Geo

Personally, I would make the waist narrower, and have each bout curve farther in towards the center of the body (if that makes sense...) I think it's no secret (or coincidence ) that good-looking solidbodies resemble a female outline. (Think Tele, Strat). So, for me, this body doesn't have that... but it's a matter of taste, so if you like it, go with it. Note that real violins, violas, etc. DO have this "feminine" figure. I suggest that you draw the centerline and scale length first... then see how your shape relates to it.

I think it's cool. I like how the fingerboards "rub" each other. I wouldn't try to play it... and the control layout also seems complicated. But it's pretty sweet.

That sounds cool. I think an "unfinished" rosewood neck would feel amazing. PRS does a guitar with a rosewood neck: http://prsguitars.com/moderneagle/index.html

How are you finishing that rosewood neck? I'm curious... could you leave a rosewood neck "unfinished" and apply the same stuff you wipe onto the fingerboard? A "raw" neck like this could be super cool, if it would hold up.

Here's a thought for getting the sawdust out of the pores... a vacuum cleaner with handheld attachment?

Hey MCH, If you like the body shape, that's the point. Aesthetic things are hard to nail down, but I agree that the body looks great with the narrower waist. However--and I have utmost respect for everyone who has commented--don't let the negative comments discourage you. If the guitar plays great, sounds great, and looks great to you, then it's a great guitar. Even if folks don't like it, it looks like you've done a great job making it. Better than I could...

Very cool guitar. To my eyes, it looks better than a PRS. As to single coils... it really is a crapshoot. I rehearse in a house where I can't use my humbuckers in single-coil mode--it hums so loud, it sounds like something is wrong. But then we play in a room on campus and single-coil mode is DEAD QUIET! I should add, the guitar I'm talking about has no special shielding of the control cavity, and no shielded wire beyond the pickup leads. But so far, to my ears, single coils in general have more character (especially for clean sounds), so I think it's worth the troubles.

No one can answer that for you. It depends on the height of the fingerboard above the surface of the body. You need to know the maximum and minimum height of the saddles on the bridge you want to use. You would use this figure in the full-sized, edge-on drawing which I'm sure you've made. If you haven't made that drawing yet, don't start working on the guitar, you will waste all the materials! If you raise the neck higher relative to the plane of the body, you may not need a neck angle. I believe (could be wrong) that some SG's were made with "raised" necks and no neck angle, using tuneomatic bridges. So it all depends on the adjustability range of your saddles and how you place the neck relative to the body. The Hiscock book will help you immensely. I'm very new to this too, so corrections may be needed.

Interesting. Not my style, but it's definitely original, and I think that's pretty cool.

Thanks for all the replies. That could be. I will check it. This happened after I adjusted intonation, so maybe the saddle being dragged backwards over the plate upset the "firmness against the plate" of one of the height-screws. This is a tilt back, 3L-3R head. The problem is not at the nut, I think, because it doens't only happen on the open note. It is based on the pick attack. With the very lightest pick (you know, so soft you would never play that way) I don't hear it. But with any "reasonable" pick, from gentle playing up to rockin' out, it's there. Also, it's present when fretting the last fret on the fingerboard, so I don't think it's hitting another fret. The action is high anyway. I think it MUST be at the bridge. Thanks for the help... with any luck, I'll have this sorted out soon.

Hi, I finished building an electric guitar. It has developed a "sitar sound" (suddenly a high harmonic "seperates" from the fundamental and is very audible) which is consistent on the B string and happens sometimes on the thin E string. I know it is not fret buzz/rattle, because it will do it with a very light pluck and I can see that the string is not hitting the frets. The action isn't that low anyway. This happens whether the string is fretted or open, so it's not at the nut. I think it's at the bridge. Here's what I think the problem is: I adjusted the intonation at the bridge. Perhaps it was unnecessary, but I tuned each string down significantly (maybe a 3rd or 4th down) when adjusting the saddle, mostly not to pull the string too tight when moving the saddle back. I think in tuning the B string back up, it caught some sort of kink right where it leaves the bridge. Here's why I think that: I can tune the string down a 3rd or so, and it won't do the sitar sound. As I tune it back up, it doesn't do it. Then, as it reaches a half step away from correct pitch, the sitar sound reappears and is there "in full force" when the string is back at correct pitch. It seems like the kink moves back off the edge of the saddle as the string is tuned down, and then pulled back up as the string goes to the correct pitch. One more thing... I have not changed strings to test this. I will, but I don't have any strings right now. I just wanted to throw this out there and see the more experienced folks think.

Thanks for all the router info, guys. "Congratulations on the build. Do you have any pictures of the back of the body?" Thanks Jon. No pics of the back yet, but I'll take some when I get a chance. Basically... it's the same color as the sides, with some Strat-style relief carving.

How can you see the trussrod channel buried under the fingerboard? I see what you're saying. I'm not sure why it looks that way in the picture. I cut the channel on a table saw, and I know it's at a right angle to the glued face of the neck. Sometimes digital pictures are deceiving, I guess. I know, I'm really going to save my pennies for a router now. Thanks for the advice.

I don't have a router. I should probably get one, but they're so expensive! Then I could do bindings too, so I guess I'll have to get one some time.

Dude, just leave the bloodstains and finish it clear! Girls will be amazed !

Thanks for the replies. This project was something of a transition between not caring out mistakes, and trying to do a professional job. With making this guitar playable, I couldn't live with mistakes... but aesthetically, for this guitar, I just didn't care. I feel like now I have gotten some of the skills down (neck carving, fretting, the scarf joint) and I'm now free to do a better aesthetic job on the next project. So, just some explanation for that... I have to use a jigsaw to cut out things like bodies and headstocks, and sometimes it just won't budge--and by the time you see smoke, it's already burned. I also do all sanding by hand (I know, I'm stuck in the dark ages ), so I didn't sand the sides any farther than trying to remove some saw-wandering.

I hope you're putting a tube amp in there. Of course, the transformers will be heavy. I guess you could put a tiny solid state "amp" in there.... but why waste all the tone in your guitar on a lame-o amp? Whatever you do, have fun!

Hey y'all. This is my second project. I finished it yesterday and played it in church today! My first build was NOT good--this guitar is sweet. Body--poplar; top--spruce (w/small cavity and soundhole); neck--mahogany; fingerboard--cocobolo; scale--25 1/4"; electronics--2 Golden Age humbuckers from Stewmac; master coil cut; PU selection; master volume. http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q119/Ge...uitarfinished1/

If you want to pay an arm and a leg.

That would be a whole lot easier than trying to solder to the cover.

You might need a more powerful iron. I wouldn't even try to solder to such a large piece of metal with my iron, which is 40 watts. Also, if the tip on your iron is really old and not well tinned, it can have trouble heating anything other than solder. You probably know all that, but just in case...

Hey man, You sound a lot like me (college sophomore/junior). I've also only been playing for 2 1/2 years. This hobby is addictive! I've made one guitar that is really horrible (though I love it since I made it), but I'm working on another onenow that's turning out great so far. So, even if your first project has some flaws, you'll get better and better.

If you want to use a tune-o-matic bridge, you may need to incorporate a neck angle. I've never looked too closely at a tune-o-matic, but I think they are considerably taller than the Strat/Tele type bridge. You should probably know the minimum and maximum height of the bridge you'll be using, so you can draw it on paper and figure out the neck angle.

Sounds like an awesome project. If you have time, I would wind my own PU. For all things tube amps... check out this forum. http://hoffmanamps.com/Forum/yabb2/nph-YaBB.pl Building an amp is easier than building a guitar--you just connect the dots. You just have to learn the safety stuff for high voltages. After your guitar, you should DEFINIETLY build an amp! It's awesome.

Wow, that looks fantastic. The color scheme reminds me of oil spilled in a parking lot!