Xanthus

Australian? Then you'll feel right at home here Yeah, I know it's a bit crazy to pay for just a piece of paper, but I'd honestly trust one of those sites than have to worry about/hassle with finding a picture or outline online then having to scale it up and print it out, paste it together and all, ya know? I think it's worth the convenience knowing that it's accurate. I'm actually planning a Rhoads for my next build, over vacation, and I'll be paying my own $10 soon enough.

http://www.guitarplansunlimited.com/Body%20Templates.htm http://www.guitarbuildingtemplates.com/RandyRhodes.htm Links to Rhoads templates. One of them costs a lot more, but the hard part is already done

I like it! Love the shape and the color scheme too. How does it sound?

I like that body shape, it reminds me a bit of the Vampyre basses that Warwick makes. Very cool I'd also agree with Jon, though, in either jointing or dowel-ing the pieces before gluing them. Even though you said you did, it doesn't look so in the pictures. I'm not calling you on it, just saying. Also, the glue pictures show 4 pieces being glued together, but the cut out body is a 5-piece. What happened there?

Oooooooooooooooh... Anyways, that's a good method of doing it. I was thinking about doing the tack/staple ends method, but that works too. What's your method of tapering the fingerboard to size? I'm assuming something powered, a scroll saw, perhaps. I should track down someone who has one...

Still looking good, but I've got a question about the newest pic. What's that dark, conspicuous line on the fretboard? I hope it's not a booboo, thought if it was, I think you'd have informed the community

Nice work! It's shaping up to be a much better piece of machinery already. My only comment would be to switch the pickups out with something that compliments your style of music better. O'course, I say that every time, whenever I don't know the manufacturer/model of the pickups Where'd you order that killswitch from? I'd much prefer getting one of those, an actual button, as opposed to wiring a switch so that it's dead in the middle. I was originally thinking of using a stompbox button, but those lock in place, which means twice the button pushing, hahaha

Meh, either way would look awesome. It's something to keep in mind, assuming that there's a fairly cheap chrome paint that actually looks good. Also I'm taking a guess that if the chrome dissolves in water, I'd have to intercoat clear it or something prior to dipping.

I wonder if one could use the chrome paint to do a swirl over a black guitar. That'd look amazing, in my opinion

A MAHOGANY Strat! A DEEP TENON Strat! Go you! The way they should have been made all along... It's looking really sharp, I'm glad to see this isn't just a replica job. Keep it up!

There not is really one correct answer to your question. You can make the body as thick or as thin as you want, but yeah, in my opinion 58mm is a bit thick. What you COULD do is plane that 10mm off the bottom, and then use a router to make some chambers to reduce the weight of the body. Something like this. Afterwards, you could glue a thin back onto the Les Paul and proceed as normal. If you could get a maple back to glue on, that might look really nice, too. Or if you're going to be painting the back a solid color, the wood appearance wouldn't matter. The procedure would actually be really simple, too, because the top isn't carved, so you have a nice surface to rest it on.

The XT Live is the best invention ever ...With the very possible exception of the Vetta II, haha I got scared for a second, though, when I clicked on the link, because I saw the transplants and though "Oh that's just too bad, he'll have to use the #(*% fixed bridge or the (#&! trem bridge." And apparently neither is the case, and I didn't know that. That's pretty cool If, like others have mentioned, it's not a big deal to buy a guitar and throw away almost everything in it. Hell, I'm still trying to scrounge up 50 or so extra bucks for neck wood this summer.

Take THAT, rock and roll angel!

I actually like the sharp horn idea, it's a nice update to the classic LP design, and a welcome change from all of these PRS-style builds. To comment on the neck heel as well, I think that a neck-through or deep-set neck would be better, because with the body join so high up on the neck, you're going to want as little bulk on the heel as possible. You could probably follow the "swoosh" idea and carve out a pretty awesome neck joint, considering this is an LP shape. http://public.fotki.com/xanthus/misc/scaledrawing2.html Check out that quick photoshop to give you an idea of what I mean. It's a neckthrough carve more like a traditional strat-style guitar. It might look pretty good ::EDIT:: Always remember neck angle for the bridge you're putting on (I'm guessing standard TOM/tailpiece), and if you're concerned about weight, you can always chamber the body, assuming you want to put a top on it.

Yeah, you did get it But I think that the design looks pretty sweet! Nice work, so long as the string holes aren't covered by the wood overlay you put on. That was the problem with my build, I had to recess 2 tuners (staggered Sperzels), and ended up having to thickness the whole thing again.

I used a prebuilt Carvin necktrhough for my project, and routed the recess into the body as well. It really wasn't that hard to do (save for the fact that I forgot to take into account the thickness of the paint and therefore my height adjustment thumbscrews didn't fit). Ferrules are a must, though. Pics here: http://public.fotki.com/xanthus/ I was wondering, planning for my second build, if it would be possible to make a "body angle" jig and route out a body angle onto the neckthrough blank, if one wanted a neckthrough with a neck angle. My initial thoughts think this would work, but you'd have to glue a piece of wood onto the back of the guitar body, so that you don't have a tapered guitar Wouldn't be much of a problem if the body is a solid color. Natural or transparent bodies, maybe not so much.

Ain't it great? Glad to know you got everything under control. Good luck with the build, and pics pics pics!!! Btw Prostheta, AWESOME bass build. Too bad my bassist won't let me build one for him How does the slot in the board affect the playing, that high? Or does it at all? And what's the amp head you've got in the back of the picture, too? Is that a 5150? Seems you took the grill off of it

Well, you're talking about a 2mm difference, which is .07 of an inch. I would just suggest to raise everything 2mm accordingly (bridge, pickups, and check/adjust intonation again), and you should be all set. Setting up a router and a jig to take care of 2mm seems like a lot of effort for not a lot of change. Alternative idea: If you're that bugged about having a higher fretboard (I personally don't like having my strings that close to the body), you could clamp down the neck heel and shave 2mm off with sandpaper. It's a lot less work/prep than using a router.

At least if it's routed into the neck, you can switch the neck out for a different one and not have there be a strange-looking route in the guitar

I have the same setup on the guitar I just built, TOM and string-through. As soon as I read this thread, I ran to check if I had any strange sympathetic vibrations coming out of my guitar too Luckily I think I escaped unharmed. I personally like the feel of taut strings, so the string-through method works well for me. Then I got to thinking... Is there a way for someone running into this problem to get rid of these vibrations as well as keep the feel of "tight" strings? Basically like, a non-invasive procedure. I wonder if there's a way to dampen the part of the string beyond the bridge, if that would help. Haha, now I want to have a broken guitar to experiment on! And I should find a guitar with a wraparound bridge, and see how that feels compared to a TOM or stringthrough. On an unrelated note, would you mind telling me where you buy your SS fretwire, Wes? I'm debating fretting my next project guitar with it.

I think, according to your drawing, that the spoke-adjustment-space would overlap the truss rod route. Or, if you're going to route into the neck pocket, the straight truss rod channel that you drew would work fine. With the Music Man guitars (I can't admit I've played any other spoke-adjusting guitars), only the wheel and the little threaded attachment stick out from the neck; none of the actual truss rod sticks out from the neck heel. So your drawing should be spot on, and you should fit the rod in the straight channel so that just the spoke and threads are sticking out. They way I see it, the anchor area is the wood that's right up against the double-nuts, so you want it nice and snug in there. As for heel adjustment? If you're using a multilam neck, the neck will be plenty strong, especially if the pieces are quartered. I've got a 2-piece neck on one of my guitars, the other two are 1-piece, and I have never had any problems with the headstock adjustment truss rod. And none of them have scarf joints But I know where you're coming from, better safe than sorry. I'd have done it on my own build, if I didn't buy a prefab neck. So how am I doing, closer to what you're looking for? hahahaha

http://www.ernieball.com/mmonline/specs/inst_luke.jpg http://img3.musiciansfriend.com/dbase/pics.../7/3/408073.jpg From what I know about heel-adjusting truss rods, and what I've played of the Music Man guitars (see pic above), it looks like you'll have to route an extra notch in the neck pocket for the spoke access. StewMac says thusly: "To install the “spoke nut” truss rod, counterbore a -3/8"-diameter hole 3/4" deep to accept the shank of the adjustment nut. Allow at least 1/16" clearance between both flat sides of the spoke nut and the guitar’s neck heel and neck/body cutout. This will prevent the nut from binding on these surfaces as it is adjusted. A 1/4" x 5/8" access rout in the instrument’s pickguard/top and the neck/body cutout is required." So what I gather is that you need to either make a notch in the neck/fretboard for the spoke, and recess the spoke into the neck itself, or leave the spoke sticking out and make the same size notch in the body. In the choice between the two, I'd go with a headstock-adjusting HotRod but if the product is already bought, you gotta make do, eh? So I hope I'm answering your question, the only remaining decision is whether to make the route in the neck or neck pocket.

Hmm, that's an interesting way to go abotu the neck angle, but is there any guarantee that the wood will glue and dry at that angle? I had to actually BONDO my guitar body because the wings didn't dry straight. I sanded them with a huge block and bondo'd the low spots, because I didn't have access to a planer. I was thinking of drawing out my blank on the side of the maple and taking into account a 2 degree neck angle, then cutting it out. I just like the feel of the neck angle, even though it isn't all that much, just keeps the neck a bit closer to your body. I agree with ya, it feels much better sitting down and playing a guitar with no neck angle.

Wow, what an awesome color! The guitar really came out awesome! My only comment is that I'd feel kinda restricted by the 19 frets. Not that I use them all the time anyways, I just like knowing I have 2 full octaves to slide up and down But man, the blend of all those reds.... Congrats. So I take it that, because of the neck through and the fact that you recessed the bridge, you don't have a neck angle (I admit I haven't read all 8 pages), is that correct? I'm planning my second build, and I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile to build a neck angle into my neckthrough blank... Something to ponder. But anyways, it came out really sharp. Hope it treats ya nicely!

It looks to me like the weight of the tuners and the amount of wood on the headstock would send the bass for a nosedive. I think the headstock shape looks fine, but maybe the body should be a little larger? I dunno, something looks out of proportion. Here is a Fender 5-stringer, complete with those enormous tuners and therefore a lot of headstock mass. Might it be worth it to track down a CAD of a "traditional" 5-in-line bass for comparison? I think the thing that is throwing the pic off is the size of the body. I personally love the shape of the MM basses, 3x2 headstock, teardrop body, everything. I might try to convince him that it might not be the best move, to go with a 5-in-line headstock, especially if the body's that small. But then again, making the body bigger might solve the problem too, I dunno.