davee5

So I finished grad school recently and used my extended initials to get a slightly better paying, more interesting job back in the real world. This has a few important implications: 1. I have regular paychecks again. 2. I have my nights and weekends back (well, I got married 8 months ago too so not all of that time...) 3. I'm resuming business trips across the Pacific where I spend weeks on end in factories and design offices before heading back to the hotel. 4. I'm dang ready to start in on some purely personal projects! I've been building up plans, the reading, and the wood stash to build an acoustic guitar for a while now. The plan is to use only woods native to my beloved home of California, preferably of trees that are of personal significance to me. Here's he general list: Top: Sinker/Salvage Redwood (LOVE the redwoods dotting the Northern CA coast where I play) B/S: Curly Claro walnut (maybe Bay Laurel / Myrtle, which I smell on every mt.bike ride I take and even cook with. I have sets of both woods.) Neck: Curly Monterey Cypress (hard to come by, but I know tree doctor from when I lived in the area and he hooked me up big time with some spectacular offcuts from wind fallen logs) Fingerboard/Bridge: Apricot (also hard to come by, but my grandparents lived in the orchards that later became Silicon Valley and kept an old Blenheim in the fornt yard. When my g.pa passed this last year the house was sold and the dying tree was to come out. I took the widest portions as a keepsake and am letting it dry now) Bracing: Port Orford Cedar/Cypress (Backpacking through the north coast mountains and sierras you'll find these lovely trees, and daaaaaang the woods smells phenomenal. The wife actually requested we keep one of the spare billets in the living room for the scent!) Binding: Figured Sycamore (Uh, this wood grows here, is pretty, and available from LMI. Nothing to see here, folks.) Shell Inlay: Abalone (Found on the beaches of the Monterey Bay when I lived there for 2-3 years. Any larger heart pieces I found were kept for this project) So. that's the long term plan and why it all matters to me. Still, despite all my prep I'm still a bit nervous and wanted a quick startup project to get the jitters out with less pressure. Combined with my desire to have a travel instrument the logical conclusion was to start the... California Ukulele Project! Same woods, same general aesthetics, less pressure and simpler construction. A win all around. Status Report 1: All the materials are in house, though some have more drying to do and a lot more millwork remaining to boot. I have a rudimentary bending iron lefotover from the binding work on the semi-hollow, enough handtools to be dangerous, a drill press, and a very small workspace in the carport behind our lovely rental shack. Go time! Woke up jetlagged after returning home from Taiwan yesterday so I dropped the wife off at work (surgical resident, she's on call for the weekend so I can work aaaalll day.) I got out the wetstones and sharped all my chisels, the plane blades, and trued up all the surfaces. Then I jointed the Back and Soundboard and planed both to thickness. Lots and lots of shavings, but it was not nearly as hard as I had expected. 3 hours of careful blade honing was worth it for sure. It seems like everyone in the business sands their boards to thickness, which would have been fast and easy by comparison, but if Cumpiano hadn't textually encouraged the use of a handplane I might not have gone for it. It's slow, it's probably not perfectly even, but the surface is beautiful and the work is blissfully meditative. The curly walnut is gorgeous and the little sinker top is almost the same color but pinker. All in all, a good start and I'm happy to make some wood dust again. I feel waaay less anxious about a building a uke than a small jumbo, so I'm looking forward to the next steps. I'll keep you guys posted and get some pictures up soon. Peace, Dave P.S. Anyone else's fingers and palms stain a strange, splotchy purple when they handle cast iron while cutting certain woods like rosewoods or walnut? Everytime I spent more than an hour with a plane, chisel, scraper, or even hand files (plus a lot of wood dust) my hands looks frostbitten! It doesn't wash off entirely, but it's not real bothersome, I just have never seen anyone else exhibit these epidermal symptoms. Just curious.

Lemme guess, stewmac pot? They're crap, it has zilch to do with wiring it correctly or not. I had the same issue with 2 different blend pot vendors before I found the one that worked. Basically I looked into it and I seem to recall it having something to do with the stewmac (and other vendors) carrying blend pots that are designed for active setups. So, if you are looking for a passive blend pot, like the one in my guitar that actually works (finally), try the blend pots from one of three places: 1. guitar parts resource - http://www.guitarpartsresource.com/electrical_blendpots.htm 2. allparts - http://www.allparts.com/store/electronics-...ts,Category.asp 3. guitar electronics - http://www.guitarelectronics.com/category/...nic_parts.pots/ I'm pretty sure all these guys are selling the same stuff, but I can personally vouch for guitar parts resource. I recall other boards saying they are actually the only people that do "true blend," but from photos the other 2 look like they are selling the same product. Best of luck, -Dave

Thanks for all the kind words, guys! I really dig on the Z1 and Lesser Spotted Ironwood builds too, I'd do some things differently with the shapes but they're real nice instruments. Also I love the build quality and pitch-perfect humor of the The Yellow and Black attack. Probably not going to go out and buy one, but it's probably my second favorite! There's a lot to be said about making a guitar that is exactly what it is supposed to be, every detail is just right for that build and it's well executed for it's intention. Real quick reply RE: the action. The neck angle is there but very, very slight because it's effectively a flat top with just a slight curve relief over the face, just enough to give it some visual depth. That and the setup I used while routing slipped a bit and gave me less than I was planing for... Ultimately the action is probably higher than the yellow, pink, green, and black attack's, but it's mostly the sideways lighting in that shot that makes it look a mile in the air. I play 13's with pretty heavy attack, so I keep 'em higher than most to avoid fret buzz. For a while I had them setup suuuuper low, but I would get buzz when fretting chords at the nut (also, the second fret needs to be releveled just slightly, which exacerbates the issue). I will admit that the lack of a true carve and the current neck angle force the TOM to be higher than I'd like visually (though it's actually got enough room to drop until the strings hit the fretboard), but that's what you learn on your first build. Personally, I think it's not too hard to get the details right if you're willing to sweat the small stuff, but there are some subtleties in instrument design that all the reading in the world won't help you get right until you've tried your hand at building. Lessons for the next one! (Which will definitely be a ways out). Thanks again, all, I deeply appreciate the thumbs up given from a community that's been a great help to me. -Dave

I've been gigging with this guitar for almost a year and a half now, but only recently got around to taking some glamour shots. Introducing my first build, as seen in this thread, the nearly incomparable and cleverly named... Koa Semi-Hollow The Koa Semi-Hollow is, in bullets: - Flamed koa top plate with stylized f-holes - Striped and lightly figured African mahogany body; chambered/hollowed tuning-fork style (Scott French inspired), string-thru - Honduran mahogany neck; bolt-on with hand carved volute - Ebony fingerboard with black MOP fretboard markers and Myka-style silver outlined black MOP side markers - Rosewood binding with fine BWB purfling on all edges - Nitrocellulose lacquer finish (by Addam Stark, who absolutely rocks) Electronics: Two PAF-style gold humbuckers and L.R. Baggs Piezo tune-o-matic bridge controlled through: - Mag master volume (pull to kill) - Neck tone (pull to split) - Bridge tone (pull to split) - Mag blend - Piezo volume (pull to on) - Hidden in lower f-hole is a piezo mid-tone pot and bypass switch This thing has been everything I could have hoped my first build could be. Thick and sweet tone with smooth and responsive handling. I've been playing live with it for a while now, and it even inspired me to build a worthy tube-amp from scratch (you can find it on my website as linked in my signature). Here you can see the neck detail, including the volute, the heavy machine screws that hold the neck to the body through brass inserts, the string-thru ferrules, and the uninterrupted-grain electronics cavity cover. The cover was carefully routed out from the body with a 1/32 endmill in a Dremel, bound in rosewood to recover the kerf, and replaced to keep the woodgrain as seamless as possible. The body of the guitar sports Madagascar rosewood pickup rings, rosewood knobs (I still have to turn my own later) and all gold hardware. The strap button washers are made of silk I picked up in China on a business trip between building sessions. Here the silver outlined black MOP side-dots are clearly visible. The Black mother-of-pearl on the ebony fretboard blends in from most angles, but flashes bright red and green from others. This creates a nicely understated appearance with a subtle elegance that is just barely visible in half of the markers photographed here. The bookmatched headstock faceplate is made from the koa removed at the body's waist. White mother-of-pearl inlays of my last name and a signature symbol of my hands hopefully give off both a personal and professional touch at the same time. While it's tough to see unless you press your nose up against it, there is a sliver of bloodwood on a knuckle in the lower hand inlay. I have a slight accident that resulted in 8 stitches while working on this project and made reference to it in the inlays I was already working on. For more build images you can check out my webpage here additional shots: Hanging on the wall of an art gallery it was recently featured in Front oblique Front with highlight showing slight shaping of top Back with highlight Headstock with inlay detail With it's amp (see the amp's own webpage here...) Thanks for all the help this forum gave me, it made my life easier and filled me with both inspiration and cautious humility in my build. This guitar is easily one of my top 3 favorite projects of all time, and I've already been amassing wood for an acoustic! That, however is to be entered in a different GOTM many, many months from now. All the best, Dave

1. I have convinced myself that buildin g atrue archtop is about the hardest guitar build one can undertake, more so than a flattop ("normal") acoustic guitar. I have built only 1 guitar, a semihollow/chambered electric, but am preparing for an acoustic build and have read widely. I expect that if you have to ask how to do it in an online forum, you have a LOT more homework to do before you can build an archtop. 2. My favorite guitar building book of any genre is Robert Benedetto's "Making an Archtop Guitar". Buy it no matter what kind of guitar you're making, it's gorgeous and incredibly informative on a wide range of fine building techniques. Incidentally it will also teach you how to build an archtop. 3. Everything is doable, but you have to take your time and do your reading and/or practice. (Well, definitely practice, but extreme care can take you a long way on you first go.) 4. Best of luck. -Dave E.

I teach at the machine shop on our campus and we have one of these, which is a GREAT call around rookie shop users (and veterans too, mind you). The shop has, historically, lost 2 fingers on a table saw and now that's not a concern any longer. It has, in the last 2 years since it was installed, been triggered twice. 1. Student cutting aluminum/metallic backed acrylic (skin on metal = skin to the machine) 2. Student cutting VERY green wood. (that is, so green when we put it in a vise later and put mild pressure on it the wood was literally dripping out the end grain). 3. Student touching side of saw while carelessly replacing hands for a thiiiiiin cut. Probably wouldn't have chopped of a finger since it was away from the teeth... but better safe than sorry. Replacing the safety unit is simple, but about $250! Add the $150 for a nice blade too (since it ruins both) and its expensive upkeep. not as expensive as sewing a thumb back on though! In other news, it is also a very nice saw. Well designed, solid construction, lots of accessories, accurate cutting, and easily maintained. Whenever it's time for me to build up my own shop, in house, where there may be children running around (in the distant future) this will be a no-brainer: Sawstop for me! -Dave

Ansil, big props for making a bunch of amps and finding a way to pay for the hobby, it's nice work if you can get it. As for my comment that nobody builds "a circuit from scratch," it was not to imply that people don't sit down and work out new ideas on schematics and setups etc, but rather that in the current state of the art it's all about tweaking or modifying (more or less heavily) existing amp designs. That may be starting from the RCA handbook and working up from the super-basics, or modifying Fender schematics to integrate some Mesa circuitry, or putting your own spin on any or none of the above. I would be very surprised to hear about anyone who sits down and designs an amp by looking at tube schematics and then spinning all the circuitry around it. Since I figured all I would do if I were to work from a schematic level myself would be to take existing designs and make small modifications, it's not like I'm reinventing the wheel. As such... why not buy most of the wheels and focus on how to make 'em work (and, not to over-extend the analogy, go cruising sooner!). I'm not good enough on the EE side to do too many mods to analog circuitry, and my guess is most people asking for tips on DIY are in the same boat, thus kit it up! For those of you (Ansil) who can pull it off from a starting point that's a bit more abstract, by all means and you have my deepest respect. Peace, Dave

I built a dumble-inspired amp froma kit sold by Brown Note, the d'lite. It's pretty dang sweet and does everything a boutique amp should for a build cost of about $1000. The best part is this: all the parts, all the eyelet boards, the chassis, all the instructions (schematics plus physical layouts), online forum for their products (very well populated), good support from the guys, ALL make it pretty hard to screw up. You just supply the cabinet and the time with your hands. Note that I consider myself reasonably competent with building things, but high voltage makes me uppity. I learned a TON doing this project, and cannot explain how incredibly glad I am that I built from a nice kit instead of trying to make it all from a schematic. Unless you are incredibly good with circuits, and troubleshooting, in which case you probably wouldn't be asking for our input anyhow, I would very strongly suggest you go from a kit. I will add, though, that it is immensely satisfying to play through an entirely DIY rig. I don't really feel like I cheated on the amp because I was never going to build a circuit from scratch... no one does anyhow, so you may as well do yourself some favors. -Dave

The flame koa I used for my semi-hollow's top was WAY harder than most of the rosewood I've handled and cut. It was a beast on tools, but also not nearly as hard as ebony. I've never built an acoustic (collecting the wood though), so I have no expertise to add in application. I just wanted to note that some koa flitches can be very hard. Close to an old-growth, heavy walnut I suppose. One guy's opinion. - Dave

I can't speak to the standard martin stuff, but I can add a bit of mechanical engineering / manufacturing experience to the discussion and say that 1/4-20 is going to be very, very strong. I used 10-32's on my electric bolt-on build for a few reasons. 1. #10 machine screws are strong enough for any load-bearing applications that a guitar will ever see. 2. 32 threads per inch will yield much greater adjustability, force of engagement, and holding power than 20 threads per inch. 3. Slightly smaller head sizes seemed more visually balanced. As for threaded inserts I have used 2 versions in wood: the ones typically mentioned here with external threads which are driven into place by screwdrivers or allen keys and the ones which are press-fit in place and then expand for a tight fit when bolts are threaded into them (sometimes called finserts). I have to say I have developed a very strong preference for the finsert variety. \ The ones you screw in place, particularly those with flat-head slots are exceptionally easy to strip out, slip out of (hurting your work), are very tiring on your forearms to get in place, and they do not always end up very well aligned with the original hole you drilled (and they are super hard to correct the axial alignment of). The threaded ones are far more common, and they may be a bit stronger, but I no longer believe they are worth the effort and hassle. By contrast finserts are a breeze. Basically they are split down the center and compress into a pilot hole for easy insertion. When you insert a machine screw/bolt the compressed body expands, cutting into the wood walls and holding tightly via barbs and pressure. Thus they are super simple to install, easy to align with the holes (just make sure your bolt goes in at the angle you want it to) and have a holding strength that does not seem to be any weaker than the threaded sort. In fact it often seems like they hold tighter and the wood you are putting the inserts into does not get as damaged upon installation. I cannot speak to their actual holding power in contrast to the ones most people are used to, but I've never had any issues with my other non-guitar projects. So if I were to throw out what inserts I would (will) buy for my next project, I'd go with McMaster-Carr part number 90363A029. Here's a page on how they work, crazy simple: http://www.ezlok.com/InsertsWood/woodPlastic.html My two cents. -Dave

My guess is that it's wood dependent. My cedar topped Taylor (w. cocobolo) smells FANTASTIC, especially if it's been sitting in the case a while. Granted it's only 6 years old, but by comparison my es-135 (maple ply) is completely scentless. - Dave

Wow. Having spent a TON of time trying to get the purflings on my own f-holes (etc) perfectly mitered in the corners with marginal success, I must say those acute angles look absolutely PHENOMENAL. The overall shape really isn't to my own tastes, but the craftsmanship and detail looks impeccable so far. -Dave

I had a similar experience cracking my lacquer finish when I was an idiot about my bridge installation. To add to Drak's comment about using pipettes to deliver small amounts of liquid... you can also use pins or razor blades if you're careful. You won't be able to deliver much fluid at a time, but small drops of thinner or retarder will stick to the tip of pins or nails so you can more easily place them very precisely. It's slow work, but I hope you won't need to do much volume, and then you won't need to find more specialized equipment (or suck up any more fumes for that matter). - Dave

Well geez, it's all been said... GotM_of_the-Century I too thought mike was it when he posted first, but the more I look at it the less I like it (sorry man). I mostly like the shape, but I love the woods. Ultimately I'm not a fan of the finish or the general bulk, execution was just not up to the level of a few other competitors. In any other month it would be this one. Ultimately I decided to go with Russ's just ofr pure quality of execution. I actually don't like the body much at all, but the neck is stunning and the pinstriping details on the body are very very nice. Clean, very impressive build. - Dave

I'll say this about Asus, though, their stuff is pretty good in general. I'd personally take it over the Lenovo stuff (i.e. Thinkpads) just on build quality and components. Their design leaves something to be desired (they know we'd just nuke their plant if they even slightly copied teh designs we contract them to manufacture) but their build quality is pretty good. I mean, it should be since we keep sending guys like me over there for 5 months a year to help them get better at making laptops...

Ok I swore I was gonna stay out of this, but now I need to say something. I make Apple computers. I make them at the ASUS factory and there is no way in hell you can make that comparison. That's like saying Epiphones are made by Gibson, same thing. Sure the Epi plays well enough and does what you need it to do, but it's not a Gibson. Here's my 100% honest take: Hardware: Apple makes wonderful hardware that is actually reasonably priced, actually these days even cheaper than a Dell of identical parts. Now that's imporatant to note because the variety of Dells & HPs you can get is much larger than the variety of our lineup. If you need what we make, fantastic, but we aren't going to give you a ton of options on hardware guts. If you want a cheaper bare-bones PC you won't find it at Apple, but if you want a mid to high-end machine come to us and try 'em out. From a physical side, the side I work in, Apple makes the absolute 1000%, no crap, no exaggeration, best quality products in the world. I mean it and I'm not in marketing, I'm a manufacturing engineer. Next time you're in an Apple store go look at teh products and try to figure out how they're made, try to find a defect, and then look at another mass-produced product. 50% of my job is trying to explain to our customers/suppliers/etc that "good enough" isn't. You will NEVER see another tech company making products of comparable quality. This point I will defend to the death, so if you want to pick a bone with my arguments here, choose a different one. Software: OS X takes about 1 week to get used to if you've been in Windows land for a while. The new hires here who come from Wintel land look confused for a while, but then it clicks. Why does it click? It makes sense. It takes a while for your mind to stop "trying so hard" and looking for the bizarre workaround than comes from updating a legacy product that runs on the same core technology that existed in the 80s. However if you, like me as I prepare to go back to school, need to run Windows programs like CAD then the Macs a sort of compromise. They are plenty powerful enough to run Windows on the Intel chips, but it's clearly now the native what-it-was-designed-to-do setup and it won't be ideal. For me, though, the stability of the OS, the iLife suite of applications, and the generally MUCH better workability/functionality more than makes up for those deficiencies since I'm not on CAD all day. If I was I'd buy a tower workstation, but since most of my student time will still be spent on email, Office apps, the web, and iLife with sporadic use of SolidWorks it makes a ton of sense for me to pickup the MacBookPro I'mbuying when I leave. As an aside, my discount is not that deep so that is not a monetary decision for me. I have a Dell and I have a Mac and I can tell you it's an absolute no-brainer which I'd rather upgrade as I head back to class for my masters in engineering. The few programs that are Windows only I can now run on my Mac and I don't use any of them on a daily basis, so the marginal inconvenience is quite bearable. As for the complaints about busted hardware here's my spin: Apple has a repuation of making perfect stuff, of being unbreakable. Thus when Mac stuff does break, as all stuff is want to do, the complaints are much louder then when a Dell breaks because everyone expects to replace that cooling fan 6 times and have sticky non-functional keyboards from Gateway. All products have issues, and the closer to a major revision or product release you buy the more risk you accept with that new product. Wait about 2 months after we release anything and that product will in all likelihood never give you problems. If it does, we deal with it quickly (or so I hear, my channels are different from yours). Blaaargh, I didn't really mean to go off like that, but that's my quick and dirty spin on it from the inside out. -Dave

1280 x 854 on an old Apple PowerBook (FYI your page looks fine in Safari, unlike on Russ's Windows machine). I tried to design my page for it to be about 800 pixels wide x 600 tall for the base size, then additional length for "content" pages could over run with scrolling. I think the 600 x 800 setups is something of a standard guideline. (I'm not really in the webdesign biz). If you're using something with much higher resolution it will make your webpage look tiny and odd, but it's much more universally accessible. Food for thought. - Dave

Suggestions: 1. On home/index page with the images up front: make each image a link to either (a) a magnified/larger image or, even better, ( a link to that guitar's gallery 2. The home page is a bit busy, or perhpas just laid out a bit clumsily (in my opinon). Here's my quick hit list, from broad to specifc pseudo-gripes: - Some of the text you want to get across seems hard to get to (i.e. scrolling is involved). Maybe break out the "about us" into a separate page to elminate clutter. - Too many images that don't really correlate with anything in particular and thus don't make a distinct statement. Perhaps select a few super-choice images to use on a larger scale instead of 6 smaller ones that don't visually flow very well to me. - I don't find centered text easy to read for full sentences. It's good for titles, but people have learned to read English in left-justified layouts. Using centered text is just marginally unconfortable enough for me to read that I subconciously skipped it all. - Big gaps between text and images. All that white space really breaks the flow of the page. Try to avoid making people have to scroll on the first page. Recent studies show most people decide if they are going to look over/like/stay on your page in about 1/10th of a second. On my machine there is not very much content or visual interest on the first page (I probably have a lower resolution screen than you. Remeber these sorts of factors!) but there is a lot of white space. - Dig the logo and the navigation bar, buuuuut since I've already noted my older machine has a lower resolution screen than many laptops it takes up about 1/4 of the page's visual field. Since I don't really want to focus on it too much unless I'm navigating, which I can figure out with smaller logos, I would consider scaling it back a bit. This is especially true because with the gray "welcome" or "pricing" titles below each page I'm left with less than 2/3 of the page for "real" content. 3. Your photos are great but your copy needs work. Things like the tech specs seem "rambly" and the visual layout of tightly packed bullet points makes them hard to read easily. It often feels forced to me too. Why try to sounds like factory machines when you can (and are ostensibly trying to sell) your individual crafstmanship. Make it personal! Example: "Everything from the neck carve down to the finish was chosen by Paul... Our legendary neck means you will be able to play faster and longer without the hand fatigue you might experience with a “factory” neck that is not built to your specifications." How can your necks be legendary already? How especially can they be legendary and alow people to play better if they are all unique and built to each individual's specs? This may seem like a nitpick but if Paul chose the neck shape then the awesome design that enables superior playing is implicity HIS legendary neck design. Really what you should be touting is somthing like: "As a small team we take pride in working directly with you to understand everything from your playing style to the size and shape of your hands so we can design and custom carve the most comfortable, best-playing neck you have ever owned." On a different note, I agree with Russ about the feel of the page. Much more appropriate for what you guys are up to and more personal feeling. I will say I prefered the old page's more muted gray tones than this new ones harsher white background. All in all, I like it. I just think it needs to be polished a bit more. (As maybe all sites do, like mine for instance... shouldn't throw stones now should I!) Keep up the good work. -Dave

For my volute, which fits me great, I kept as much wood as I could in the transition area, but not directly behind the nut. For one thing my neck is already beeeeeefy, so I highly doubt the volute was necessary. For me it was more about the "I made this by hand" statement that a volute makes (or made at one point) than it was about strength. I recommend, after 1 build, that you just make it oversize and take off material until it's comfortable. You can always take more off until it fits your hands and playing style. I don't have the problems that BiliousFrog mentioned because I clearly fret those chords differently. Adjust accordingly, it's your guitar. -Dave

Maybe I'm too late for this, but here's my 1-time only experience w. a slight volute carve on a scarf jointed honduran mahogany neck. Mine looks fine at the glue joint as the open grain & consistent color of teh mahogany blends very very well, but the glue line on the back kind of stands out if you look hard enough. I hand carved mine with gouges my grandfather who I never knew, and who is my namesake, owned. My old man tells me I take after his ho0bbies much better than he does, so it was cool to use these tools a bit on the project. I don't have any great pictures for you, but here's what I've got as enhanced for grain contrast as I can make it. -Dave

Well, there are a number of options I know of but before I go into dissertation mode, there's a few wuestions that need to be addressed first: - Do you want it to be variably opaque or is on/off OK? - Is mostly opaque OK, or does it need to be totally solid? - Did you want a color other than black? - Does it need to be electronic (i.e. truly a switch/battery situation?) - What is your price range? - How good are you at making reasonably complicated mechanical assemblies? Many ways to skin a cat, but ultimately how much you want to pay for the skinning services and what exact kind of pelt you're looking for will be big, big factors. - Dave P.S. Most have to do with polarizing films.

3 Pedals: Vox Wah Ernie Ball Volume Boss TU-2 Tuner The rest is in the notes, fingers, and koa/mahogany semi-hollow specifically tap tuned to get rich harmonics on flat fifths and sevenths when played in an environment with over 22% humidity but under 2,300 ft using strings dipped in WD-400 for 3 seconds and then put in the freezer under tri-tip for 2 weeks before being placed under photos of Hendrix with Miles Davis' Bitches Brew playing at 73 decibels for about 2 hours and 5 minutes. Really brings out the sound of those clams.

Well bending wood dry is no problem if it's real thin and a flexible sort of wood. I mean if you're using green yew or something you can tie it in knots, but not so with other woods. As others havae noted you should build/buy a bending iron and stem bend your bindings. It's not that hard after a bit of practice, so don't worry about it too much. One thing I must absolutely stress from my own first experiences with wood binding is to be very careful with your wood selection. I started out trying to do bloodwood because I think it looks awesome but I couldn't get a radius tighter than about 6" before I'd break it as the wood is quite brittle. Also it scorches very easily, so even if I managed to bend it enough it would be so charred that after scraping it off like a burnt piece of toast there was nothing left. Then I tried rosewood. Hallaleuja that was easy! Get that wood up to temp, a little steam, and BAM you can bend anything down to about 2" without trying too hard if you're patient and don't rush it. I determined rosewood likes radii larger than 1.5" (my horns are 1" diameter! I broke a TON of binding sticks before it worked). There are other woods with bendable reputations, but in my experience rosewood is a great starter. Dave

Meh, not into it. Like to woods, looks well built, but gimmicky. I'd much prefer to play a Charlie-Hunter style 8-string novax, if i had the skills or inclination.

Once I finished my axe it became painfully clear that my amp blows the sound locked up in my guitars. Time to get something better than my Fender Performer 650 (loud, decent cleans and 'verb, lousy OD). So in the spirit of apparently having to make absolutely everything I own by my own hands ('cept clothes) I've decided to build a dumble clone. Unfortunately my EE skills pale next to my ME skills, so after much searching I chanced upon the guys of Brown Note, who have recently finished building a kit to build one I have recently purchased. Hooray for too many projects. It will be cool to be playing a rig that's entirely my handiwork, though, and I look forward to making a nice hardwood cab for it! Can't wait to get home from China (been here a month on business, killin' me) and play again, not to mention build something. Once I get back I'll finally get some good shots of the finished semi-hollow and put in my GOTM entry. -Dave