Jump to content

Dave I

Established Member
  • Posts

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dave I

Profile Information

  • Location
    Wisconsin

Dave I's Achievements

Collaborator

Collaborator (7/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. For a guitar build I'm designing with a buddy (he's got a woodworking business and I'm giving him some ideas to play with), I'd like a hollow-body. However... I've sort of fallen in love with the idea of a heavily contoured and ergonomic guitar. I'm thinking something along the lines of Myka Guitars (and eventually I'd like to save up for one of his, it just hasn't been in the cards just yet). But I'm looking at something that's got that seamless sort of flow, and I like the look (and presumably the feel) of his that are one-piece backs that just curve around without any edges. So my question is two-fold. First, can you get those kinds of ergonomics with a semi-hollow, or would that just be too complicated to make work with the bent sides and carved top and back? I have seen Ovation make some contoured acoustics, but I don't know how to give my buddy any advice for planning that. Second, if you carve out huge chambers (or carve the whole thing out and add a separate center block, if that would make sense) and make the top and back thin enough to be resonate but thick enough to be be structurally sound and not feedback like crazy, how much of the traditional semi-hollow sound and feel? Because part of what I loved about the semi-hollows I have owned is how they just vibrated your whole body with them. It may be silly (or not), but I loved that kinesthetic part of playing. If I could add a separate build question, I'm thinking of a black limba back, walnut top, rosewood neck, and either a rosewood or ebony fretboard. What would be the difference between staying with black limba for the center block vs. the more traditional maple or mahogany? I've read the tonewood talk over the years, but with this much going on that's already non-traditional, not to mention the electronics, I'm not sure if it would matter. That said, I'm open to being told I'm wrong. -Cheers
  2. Good points. I'm less obsessed about it than I was. There's so much more to dwell on. Now I'm about ready to rough-cut the body, I'll make a neck template first and then rough-cut the neck. I suppose I should probably add the cavity routes to my template for the controls & wiring sometime too. Hopefully I can get that done this weekend and then I'll work on my pickup & neck angle jig. -Cheers
  3. Hey Scott, thanks for the best wishes. I've spent some time on your build #3 progress thread (nice work on that one, by the way). It's given me some good ideas. But yeah, I'm going to take the consensus advice and go w/ play #2, leave the template alone, and just chill out. Thanks for well wishes on the familial addition as well. It's our second, so I'm more nervous about the guitar than the baby. Thanks anyway. -Cheers
  4. Here is what I've got planned. I got plans for a Les Paul, and my copy of Make Your Own Electric Guitar, however my intention is to give it a contoured neck heel rather than a total clone. Pretty much the guitar idea I posted about here: http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=45994 It is going to be a 24.75" scale LP-style with a fat neck, Mahogany neck & body, flamed Maple, Rosewood board with split-block inlays (I'm buying the fretboard premade, don't feel comfortable with my ability to do inlays quite yet), and a stop-tail. I'm planning a long full-width-tenon through the neck pickup pocket, a 3.5 degree neck angle to keep the TOM as close to the body as possible, a non-G headstock, and for the finish I'm thinking of trying for something like a leather brown with a subtle black burst on the edges to enhance the carved top. Anyway, I figured I would post my progress here as motivation to work on this, and to get helpful advice in the process. I will be upfront about this, there will probably be some delay partway through as my wife and I are expecting our second child in February, although if you still feel inclined to give me crap about being lazy, by all means feel free. This is also my first build but I'm going to be meticulous (I'm also largely going to be using hand tools and handheld power tools, buying what I need along the way) and taking my time so hopefully it turns out alright. If not, nothing ventured nothing gained, there's always next time, and so on and so forth. So here's what I've got so far. I also have a question about the contour at the end, and if you have any advice along the way feel free to shoot. Here's my paper cutout. It's the body from Tom Bartlett's '59 Les Paul plans, but it's not going to end up being a to-spec LP or anything. I'm keeping the front of the body as such though, I just like the design. Note the nice grease spot I got from laying it on my counter. Did I mention I have a 4-year old daughter? Here the old-faithful MDF template. I made one and had a slight indent in the tail end of the body so made a second one. I'm using a jigsaw which I am finding out is much less convenient than a bandsaw. Still, it looks more or less like a Les Paul, no? Here's the template & paper cutout side-by-side. As an aside, nothing warms a woman's heart quite like their husband leaving project stuff on the counter. That said, and in an entirely unrelated note, I'm off to clean my stuff up after I post this. Here are two copies of the MDF template. This is here to demonstrate my planned cutout for the body (you can see where I penciled in a possible cutaway). I am trying to get the contour down so that from the front the cutout looks like a standard LP and does not start curving in too soon and on the back curves in a nice accessible way and gets as much wood out of the way for the best possible upper fret access while preserving as much neck joint (for stability and any tonal benefits) as possible. Here is my question, actually two questions: 1) Should I just keep on trying to pencil in the cutout until I'm happy with how it looks then modify/sand until it actually fits on the guitar itself? Or; 2) Should I just cut it as-is and use a file & sandpaper to just take as much (or as little) as it needs to feel ergonomic up & down the neck? That's all for now. I'll put up pics of the wood later. I haven't touched it yet (I'm waiting to get the templates perfect first). -Cheers
  5. What is the best way to plan that sort of a contour out? Not to be dense, but are there templates or tutorials for that? My apologies in advance if they exist and I've missed them. I have my template made, but it just has the normal squared neck heel (for now). -Cheers
  6. Maybe one fairly specific question. If I just round the treble-side of the pocket ala. the aforementioned designs like an Axcess, Myka, or Feline neck joint, should i reinforce the neck with carbon fiber? If so, where, just the area directly in & above the joint? I'm guessing doing it the whole neck would be overkill and change the overall sound of things. -Cheers
  7. I'm planning your basic single-cut LP-style guitar. It's not a clone, but pretty standard specs relative to that style of guitar. However, I'm looking at having a contoured/blended heel. I don't really shred, just melodies that sometimes get me high up the neck. Basically, wondering three things: 1) Tenon: Should I plan on doing the tenon to be full-width so it matches the width of the fretboard all the way through? This being so any contouring of the neck joint would not break through to the tenon. Any pro's/con's of traditional tenon vs. full-width? 2) Neck joint: Any thoughts on how much is actually required to cut away to give nice upper fret access without compromising strength of the joint, or (without getting too voodoo about it) how it might effect the tone, if at all? 3) Design: Any templates, designs, or general how-to advice out there I should consider? FWIW, here are the basic styles I think look the nicest a/o most useful: This one is apparently a Feline guitar neck heel and seems functional without being too extreme. Here is one from a Myka guitar. It looks about the sexiest I've seen, although I am not sure I would ever get my thumb down far enough to sit on the back of the body itself. Still, it looks very slick and ergonomic. -Cheers
  8. Sure. I'm really just looking for approximations at this point. I know I could probably throw together anything and it might come out one way or the other. Still, some combos seem to have a history of being more successful in general than others. So sure, I know that with electronics & EQ I can account for a lot of stuff, but voodoo or otherwise it gives me a place to start. It also apparently gives an excuse for puns. -Cheers
  9. I think that the neck would be too slick (presuming you peel it?). Plus, seems like the action might be kinda mushy. I also think something with more fiber & protein would be better, although "ripe banana" probably has that nice relic'd look right out of the box. Maybe. Force of habit. And why not use EVIL wood while we're at it? Not every guitar has to be GOOD. You need the Yang to the Yin. Yeah, but rubber cement would capture the element of childhood. Totally cool for capturing Mojo. I think. -Cheers
  10. Good point. It's going to be a double-cut to boot. Yeah, I guess I am hoping for a chimier/livelier/less-muddy(?) tone than a LP (or alternately warmer/fatter/thicker/rounder-chime-than-a-Tele-or-Strat tone) but with the playability of the bigger scale and double-cut design, not to mention the looks of the aforementioned hardwoods . But yeah, it could end up being brighter a/o just different than I want. That said, I do have a standard LP-design guitar that I really like and it's not going anywhere so it's not like I'm particularly lacking for that particular tone. True. I guess I'm more or less looking for a good tone with nice highs & lows and thicker/rounder sounding peaks on the EQ (as opposed to overly sharp/shrill, hence my use of flowery terms like "silky", "syrupy", "creamy", etc. which in real terms probably mean very little). That's where the Les Paul-type tone comes into play. That said, I want a bit more of a focused sound of the notes and a bit more chime (daresay a bit more Fender-y) than a typical LP (or at least MY Les Paul-style) and I really like the acoustic sound of my Strat-copy so perhaps I'm fine with it being less LP-like than it sounds (although I do like the warmer/thicker/rounder sounds to at least be there) and just using the EQ to shape how things end up post-amplification. -Cheers
  11. So I'm trying something new (to me). I'm planning a 25.5" (Fender-scale) set-neck. For aesthetics (largely, plus smoother feel w/ an oil finish) I'm planning on a flamed-Maple neck w/ laminate stripes, done in a thick-neck (because I've grown to like the feel of thicker necks and a bit in hopes it might get a thicker tone than a thinner neck). I'm also thinking of an Ebony board because of the looks and feel. What I'm not sure of is what body woods to use. I'd like to use a nice curly Maple top. However, I'm not sure what would match with that for the body-back. I would like to do something with a thick body like a LP, just for the mass, and tonally would like something that will be full sounding and a bit silky/smooth with nice low-end and just "big" sounding notes, not entirely unlike a LP or a fatter/warmer Tele in a weird way, however I'm looking for something with a bit less slur, a bit "livelier", and a bit more chime, articulation, "cut" (for leads & melodies), and clarity than my LP-style (or more of a syrupy sounding Tele than a twangy one). I know I can control a lot of that with pickup design and amp settings, and in fact the neck pickup I'm planning in particular (Vintage Vibe Charlie Christian-style CC-Rider) will probably benefit from the snappier woods & longer scale as it's a very fat/bassy pickup, and I can get a warmer humbucker for the bridge. As for my possibilities . . . Mahogany seems the most natural fit, however I've read that Maple necks & Mahogany bodies do not always sound great together (although there are some Ibanez RG's and Satriani's S-series with Mahogany bodies on their Maple-laminate Wizard necks so it HAS been done). Plus, I'm wondering if something else might gel better in creating a thicker/warmer sound while still having a bit better note articulation. Koa & Limba could work, although they seem more like Mahogany-substitutes. Which is not bad, just sort of stating the obvious. I'm not sure how well either would or would not mesh with Maple & Ebony to be honest. Swamp Ash is intriguing to me. I've got an Ash Strat-copy w/ Maple neck and really like it. This would be a double-cut Fender-scale, so not entirely dissimilar from a Strat (with the Ebony it'd be closer to a Strat Ultra, I suppose), and is warmer and more pleasant sounding than I would have thought before getting a Strat. Alder gets used a lot as well, I just tend to get the impression that Swamp Ash tend to sound a bit more "special" for some reason. That said, I'm open to being wrong and I have read Suhr had recommended Alder w/ Maple caps, as well as Basswood with Maple caps, and had good success with that combo. Basswood . . . Never owned a Basswood guitar. This is another one where people either hate it (for everything except high-gain), or love it. The dingability factor is a bit of an issue, and it's not the prettiest wood to look at (although that would only be the back). Still, I'd consider it and I suppose I could always use it as the "center" and put something else on the back so it was a Basswood Sandwich guitar. Just thinking aloud. Other . . . There are probably dozens of choices that might work great. I'm definitely open to other options. So, any suggestions for the body wood? -Cheers
  12. I have a guitar in the works, pretty much a variant on the Super Strat, it's a PRS shape, no trem, with a Charlie Christian in the neck, Strat-type middle coil, and a humbucker for the bridge. Sounds fine so far, eh? My questions revolve around how to wire it and what type of pickup selector to use. First & foremost, I want something I can easily use whatever pickup(s)/option/etc. Functionality is important not because I plan to speed-shift a dozen pickup or in/out-of-phase changes in a song, but just because while certain features seem kind of cool to have around, not if it turns into an exercise in frustration. Thus, I do not want a ton of switches or to have everything on knobs I have to remember how far turned on/off/up/down they are. However, if it's a relatively simple, and quick, setup I can learn pretty quick. Options . . . In my dream world, it will have all six possible pickup configs (the traditional five, plus neck-&-bridge, and all three ), out-of-phase, and series wirings. That said, the phase & series wirings seem kinda cool but I do not think I'd use them at all that much or miss them terribly if they were not around. The six pup configs also seem cool, but I do not want to sacrifice functionality if there are only three of four that will stand out. I'm more or less fishing for opinions as ideally it would be fun to have all these said options, but would scale back if it will make the more standard functioning of the guitar more difficult. I'd also want to coil-split the humbucker. Controls: I'm thinking master volume and one or two tones (maybe separate bridge tone). I'm also thinking I'd like to add a Shadow Kill Pot which basically makes one of your pots a push-button kill switch. I'm NOT sure on how to control the options. I'm not sure about going 3-way toggle (maybe with a blender pot for the mid pickup), 5-way blade, mini-toggles ala. the Anderson Guitars Switcheroo, or something else. I'd love suggestions or ideas. I'm mainly concerned with what will be most useful and most natural in use. The Seymour Duncan Triple Shot is an option too, just not sure how well they work and how it would look on a humbucker next to the two pickup-ringless single coils. Aesthetics: I just want to keep the guitar as uncluttered as possible. Hence I do not really like mini-toggles when they add to a pre-existing selector switch and knobs. I DO find the Switcheroo nicer looking because it is arranged in the genera real estate and space a blade selector typically takes. Overall though, I do not want the face of the guitar covered wholly in all kinds of buttons and switches. So, any thoughts? -Cheers
  13. Good to hear. I'm thinking set-neck, possibly bolt. I'm mainly a set-neck guy although I do like the Strat-style I just got. My hope/rationale was that the set-neck would help get a more Gibson/LP-esque sort of rounder top end with the longer scale w/ brighter Bubinga w/ Maple-striped neck would add some chime and note definition. Which I only bring up o put in perspective of the whole build. I also have a set of Mahogany for a neck & body so I am also asking because I can either make an all-Mahogany out of that, or mix and use the body blank for a Mahogany body with this Bubinga neck (well, one of them), and then add something else to the Mahogany set (i.e. Basswood, Alder, more Mahogany, etc.). Sure. Unfortunately for you guys I tend to ask a zillion questions before I ask. It all makes sense though, so thanks. And no apologies necessary for any rants. I really appreciate all the info I can get. -Cheers
  14. Makes sense. Sounds good. More than likely. Thanks for talking me down. I'm just trying to think through the variables. As an aside, nice Baritone guitar. -Cheers
  15. Another quickie on this; will the fact they're 5-piece laminate necks make much difference in the stiff/brightness of the sound (and if so by what margin)? And thus body considerations (i.e. that I should get a warm body and ditch the idea of a maple cap)? -Cheers
×
×
  • Create New...