RAI6

27" should be plenty of room for a headstock. I think you're confusing the neck length, with the scale length... Now, as for which way to do it... You can go one-piece, with no angle. Or one-piece slab, with the angle cut into it, as shown in your 2nd example (however, this wastes alot of wood). Or two-piece, where you attach the head to the neck, as shown in the Warmoth example. Which way is better could probably be argued for days...

Exactly. Pretty much anything you do on a guitar depends on the various parts. Now, if you buy everything from Warmoth, and just assemble parts, everything is already figured out. But as soon as you introduce anything that you made yourself, or wasn't made with the other items in mind, you have to start to figure things out. And no one else can do that, but you. There are no set ways, or measurements...

This guy has no idea about Floyds. If he did, he would know what a Speedloader is. "Even better- it's an entirely new type of Floyd based upon the "Speedloader" style- BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE-Forget about the fussy snip-the-end-off-the-string deal- just pop your strings through the tubes and you're all set- NO locks on the saddles, and they got the geometry right because I have Dive Bombed the crap out of this thing and it is RIGHT ON THE MONEY! Yes folks- this bridge can accept regular strings- no special Floyd strings needed." If it takes any strings (not special "Floyd" strings) then it's not a Speedloader! Speedloader systems have special strings, with "ball ends" on both ends. You drop them in, and you're almost instantly in tune and ready to play. What he's selling is a Floyd copy that allows you to install the strings without cutting off the ball ends. Besides that, it's still a regular Floyd... It drives me nuts to see all these bridges advertised as "Speedloader" style, yet they have nothing in common with the Speedloader.

I was under the impression that Steve simply has Velcro on the slide and headstock... Maybe I'm wrong.

Yes. The arm has an angle, so that it points slightly towards the strings. If you take a right arm, and put it on a lefty trem, the arm will point away from the strings...

The easiest way to fix stripped holes (not stripped screws) I have found, is to simply roll some toothpicks in wood glue and then insert them in the hole. Cut flush with surface when dry, and proceed to screw your heart out! Works like a charm........

That would be because the link above is incorrect... Here's the right one: http://www.nymphusa.com/tele/ Party on!

Dido? What does she have to do with it?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Ditto, I say........

As you stated yourself, the scale is the distance between the nut and the bridge. If a guitar is constructed for a 24.75" scale, that means that the neck falls in a specific position to then work with the bridge. If you now stick a 25.5" scale neck in the same neck pocket, the bridge will not be in the right spot anymore. If you're building a guitar from scratch, and you're in the early stages of building, "minor" changes like that are not really catastrophical. If you're fixing up a guitar, or building from various parts, it will be more involved. Possibly even impossible, depending on the guitar....

From a design point-of-view, they have most certainly created something new in the guitar market. But from the consumer/guitarist point-of-view, I don't see anything that would warrant anyone to drop that kind of cash on their product... It's a solid "log", with a bunch of "crap" attached to it, that pretty much has no impact on the sound as soon as you plug it in. So, sell me. Give me a reason why I should buy THAT guitar... I just don't get it.

Why don't you cut a nice piece of wood, and place that in the outer (lip portion) of the route, and then cut a new hole in that? It will cover the larger inner route. The battery box won't be recessed, but at least it will look decent. Just a thought........

It's intended for straight headstocks, which means you want the tallest for the low E, and the shortest for the high E. This will create a staggered array, that will eliminate use of string trees and such.

Was the trem recessed? If it was, and you're now putting on a TOM, you're going to have to shim the neck to achieve the neck angle needed.

Get us a good, clear, in-focus shoot of the bridge. Maybe from a couple of different angles...

Are you tuned up to pitch? Is the trem base parallel to the body? Once that's in place, check and set intonation one string at a time...

Give us a background on what you're doing, and what you've got. Is it a factory guitar? Or factory neck, home-made body? Start by giving us all the details, and we'll try to figure it out from there.......

I think most people on this board wouldn't be particularly offended by "that's a helluva nice axe..." But that's just my opinion.

Are you sure it's the same as StewMac's? Is it conductive on both sides? I guess it doesn't make a difference if you use it for a cavity cover, and it's a single piece. It may, however, make a difference if you have to have to overlap pieces...

"Hey guys! I've done a lot of work with a process called hydro forming. I've used this process to build 2 stroke expansion chambers in alloy stainless steel and mild steel with great results. I'll give you a brief outline of it. Here we go... Cut out the shape you want. Then take one shape and drill 2 holes in it at either ends. One end bleeds excess air out and one is the water inlet. Then weld the two shapes together. Now attach a plumbers hand-pump to inlet side. Bleed air out then blow the piece up to the shape you want. You could use this process to make a nice arch top. Hope you all under stand what I'm on about here." I think that should be it...

Well, normally something like that would be done with purfling (I believe that's the right word), applied almost like binding in a routed channel around the body. What you're asking about is something completely different. You have to lay down a whole sheet on the face of the body. Mother-of-toiletseat is your only option, but I don't know how much it would actually look like anything more than white plastic, when all you're seeing is the thin edge. It's designed to look like mother-of-pearl from the front... Maybe there are other options.

And I wish I knew where I saw it, but there was a site that had a pretty darn good story of how they did Paul Stanley's cracked mirror guitar back in the 70's. The final variation ended up being that they routed the top of the guitar down (to match the thickness of the mirror), but left the binding on to work as a final, clean edge. They tried smashing the mirror, but that just turned into a mess. The best result came from designing a crack-pattern, and then cutting it that way. I believe they also added some type of clear material on top, to avoid getting cut by the mirror edges. You would think that with the mirror pieces flat, and pushed together, there is no way you can cut yourself... Well, they didn't just leave the pieces flat, but "angled" them all slightly to really get maximum reflections from the guitar. If you just put the mirror back together, perfectly flat, it ends up barely looking cracked, and just giving off one large reflection... You could always do it like this: http://www.vai.com/Machines/guitarpages/guitar037.html

The "explosion proof fan" does NOT mean that the fan can withstand an explosion... It means it will not cause an explosion.... Almost the same, but not quite.

After seeing that guitar sanded down to bare wood, I think it would look absolutely stunning in a satin clear... It would actually look quite "classy". "Shiny" isn't always a good thing... But that's just my opinion.

Sounds about right....