunt'. None of that interests me... only building interesting things does!

I am a hoarder right now because all my life I couldn't afford anything fancy like many of my cohorts have... now the only thing separating me from owning every guitar I ever wanted is learning to build it. Along the way it turns out building is more fun than I thought! that said, I've had a few folks ask me about selling guitars and I'm def not 'above' doing that, but I generally tell folks "I'm really just doing this for fun". Then, one day I have this guy who is hounding me to sell him a guitar despite repeated "nos". I finally give in and tell him "ok fine... what would you pay for it" thinking this should end the conversation pretty quick. He shoots a number that is surprisingly close to what I would part with it for so I tell him 'x + 300' and promptly never hear from him again. I didn't even want to sell it in the first place and this jackwagon gets me thinking "well if I sold it I could afford parts for 2 new guitars" only to break my heart. That right there is why I would not want to build for money. I only care about building. I have a few friends that have asked me to build them something but I try to change the conversation. I'm sure I will sell something or build for a friend at some point because I'm blowing way too much money on this stuff but here's what tempers my view: "find a job you love and you'll never work another day but make what you love your job and it'll become work"

"series of compromises held together by hope" - I like that. good one!

awaiting some parts and kind of left to all the minor details of my builds for the time being, so thought I'd spend some time on my plans for electronics: first up: the tuxedo. going to be using a seymour vintage stack for the bridge, and a 4 way tele switch. I have a 4 way in a tele and didn't realize until recently that the two middle positions where NOT the two combined positions... so I changed this on my version as I prefer Bridge, BN Parallel, BN Series, Neck. Also set it up so that the bridge will be in stacked humbucker mode in pos 1, but split for the two combined positions 2 and 3. Figured it might be nice to go back to single coil for the bridge position so I've got a push pull that will accomplish that, and also swap between 50's and 60's style tone control with the lead for the tone swapping between the pickup side and the jack side. next up is the broadchaser: I'm putting a hot rail in the 'hidden' middle position so that I can use either rail for hum cancellation. That rail is a bit mismatched with the bridge which should allow the bridge pickup to dominate for a little less hum cancelling but a little more bridge flavor. Using a 4 pole 3 throw switch here for stock tele operation plus two additional modes: parallel humbuckers and series humbuckers. finally, the les flaws: I don't generally tend to care for the split singles by themselves from a humbucker, and the humbuckers I'll be using are sentient/nazgul which (I'm told) don't sound great split anyway... so I figured I'd do a simplified version of my signature "all combos" wiring... and just focus on the 4 humbucking combos: bridge-vs-neck-parallel, inside-vs-outside-parallel, inside-vs-outside-series, and bridge-vs-neck-series. Going to etch a pcb to keep the wiring of the 4p4t clean. Using a unique alph 4p4t switch that is fairly small... might have some issues getting it fitted in the carved top but... will cross that bridge. Also planning an active mid boost mounted on a push pull for this one... I have a jackson preamp etch lying in wait, and an sho... but I loved the 'switchblade' in my sweet spot build so much I might etch another of those... haven't decided.

right on... I have heard of that angle calculator but have not used it... I guess because it appeals to me a bit more to lay it out... play with it a bit and see how the pieces interact, the ultimate goal being a better understanding. There are some other one's as well... on mlp a spread sheet version... and of course ultimately we are just dealing with a triangle so... could just do some trig. certainly pickup height would be something to think about. In my case, and in most cases with an overwound bridge... there's probably a 1/2" of play so I can't imagine it being an issue but I'll def keep that in mind and take a look at it before I finalize my neck thickness. thanks for the suggestion.

thank you for responding - some good thoughts there. I guess the original motivation for gibson was just that they have a 1/2" bridge to overcome... but then it could be that they designed the bridge to be that thick because, as I understand it, acoustic guitars and perhaps even violins and more - had neck angles and they wanted to match that? Def seems to be ergonomic... but perhaps more by chance/circumstance originally? It is an interesting perspective to flip it and think that they carved the body away as opposed to putting an angle on the neck. I have often thought about starting with a thicker body, and doing a straight neck pocket... but then cutting the body away at 5 degrees... but after carving my tele top that was enough work for me! Not to mention how much more wood would be wasted. afa tele... seems at odds to talk about comfort there as it should be an uncomfy guitar, what with the 1/8" radius edge, and no belly cut or forearm relief... yet they feel quite comfortable to me. I have great respect for the 'lines' of the strat and tele as they ooze that sloping design style of the 50s/60s. I get the theme of your post is that the determining factor for you is mostly comfort - a solid goal. Something we should all consider more as we build. so... do you countersink your studs?

right on, and you as well (xmas). right on... I was thinking it must be something like epoxy or super glue and clamp... just wasn't sure what 'magic' you were going with.

man, quite the collection of tools you are accumulating. monkeys look great. isn't it going to be problematic to get the fret to seat with the the wood removed? or am I seeing that wrong? hope I'm not being an asshat for asking, genuinely curious if I'm missing something there.

that looks kickass!

every time I see this thread title i think "you and me both sister". Man, I really struggled with my first few fret jobs getting the frets to seat properly and the above advice (chamfer the slot) really helped (probably was curtisa who suggested it to me as well). looks right to me assuming we are getting a side view looking down the fret slot. that said... getting the proper slot dimensions matched up with the proper fret tang was an equally helpful convergence. then from there... getting a proper fret caul, and mounting it on a vise grip... took me the rest of the way. my last fret job arrived action on par with the best I've played - and req very little fret filing/crowning. here's to it working out for you!

right on... well... within the range of angles possible for my parts... and considering what I have found comfy on my own guitars... I'm going to try 4 deg. There may be some merit to a steeper angle being more comfy esp on a baritone... as IME it seems to bring the headstock end a little 'closer'. at least that's how it feels to me. Incidentally, looking around at pics of les pauls - contrary to what I would have thought... there are some where the neck/binding sits proud of the body with a sort of 'wedge' of material visible under the binding. Seems fairly rare as the majority have the binding flush with the top... but I suppose like any rule - made to be broken. Building guitars is turning out to be more like jazz in that respect!

thank you sir! Not the best - we spent the day in bed both feeling sick... but feeling better now and enjoyed the entire second season of lost in space so - not a total loss (pun intended)!

Have not, but that first pic... you should be able to easily make a full size template based on it. use fret2find here to generate the right scale frets pdf, open with photoshop or paint or whatever, scale up the image until the fretboards match and voilla. I've done quite a bit of template hunting just for fun and have not seen this one so... might be a bit of a long shot otherwise. (here's hoping you find what you need!)

funny, I started to write exactly that at one point, obviously some angles are more use-able than others... as your pickups would all of the sudden be too far below the strings... or on the other side, your neck would be thru the bottom of the guitar... but yes... this is exactly what I was getting at originally - really ANY angle CAN work... so what are the reasons to choose one over the others? so far I've heard the argument for 'easier ie remove less material', and for 'max adjustment ie 4.5deg'. Perhaps someone out there would feel that a 5degree is more ergonomic... I'm not sure. Perhaps one would chose the corresponding break to be historically accurate... and those are all the reasons I can think of. so... thank you bizman, and you ad for your input. I'm going to play with my drawing tonight and factor in a slightly lower bridge for the countersunk studs and deeper slots for strings... and add the typical action and refigure. also going to measure some guitars... then I'm going to put all the possible angles in a hat and randomly draw one (hehe). thanks again.

Clearly I'm making a 20" full scale instrument - you gotta problem with that? I have very small-large hands. " should see a scaled full size drawing " it's full size and scaled what's the confusion? jk - kind of a contradiction huh? it was full size but I scaled it down as it's a rather large space soak otherwise but the jist is... I def layed out my stuff full size. pretty sure the real size is still going to be bigger than 20" - but if you are more comfortable with that - ok by me! haha! I appreciate you reading between the lines, and your response - so thank you.

i could see that.

I'm not good with words.... and numbers... or concepts... or retention... it's not MY fault. for the record... I assume after you blend it in it is less of a known angle and more of a unknown radius... so that must have been what I meant? hehe.

interesting. I understand that later les pauls use 5 deg... earlier used anything from 2.5-3.5. I have a modern one and like it a lot... but I'm not sure how much of what I'm liking is the angle! also, interesting - sounds like you are saying (AD) that you are putting a secondary unknown angle on after... to smooth the transition between flat and the angled neck. On a les paul -they often do the back of the guitar in red (will do on mine)... pretty sure it would not only be hard to finish but look wonky to have that red carrying on to the front of the guitar below the binding on the neck. Perhaps a contributing factor to how they do it as you've mentioned agreed on the countersink. think I'll do that. food for thought... have to go measure the angles on a few of my guitars. thanks again for the replies.

thanks AD, I appreciate the reply. What I'm gathering from both your posts is you chose this method because it's the least amount of work according to how you do it. That's a solid reason. For me... it's not going to be more more/less work to do 2.5deg vs 5deg as I'm going to remove all material with my router. So I wonder... is 4.5 deg more comfy? does 2.5 sound better because the pickup sits further in the body? who knows. do either of you counter sink the lip on your studs? (sorry, you recess the studs AD)

thank you for the reply. while I do appreciate your drawing... see above - full size drawing - is that not showing up? You should see a scaled full size drawing sideview of my tele neck. My issue is not that I can't determine an angle... it's that I believe one could make any angle from 2.5deg to 5 degree work... so which one? Indecision... depending on how deep I want to set my neck into the guitar, where I want to make the angle start, I have played with my drawing and seen that there really isn't ONE answer. the way you are doing above... means your fretboard will be flush with the body at the end... but it doesn't HAVE to be. (EDIT - in other words the fretboard will be flush with the unplaned body height)

what in the wild world of sports kind of wood/finish is that (white?)... pretty cool. nice work.

so got my gotoh bridge... working out the angle for my 'les flaws'. It occurs to me that there are a lot is a lot of 'slop' that depending on how you do it you could choose many angles... so I am a bit unsure of myself due to this. Let me try to illiterate that: I could counter sink my studs... this will make perhaps a 1mm dif. I could change the break point... I hear folks talk about this a lot... on a lp it looks to me like they shave off material up to halfway in between the two pickups. iow, I could make the back of my fretboard even with the existing top right at the end of the fretboard, or I could lower the fretboard and take off more material as shown in my drawing below with the grey bar. I've opted to do this in my design. the gotoh bridge is 15mm at center saddle if I include the .5mm of the adjustment wheel that sits below the lowest point on the bridge. However, these saddles aren't really grooved yet. I could probably do anywhere from a .5mm slot to a 2mm slot depth. in my drawing below, I'm doing a 4.5deg angle, I'm figuring 16mm for my gotoh bridge, and I've figured in a .75" top, and figuring I would end up with a top thickness of .42 after planing at the sm 4.5deg angle 5.837" into the body. May have to revise as I contemplate at least 1mm slot in the saddle... but tell me anything you can think of about this, how you navigate the items I've mentioned, and anything I'm missing. breakangle.pdf