Bjorn.LaSanche

I have an old Ibanez where I have redone the finish on it resulting in the neck sitting a little higher on the body than it used to.  It doesn't affect the way the guitar plays, but I do not like the way the tremolo is now having to sit proud of the body and would like to set the neck a little deeper into the neck pocket so I can sink the tremolo block back into the rout. 

My first thought was to remove some wood from the neck pocket, but what is the best way to determine how far I should look to take it?  Would I measure how far down I need to take the tremolo, then apply that measurement to the neck pocket for removal?  I don't want too take too much, but also don't want to take too many small adjustments. 

Schaller parts are essentially special order only now in the states from my experience.  Even worse is that Schaller themselves will wait for enough orders for a certain item before they even manufacture a run.  I ordered a set of Ruthenium M6's(standard plain Jane type) in 2011 and did not receive them until almost 2013.  I placed the order through a friend's music store via Allparts right after 2011 NAMM show. They finally  arrived almost Christmas 2013.

Man, I always loved the way those Aria SB basses looked. The design would fit anyone for any style and look good.  Protheta, didn't Cronos from Venom play those and actually had a signature model about 15-20 years ago?

Wes, as long as one stays on top of maintenance shouldn't get too bad? Even if it will grunge up fairly quickly, As long as it comes from me, I'm not too worried. I don't own, nor want a trailer queen. All my guitars are players that are rode hard and put away wet in a manner of speaking.

I picked up a real beater guitar at a buddies shop last month. It was an Ibanez DT-250 with the trans red poly finish in really bad shape. This far I have had to strip all the finish down to bare wood, Repair a decent size crack at the base of the neck and several long cracks along the body that were shallow, but might eventually become worse. There was also a chunk broken out of the body where the neck meets the body right before the neck pickup.

The neck is straight though which is a plus. I can't say much for the frets/fretboard though as the frets were way beyond a mere re-leveling/re-crowning. It looked like someone tried to sand back the red poly finish on the fretboard, only to get mad at the job and beat up the frets with a tack hammer. I had to pull all the frets and luckily only had one small chip out at the 13th fret, which if I replace them with a little wider fret wire it will be hidden. The fretboard needs to be re-sanded to clean up the grubbiness.

Once I get the neck back to the point where I am ready to seal the fretboard, I am interested in using tung oil as the sealer instead of a lacquer as I do not intend to refinish the neck except the headstock face to match the body. Will any of you who have experience in sealing a fretboard this way give your pros and cons to finishing the fretboard this way as opposed to using a poly or lacquer finish please?

I liked that idea with the torch SwedishLuthier thank you for sharing. Pan_Kara do you think that this may be closer to the technique used on that bass, just done a little more extreme?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epXzTe7vJng#t=102

Man I hate when accidents like this happen, even if not to the extent of what happened in your case. When you give the guitar back after repairing it maybe include an invoice on what the repair would have cost him if nothing else, but for his records if he ever wants to sell the guitar again(make sure the amount due says no charge). This also clears you from any further tissue issues that may stem from the guy in the future. If I were in your shoes, I would make sure I pulled out all the repair mojo I had to make sure this was the best repair I could do for the guy to make him happy.

Man Prostheta, you just had to wave that Aria in front of me didn't you. I swear that company made the absolutely most beautiful guitars without ever pushing into the gaudy.

I have ordered the Machine heads and waiting for them to come in. I decided to go with Schaller M6's Regular old school ones. In Schaller's Ruthenium finish. Essentially Schaller's take on the Cosmo Black. I was told by one of the Schaller people via email that the Ruthenium finish is actually a part of the metal and not really a plated finish. Not quite sure how that is, but they take some time to get here. Already 6 weeks since I placed order.

I see, I didn't understand the objective, but yeah, I see what you're getting at and agree with that.

Not too bad actually, though I do see why the finish wears off of the Ibanez hardware and oxydizes quickly. When you really look at the hardware, you can tell that the plating is just average quality. I honestly wanted to use a different brand than Ibanez, but no one else makes the stop bar in that shape, and the bridge is the modern version of the old Ibby banjo knock-off. I am not disappointed though. I really love the visual aesthetics of the bridge pieces.

I just wish Ibanez would have used some other metal under the plating than pot metal. You should see my DT-250 with the original Edge tremolo I have on it. The low E saddle is very eaten down over the years and the plating on it has what appears to be a bunch of bubbles that have come to the surface and popped. It looks similar to dust being sprayed over with finish paint. Saying that, when I had my Moser Custom Shop with a "new" Kahler on it, the saddles of the Kahler did the same thing within two years. I have a Peavey Mantis with a Kahler that has had hard use since I bought it when they first came out where the plating hasnt worn off like new chrome, or colored finishes do. The saddles and base plate on that tremolo are all brass underneath.

I think both claims are correct to a degree.

I say this because you all have more experience than I as builders. I also think the "voodoo" as some call it is when one is comparing apples to oranges.

You cannot get identical tone on two guitars built to identical specs, with each part of the wood for each guitar built from lumber from the same trees. Will the guitars sound similar? Yes, but not the same because of the organic structure of the lumber.

If you build a Les Paul spec'ed guitar with anything other than the mahogany, maple, and rosewood they are typically made with, the guitar will still hold the sonic principles of the Les Paul shape due to the geometry of the guitar. It will be different slightly due to the wood used, but it will sound like a LP. Same goes for any other shape. A strat will never sound like a Les Paul, even when using same woods, and humbuckers. It will sound like a Strat with similar aspects that a Les Paul has, but it still sounds like a Strat.

Back to the apples and oranges I mentioned above. The "voodoo" is comparing two different types of woods. Each wood is different in density, tensile strength, flexability, porousity. Will each wood sound different? Yes, but when you compare two woods of different species that have very similar or same qualities, maybe the only thing difference is color, is there really that much of a difference? So comparing an all mahogany with rosewood fretboard Flying V to one built with Koa, isn't apples to apples and negates the whole argument. Now the argument would hold more water if you compared the same Flying V build of mahogany from Swietenia humilis and indian rosewood from another build from Swietenia Macrophylla and same type of rosewood. Even two guitars built from same wood from different geographical locations will sound different, but similar. Then again all things being equal all guitars sound slightly different, even if built from the same treee due to the organic nature of wood. The circle comes around again.

Then again, I might be totally off base.

I am mainly a player and only working on a build because I love woodworking and want to mesh the two hobbies of mine. I am eager to create music through a guitar I have built with my own hands.

I love this design. I always thought the Aria Pro and Takemine spin on the Explorer was the definitive exolution of the original Gibson shape. It is sleek, fast, and quite sexy looking, and stands head and shoulders above the Explorer pro(which looks like a Chunk from the Goonies version of the Explorer), or any of the other manufacture spins. Where do you plan on installing the selector switch if any? I also wonder if perhaps a TOM style bridge with string through body may add to the refined body shape instead of the Hipshot fixed. Have you decided on what woods you plan on using for construction yet?

Hey guys, I finally got the tail piece for my build. Ibanez Quick Change III in Cosmo Black. There are a couple of things I am milling over in regards to this build. I finally got to check out a newer Iceman. I wasn't too thrilled with the balancing of the body. It seems the guitar likes to balance similar to a Strat (i.e. as close to horizontal as possible). I have a hard time playing guitars that do this and why my Dinky almost never gets played. I prefer a guitar that balances to a more classical style position.

I also have been thinking about NOT doing an Iceman clone, but rather a clone of my DT-250, but set neck and upsize the body slightly. I also have been toying with the idea about a baritone scale, simply due to that I play in standard B on a six string in my band. Until I figure this out, I plan on just aquiring the parts needed for the build.

I am not going to use Ibanez branded machine heads on this build, simply because I have three old Ibanez guitars and frankly the machine heads after 20+ years just plain suck. Which in turn means no Gotoh either, as they manufacture machine heads for Ibanez. Which leaves Schaller. Schaller does not make Cosmo Black as it is a trademarked color for Gotoh, but they have what is called Ruthinium. Slightly different color, but according to a Dr. Lars Brunning at Schaller, is close enough to the Gotoh color that one can only usually tell under strong light and having parts next to each other. Plus Schaller's I can get a little less expensive through my local dealer, than an equivalent Gotoh, or the Ibanez branded part.

So, until I decide these few things, this build will be slowly moving.

Bjorn

Oh Mah Gawd!!!! Perry that quilting and finish on the head stock at 0:36 of that video is AMAZINGLY SICK!!! It actually looks like sand under water like in pictures of the Caribbean or Fiji. When is this bit of guitar porn going to be released? Put me down for a copy.

Back to the thread topic. I have watched most of the Crimson Guitars videos and find them somewhat interesting. I do agree he does ramble a bit, but you can tell he probably has quite a few things going on in his mind while he is taping. I have done the same when showing a less experienced person how to do a task while explaining how to do a task at my day job.

Sorry guys, I do not know how to post more pictures per post or if it is even allowed.

Finally, the glorious packaging the whole unit came in to include part number for Cosmo Black. I did not include more detail such as radius, as the bridge is indeed radiused. Ibanez used these on the SZ line so whatever those guitar's radius was should be what these are. All in all this is a stout part. It weighs more in the hand than the Gibson TOM my V has. When I get the matching tailpiece in I will post pictures in this thread as well.

Here is the bridge. I put the outside saddles at the extreme forward and rearward positions. The bridge is 16.85mm deep(front to back) The most forward sits 6.03mm of the rear side of the bridge. The rearmost sits 1.73mm away from the front of the bridge. With my guesstimation math I believe this to be a total of 8.9mm travel distance between full forward to full rearward positions. For practical use I plan on designing my layout using only half of the full forward distance, or whatever still looks aesthetically pleasing while remaining functional. Full forward is actually very very loose in the base and I believe structurally non functional.

Here is the post with bushing. The lip at the top of the bushing will sit proud of the face of the guitar 1.6mm.

I pulled the trigger today. $43.30 after tax. The bridge should be here within a work week I was told. Once I have it in my hands I will take some close up pictures including those post bushings.

Ok, I have to look at the posts/bushings when I get them. For a second there it looked like the bushings were not seated into the body far enough as the edge looks like it has some knurling. Might just be the lighting

It depends on what the maple looks like. If it is highly figured I always thought this guitar was the pinnacle of figured wood/finish craftsmanship. It doesn't even look like wood http://nealmoser.com/guitarpics9.htm Maybe something similar, but a different color.

I am drawing a blank on the bridge. I do not like any of the traditional Fender style tremolos. They have never been comfortable to me where I position my hand and always end up cutting into the side of my hand.

Carbon Fiber neck. I'de really like to see how these are done

Just a quick thought after looking at the pic I posted. Is it normal for the bridge bushings so sit that proud above the finish? Should you install the bushings before or after finishing?

Bob I am looking at this bridge tailpiece layout exactly. I like TOMs on my non-floyded guitars. I have enough whammy bar guitars and for this being my third ever build I would rather do a TOM this time around. I don't trust myself to make the angle for the bass side on a TOM install yet, so the Giii is like the old ones where the saddle travel doesnt require the back angle for the bass side of the bridge. I also think it looks friggen cool. The bridge and Tailpiece are $40/ea. from my local Ibby dealer. I will be making this purchase(bridge only, the tailpiece can wait a month or so until I get further along in the build)by next wednesday.

I've no doubt about the reliability of the material used coming from Ibanez. I have an old Destroyer with the original Gibralter bridge and aside from normal wear from sweat, it still works perfectly.

I am waiting for pricing on the bridge from my local dealer. There is a site from Germany that has US pricing of $40 for the bridge in chrome. I asked my dealer to ask about the cosmo price. The parts section of the Ibanez site (under Support) is where I found the bridge initially. I was actually after the Quick Change tailpiece and was going to originally use a Gotoh TOM. The New gibralter just called to me for my build. Anyways..... If you get the part number off Ibanez' site, it tells you to take the part number to your local Ibanez dealer for acquisition.

The build I am planning is a set neck version of my old bolt on Iceman that was stolen years ago. I am making a couple of changes to the design such as moving the body toward the headstock from the 18th fret to the 16th fret, reversing the 3x3 headstock, and using the 4 knob control setup of the more expensive models instead of the 3 knob control setup mine had. Neck and body both made from mahogany and using Les Paul Custom model body thickness at edge(my build will not be a carved top). Fretboard is undecided at this point as I have a rosewood and ebony blank. All other specs are based of a friend who owns a bolt on like mine was, but his came in dark grey where mine was black.

I want to ask one question to this topic if I may.

In step 4 of Perry's drawing, the body angle is drawn in relation to the height of the bridge, but the picture shows a body meeting the neck at the end of the fretboard.

If the guitar design has the body meeting the neck at say 16th fret, you would draw your body angle line, from the 16th fret(at glue side of fretboard) to the base of the bridge point, or does that matter and follow the diagram as posted?

Also if someone could repost the neck/string taper image again it would be an appreciated visual reference to base my drawing against.

Yes, you can start the body anywhere you like. You could also start it at the 16th, and drop it lets say, 3mm, also. The point that the body starts isnt relevant. It's where ever you want it to be. All it does is visualize, and calculate, the angle you need

I am following you. I just was wondering if the actual neck drop angle would change slightly if the top of the body intersected with top of the neck at a different position than the one you drew up? I guess it would in relation to where I put it in my design(neck meeting body at 16th fret) compared to a guitar where the body joined the neck at the end of the fretboard as in a LP Special DC(neck meeting body at 21st fret).

If I join the body further into the neck, the angle of neck drop will be a little less than what you drew, but the key elements that determine the angle are the string action off the fretboard, height of the radiused fretboard, and height of the bridge at scale length to the body.

I'm going to have to draw this up on paper to verify for myself.

@Prostheta, I will take a look at the trig, but Perry's mock up is very simple and easily understandable. I think at this point the math will confuse me. Once I get a handle on the other way, the math will solidify my understanding.

Thanks guys for your help.