mistermikev

2 hours ago, Crusader said:

Just wondering if you are keen to make it rigid-dig 59 Les Paul, are you concerned about the scale length? I will never have a real 59 LP in my hands but my 59 Reissue, 61 Reissue and ES-137 all used 24 3/4" by the Rule of 18th. Therefore the nut to 12th fret measures 12 9/32" which is probably why people think its 24 9/16"

like anything else burst... there is a lot of dif contention on the scale length.  

"Don MacRostie and Dan Erlewine did extensive studies of Gibson fret scales on a pile of guitars from the 1920's up to current models.
From what they have found, Gibson has not actually used the 24-3/4" since the early 50's. The most common scale they found was 24-9/16" although 24-5/8" was also used."

"The actual scale length is not 24-3/4". It is 24 5/8" on at least five instruments between 1953 to 1961 that I´ve mesured during the day.
Gibson suposedly used 24-3/4" before 1953 then changed to either 24-5/8 or 24-9/16""

as I understand... 24 3/4 was based on the early advertisments... but the early lesters were actually not very precision in their scale length and apparently you can find horrifying discrepancies in the frets.  With that in mind I used 24.562 (ie 24.5625 or 24 9/16) as one of the design docs I relied on early was based on an actual 'copy' that was measured to that scale.  The "marlin era" version is 24 3/4 because it is a more standard measurement.  Also I can use that fretboard work if I ever want to do an early gold top or black beauty as I understand several were measured at that.

29 minutes ago, ADFinlayson said:

yeah the plastics can get a bit silly, the buytrate pickup rings on crazyparts.de are 99 Euros + shipping, 129 Euros if you want them pre aged

I would rather spend 200 on a braz fretboard than the fancy plastic, but I kind of think if you're building a proper 59, then go all in or it's not a proper 59. 

I've wrestled quite a bit with the "go all in" and the point where we start to diverge is the headstock... just not going to copy a headstock for my own reasons.  so at that point... it's not going to be a "proper 59"... perhaps 97% of one. 

The original bridge was zinc... so imo you can spend more on getting the exact zinc mixture but A) its zinc! and B ) if I was going to spend $200 on a bridge it would be aluminum or steel... not zinc.  in fact for the "marlin era" I've bought an all aluminum locking bridge.  I'll go with zinc from gotoh - they have been very good quality for me and also make a nice tailpiece - aluminum just like the orig.

philadelphia luthier has butyrate pu rings for $17.99 and according to many those are as close as they get.  Not planning on relic here so, no interest in that.  they've (phila) also got very accurate pickguards, ctrl cavity covers, knobs, and some fairly close celluloid trapazoid inlays.

I'm not above spending money on wood... that single piece genuine mahog was not cheap, and neither were the gen mahog neck blanks.  the brazillian rosewood... it'd be one thing if I was paying $1-200 for some pale moon ebony... but the brazillian rw on the originals is just black.  I reserve the right to change my mind and snag one... but I just don't think it'd look/feel/sound different from rosewood/granadillo/ebony w some dye.

I think I'll get a guitar that looks, sounds and feels like a 59'... but more importantly it'll be another chapter in my study of the masters.

3 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

IMO 4º is plenty enough, I normally shoot 2.5-3.5 on my builds which is the sweet spot, the difference though is that the fretboards on my singlecuts tend to sit a mm or two above the plane of the body where as your 59' the fretboard will be sat on the body, that makes a big difference.

I got this book recently, which I reckon will be some useful source material for you! I've been meaning to buy it for ages but it was crazy expensive - I think they must have done a reprint though because it's only £30 on amazon at the moment. It's got loads of cool descriptions of all the different bursts, all about the plastics and pickups of the era etc. 

 

right on.  I've said it before... crazy how arbitrary it is... one could almost make ANY 2-5deg angle work.

have heard a lot about that book. if you read any good tidbits def pass them on.

I've been spending a lot of time over at mylespaul.com and reading through old threads and looking at various design docs.  The guys over there really have a lot of knowledge about anything from historically correct binding to literally where the wire channel should be.  On the one hand... I love their enthusiam about that one guitar... on the other - historically accurate binding seems a stretch too far... for pete's sake it's PLASTIC!  

There is a guy who visits a lot over there... bartlet... he has some crazy build threads where he takes it to the n'th degree.  I don't want to go quite THAT far.  I like the idea of copying the body carve as close as possible, the scale length, the neck profile, headstock angle... but I can't pay $200 for a brazillian rosewood fretboard blank!  One has to draw a line somewhere.  

all that said... the truss rod... that is a real learning experience.  having one of the gibson modern one's on hand... it is SO delicate!  .167" of stainless rod.  IDK that I want to only build with single rods from here on out... but it is a beautiful thing that it is that simple, that slight... and yet plenty effective.

47 minutes ago, henrim said:

I use it after leveling and re-crowning. Because after crowning the frets are not necessarily perfectly even. The amount maybe negligible for some but I find this tool helpful to find the spots that need some attention. 

whatever works for you is all that matters.  i do an initial crown pass with a stew mac 150 grit, bring everything up to 400 w erasers and crown again with 300 grit, then shine everything up to 2000, then come back with an 800 grit leveling beam and markers... for me this leaves a razor thin line on all frets.  after doing that I've never bothered using a rocker... and ultimately the strings will tell you if you've got a problem after everything is under tension but haven't had that issue myself.  

lotta dif ways to get to the church.

3 minutes ago, Prostheta said:

I think that fret rockers are one of the most misused/misunderstood tools in a luthier's arsenal. I think they are really only of use to anybody who is completely fretting a new board rather than levelling. I use mine to tap the frets to listen for the dull thunk of a poorly-seated fret.

on the one hand... I'm with ya... if you use a marker to level your board it should be level... on the other hand if you have wet noodle wood that doesn't hold a nice arc once tension is on it... i guess they could be useful in identifying where the problem is... for me: never use the one I have.  

so looking over my 'les flaus' build thread it occurred to me that my neck angle on that one was 4 deg... figured I had better do a mock up for these builds and confirm.  

4 degrees seems like the magic number for me.  on this neck it is setup to join the body at the outside of the 16th fret (at fret width) and the neck plane should end at the top of the neck pickup route.  given those variables... I mocked it up using the pinnacle locking bridge I have and jescar fw58118 frets to find I'll have .14" of upward play w/o cutting slots into the saddles... which is really more than I need.   I want to keep my bridge tight to the body bridges tend to be most stable when the studs are screwed in as much as possible.  further you want to have your tailpiece bottomed out on the body and a lower angle gives less of a chance of the strings hitting the back side of the bridge as they approach the tailpiece.  

well... 4deg works for this, it worked on my 27.5 scale barritone... I suspect it'd work for almost anything and it's a nice round number.

18 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

Just FYI, we've been advised to use welding sticks as truss rod material, should we want to build a single action rod. Don't know the actual type but they're plain metal (black steel) so that alone should take you to the right direction.

already bought mine a week ago and they are welding sticks, so right on.  Would like to do stainless but I'm told threading them is a giant pain so we'll save that for another experience down the line.  will just put some anti-seize on the nut side threads and hopefully that will ensure no rust for a long time.

looking fwd to seeing those cutouts!

On 4/2/2023 at 2:39 PM, ScottR said:

It just looks like a slice of tree to me.

SR

not to take anything away from that stunning top... but this view right here is mezmerising to me.

6 minutes ago, avengers63 said:

I highly recommend using crushed stone for the smaller bits. 1) It comes in various sizes, including powdered. 2) It's a hellofalot easier than cutting out the teeny pieces of shell. 3) Using both stone & shell will give the impression of varied textures, enhancing the overall visual interest of the package.

right on... couple of those pieces aren't much bigger than my .0177 bit... so not really going to have a choice there since something that small will likely get spit out into the garage never to be found again!  I was thinking what I will probably do is buy some recon stone for the blue parts of the inlay and then take some pieces over to my spindle sander and make some matching dust.  

what I'd really like to do is get into some thin agate pieces I have as the blue is spectacular... but that stuff is way too thick (3/16") and way too hard to mill.  perhaps I can buy some crushed agate... gonna go look right now!

8 hours ago, Crusader said:

Wow, talk about making things hard for yourself!

hehe, thanks for noticing!  the inlay - for sure there are a number of very small pieces that are going to be hard there... and just the sheer number of pieces overall... s/b a challenge.   there's a number of other things on these builds I specifically ran towards to challenge myself.  haven't done a 7-layer binding so that will be a learning experience but doing triple binding on that headstock?  instead of 45 deg angles... there are a number of curved meeting places... that is going to be hard.  the neck profile on the valute version - leaves 3/16+ of wood at the back of the neck... going to have to be spot on on my measurements/stock-size there.  This will be my first time doing both the angled straight truss rod, and the radius truss rod.  Could have just gone for the std double action truss... but I hoped to learn some things.  Also going to make my own truss rod for the one style.  I'm also planning to do some experimental stuff with the finish on the lp custom verison.  That said I'm letting myself off the hook on the ctrl cavities... could have gone for the magnetized covers but decided I'd just do plastic store-bought for this exercise.  s/b enough real trials  here!.

I'm sure there are better ways to do this... but as I sometimes do, I just did this with brute force.  took a picture I liked and made it suitable for inlay. 

hours and hours.  converting an image to handful of colors, then doing a vector import of the the lines... then hours and hours of cleanup and adjusting individual lines to make it look "not jagged"... then hours and hours turning the vectors into little puzzle pieces.  Worth it only for the learning process.  

This will be the headstock bling for my humorous name: "the marlin era" throwback to "the norlin era".  

I guess I need to find some blue recon stone or other blue inlay material for the blue and light blue parts... white mop for the most of it and gold mop for the yellow part.  will also need something gray for the stripes.  some of the details are so small I will probably just get some colored dust of some sort.

so... finished working on my radius truss rod version.  I've thought a lot about the 'norlin era' les pauls and wondered "what if they hadn't gone with pancake bodies, multi-piece mediocre tops, and multi-lam maple necks?"  Thought I might try to make this version reminiscent of that time... they had the 60's slim taper necks, a valute, and "boat paddle" headstocks.  Figured my headstock is 'close enough' hehe.

resawed some lovely straight grained granidillo for the 59 version... stuff smells wonderful to cut!

1 hour ago, Crusader said:

That would be .... Stewmac! and at $197.99 USD it doesn't sound much but with shipping, taxes and exchange rate it translated to $505.10 AUD

So I'm glad to hear people say its a nice looking piece or wood!

right on.  pretty spendy but ash like that is hard to find!

9 minutes ago, ElRay said:

As best as I can tell (at this point) is that it's a one-way truss-rod that can be tightened, but something is preventing it from being loosened.

I'm waiting on clarification to see if the owner really means, "The Truss rod is as loose as it can be, but the neck still has a back-bow" -- That would be a different fish to fry.

for the record i believe most two piece one way truss rods bottom out when loosened to the max if I'm not mistaken.  Either way... as you said if it's a matter of being able to somehow release a bolt vs replacing a truss rod i'd def lean towards the bolt!

5 minutes ago, henrim said:

Thanks, that’s an option, but since I’m building to myself I guess I have to do the decision myself. So when the doubt kicks in at sometime later, I don’t have to blame others for a bad choice

well that is the funny thing about my above comments... inevitably it pushes me to choose something not recommended by the group.  I respect the input... but sometimes it just drives me to what I truly wanted all along sometimes.  anywho.

I thought for sure you were building a tube... relieved it's a guitar!

afa decisions... this place is a great resource for such things.  I suggest you post a thread w a vote in the design area.  It has been my experience that inevitably folks will vote for the one I was least attached too... at which point I am ushered by my subconscious towards some other design that I secretly was leaning toward all along!  It sounds redic... but it has seriously helped me!

that is a lovely piece of swamp ash.  where did you get that wood (if you don't mind me asking).  

also, some jedi level jig saw skills above - nice work.

I don't think I'd spend a lot of money on it.  truss rod replacement would depend on the builder.  I know there are guys who build such that the rod will slide right out... but myself: I buy an expensive rod and purposely make it such that it will never move.  Just two dif takes.  further the issue is going to be finding a suitable replacement rod assuming you can get it out.  it'd have to be the right dimensions and that is not guaranteed to be easy.  Some guys use custom length rods.  most rods are 1/4" wide and 3/8" depth if it's a two piece but even that - the dimensions might vary enough that your rod is rattling around in there.

that said... it's not clear reading your post if this is a two way rod or perhaps a one way that just only loosens so far.  I'm guessing one way but either way... the wood wants what the wood wants and you could try to bind it to something straight (or even reverse curve) and heat/steam it but IME that has about a 30% chance at working... bending it will def happen but bending it straight and to a specific dimension - pretty unlikely to pull that off.  Even assuming you do pull that off... I've done it to a guitar once and a month later it just returned right back to where it was.  heating the fretboard while it's bound straight might loosen the glue bond and allow it to re-attach in a way that straightens the neck... but it also might destroy the integrity of the glue and open up all sorts of other problems.  assuming you make it through all that and straighten the neck you are likely going to need fret work.

my gut says that when you've got "wild wood" it's just not worth it to fight it... but ymmv.

hope something there helps make your decision easier.

1 minute ago, avengers63 said:

Bloodwood is the best. It smells like Christmas cookies. I've encountered a couple that smell like cat piss. IIRC, Spanish cedar was one of them. And then there's poplar. It sometimes gives me dry heaves.

note to self: avoid spanish cedar and def snag some bloodwood!

On 2/6/2023 at 3:36 PM, avengers63 said:

 

The blank is supposed to be African mahogany. That's how it was labeled at Rockler. BUT... when I was cutting & planning it, it let off a somewhat acrid medicinal odor. I don't remember African mahogany smelling like this, but it's also been quite some time since I've worked with it.

 

have no idea what that is but it's got really nice straight grain.  the aaaaaaah FRICKEN mahog that i get tends to be a LOT more orange/pink.  I know there is an asain variant that is supposed to be lighter in weight and tends to be more tan... never heard of it smelling different tho.  

mahog just smells so nice when you work it... sort of that cinnamon thing.  that... walnut and oak are my fav smells!  "these are a few of my favorite smells..."

shout out to @MiKro !  truly is a treasure on this forum!  a very generous individual indeed.

7 hours ago, avengers63 said:

Surely the only part of the process common to all builders. It is definitely an intrigal part of mine! 

Hehe, true dat.  if you aren't swearing at some point you probably aren't doing it right!!

1 minute ago, ScottR said:

Yeah, that pretty much kicked my ass on that mandolin kit I built some years back. It was only the second binding job I'd ever attempted (and last) and I was in way over my head. It'll make you sweat a bit, but you'll pull it off nicely.

SR

well... I've got some ideas on how I can mitigate the issues... I hope they'll work!  Having a cnc, should give me a leg up... I plan to cut the shape of the binding channel into some scrap and that way I can get the pieces bent and hopefully the angles cut before I try to glue them to the headstock.  I also plan to go watch some tutorials on the mandolin sites.  all that said i'm sure I'll swear!

Lovely stuff. inlays are great, inlay slot is "tighter than a fish's turd cutter" as they say.  vnice.

your clean shop keeps mocking me tho.  I keep thinking I'll clean my shop... but then thing nah it'll just get all dirty again lol.  rawk on.

4 minutes ago, ScottR said:

This should be fun!

If I remember correctly, Gibson started out as a mandolin company. That headstock still has a lot of mandolin in it.

SR

you are spot on there.  I went looking at old mandolin headstocks when I came up with that.  Have always loved those mandolin scrolls.  Going to be a real challenge to do multi layer binding on that with curved joins... not sure how I'm gonna pull that off but I'm committed to trying anyway!