Dave I

This is for my King V project. I am thinking of making it all-Mahogany. However, I would like the fullness and low end of Mahogany that I get with my Les Paul with maybe a touch more high end; I still want a smooth/round/non-shrill high end, but maybe a bit more treble. A few factors: 1) I am using some Sheptone custom hand-wound pickups. They are a set of his BK pickups which are hotter with more low/mid/body in the bridge and the BK neck will be clearer and brighter than his vintage PAF-style. 2) I am using a 25.5" scale. 3) I will probably get the wood from Gilmer woods. I had a great experience buying from Marc at Gilmer so I trust him to get me what I need. 4) I am planning on a Mahogany neck with Maple stripes in a set-neck design. 5) I am installing a Floyd Rose 6) I am thinking of going with a golden-brown color As such, I think my options are to either go with all-Mahogany (maybe ask for a blank that is likely to have nice low end and a good amount of top end sparkle), Mahogany body with a Maple cap (for a vaguely LP-in-a-V setup), Alder body, or just tell Mark what I am looking for and see what he comes up with. My first option is to go all-Mahogany and then the hotter/brighter BK pickups should add some high-end, but I am open to other ideas. Any votes of confidence or better ideas? -Cheers

Thanks a million! -Cheers

For my first electric build I am thinking of just buying the neck and taking what I learn from my semi-hollow build and using it on future guitars. However, I still would like to get a premade neck for the first one, at least in part because my woodworking class will end before I get to it. This will be for a 25.5" scale set-neck, and I am trying to decide between Warmoth & Soulmate. I am inclined to go with Soulmate, however there are a couple of factors. Soulmate Pro's: I have heard amazing things about Doug's work (mainly from reviews on this site). I also greatly prefer buying from smaller companies and American-made, which Soulmate would qualify as on both accounts. Con's: Not really a con, but I would kind of like a compound radius which he does not offer. That being said, it is not a huge deal just a minor preference. Warmoth Pro's: I can get a compound radius. Warmoth TENDS to do pretty well. I have heard a few horror stories, but overall they seem to do alright. Con's: It is a big corporation. I am not sure if they will make the neck blank at the base so I can blend the heel to match the guitar, or leave it without drilling holes, or make it so I can use it as a set-neck; I am not sure what the difference in dimensions would be. They might, but I know they are resistant to change due to it all being CNC. Any thoughts? I will eventually be doing all of my own work, but for this one I thought I would just give a pre-fabricated neck a whirl while I learn the ropes on my first build. -Cheers

I suppose that should have been obvious from the get-go. Sounds doable. How would you factor the curvature of the inside of the V? Just guess/approximate the radius of the circle and use an old-school compass?** Sure. That would be great. Thanks a million! -Cheers **Edit: Scratch that. For some reason I was thinking the wings met on a curve inside the two wings. Looking at pics . . . Nope. Just meeting at an angle. Sorry about that.

I perused pretty thoroughly through www.guitarbuild.com and did not see a King V build. A VERY basic RR V, but not a King V. Any other places to look? -Cheers

I checked the downloads and did not see any. Would I need to look anywhere else a/o sign up to access them? Thank you for the recommendation either way; they have a few designs I might look at down the road. -Cheers

I am curious if there is a good place to find either plans or buy a template for a Jackson King V. I would like to make an all-mahogany set-neck variation of the King V design. I dunno, I think it just looks a little cooler and maybe a bit less-utilized than the RR-V. Besides, I want to have a four-knob setup so the King V might be a bit more spacious for that design. Anyway, I can't find a set of plans or any place that sells King V templates. Anybody have any advice? As an aside, if I get plans (PDF, CAD, or what have you) but can't get them full-sized, is there any tried-and-true method for blowing them up, like with a projector and then drawing it out on paper? This sounds asinine, however unless I could give the exact dimensions for blowing up a drawing (i.e. print it out on size A"XB" paper, not make it match the scale given or make the length of the strings on the drawing a 24.75/25/25.5/etc." scale), the cashier at Kinkos was clueless, so I am wondering if I go old-school and somehow project the picture, or just use a ruler and rough measurements, I will be close enough. My other option is to get plans/templates for a RR V and cut the top half out, then flip the template over for the next side. Is there any reason that would(n't) work better/worse than some other plan? This might also be nice if I ever plan to make a RR-style offset-V in the future. Thanks in advance -Cheers

I know. All the more reason to build one as such, no? -Cheers

Not that I sound just like these bands, but the style(s) or metal I play include Alice in Chains, Tool, early Burton-era Metallica, Slipknot (especially Subliminal Verses, the hauntingly unsettling kind of clean tone to the typical heavier stuff to the experimental stuff), Pantera, and Opeth (the whole range). I do not typically downtune, and usually go for a moderate to moderate-heavy amount of gain, kind of like In Flames to some extent. So I like to play a range, get pretty heavy and edgy but usually not ridiculous or just to show how heavy I am. Good point. I really do not fit into either extreme. I could see down tuning to some extent, but I do not think I would go ultra low with every knob on my OD or distortion pedal turned to 10. On the other hand, I do rhythm and riffing, not the half-hour guitar solo sort of stuff where you can go have a nice meal and come back with me still playing. So I do not need over-the-top distorted sludgy drop G tuning metal, nor the peel session 5-10 minute guitar solo arrangement. I have no idea if that makes any change in what you would recommend or if it effects my decision, but there it is. As an aside, I am much less apprehensive about going the neck-thru route. Not that I will, but you have alleviated some of my concern as a group, so thanks! -Cheers

Cool. I guess I should just flip a coin and spend more time practicing and less time fretting over details*. -Cheers *Note: Unintentional pun. Sorry. I left it in there anyway.

I think . . . Both! I am thinking of buying an ESP Ltd V-500 (set-thru neck, kind of like a REALLY long tenon set neck), however I am also planning on building a Jackson King V with a Floyd Rose and a set-neck with a blended heel. However, there seems to be some preference for neck-thrus in the metal community. I am just trying to decide if, with a smooth neck heel, I might take away the main reason people prefer neck-thru's (i.e. better upper fret access). However, I have never had a neck-thru, so I thought I would ask if it is better (or not) for high-gain music, a/o EMG's if I go that route. -Cheers

Let's hope not. I am just asking about tendencies and if there is some mythbusting in the process that kills tone voodoo, or supports it for that matter, all the better. -Cheers

I remember reading the opinion that neck-thru's were better for high-gain styles of music because they lack the overtones of set-necks and bolt-ons. The rationale was that the neutral, thinner sound of neck-thru's allowed the guitar to maintain clarity under high-gain. So I am wondering, do any of you find neck-thru's are overall better for high-gain music, and if so, why? Related question, with either active pickups (EMG 81's and the like), or just really high gain, does the neck-setting and its tone on the guitar matter as much, or is that more of a low-to-moderate gain consideration? Similarly, how much of a difference will wood-choice matter with active pickups? If I normally prefer Mahogany or Alder guitars with set necks while using passives, will I necessarily like the same setup with actives, or will I be more inclined to like the different style of the guitar with, for example, EMG 81's if they are setup with a different wood a/o neck combo? -Cheers

It's a pretty nice feature. I would (and will) measure things just to make sure, but they seem pretty sound, basic plans from the few I have looked at. Any thoughts on which would be better to use, the Watson Bailey plans, or the ones from the Downloads section? Or does it really matter? I will be making it a 24.75" scale, so the WB plans will need to be augmented for the neck, but that should be no big deal. The WB plans DO seem much more detailed though, but both look usable. -Cheers

Thanks Kevin! I can do that. -Cheers Quick Update/Stupid Question(s): I made a donation . . . Where's the download section, and how long do I need to wait to get at them? -Cheers

Hey All, I am just fielding opinions for now. I am going to begin a prototype for an ES-335 clone beginning this week, my first build ever. However, at some point I would like a Flying V. I have heard they are hard to make, however, I have a picky set of options I want and nothing QUITE gets everything on a commercial level. Nothing fancy. I am wondering if this will be something I can do myself, or if it is advanced and I should have it custom made, in which case if there is somebody I can ask for a quote. Or should I just go with the commercial brand that is closest. I am thinking of looking into this in the summer or fall after the semi-hollow is done. Anyway, here is what I would like: 3-piece Mahogany neck, although would settle for a Maple neck. Mahogany body, Mahogany-colored (that reddish kind of brownish color) or dark Honey-colored finish, glossy clear coat 25.5" scale with a set-neck HH pickup configuration, two volume knobs, one tone, maybe coil taps Floyd Rose locking tuner set (I am actually pretty set on this or else a TOM bridge) Pointy Jackson King V style body and headstock (not rounded like Gibson or Hamer) My other option is to just suck it up and get an ESP LTD V-500. That seems like the closest option commercially. If I go with a custom build, what would be the difficulties in doing this myself? If that would be REALLY difficult, any recommendations for builders? -Cheers

For one or two guitars, I am thinking of pickup upgrades. One is a Hamer Studio (for Gibson Les Paul sounds), the other is an HSH Super Strat (for Strat-to-Ibanez-RG Jazzy Blues, Rock, and Metal). I have a V on the way with EMG 81's; If I like them I will keep them, if not I will go with a high-output passive, but my inclination is to stick with the EMG's in this guitar. Anyway, there are at least two guitars I am looking at pickups for, with a distant possibility of a third. I have read great things about Sheptone and WCR pickups. I have no idea which one to go with though. Any thoughts? Specifically, what are their similarities a/o differences? The major difference I found is Sheptone pickups are a lot less expensive, but I do not want that to be a factor unless they are both so great I will not be missing out by not having the other brand. Any opinions a/o experiences are welcome in this matter. -Cheers

With something like the EMG 81 & 85, can I get past the "less toneful and somewhat sterile sounding" attributes (which I hear a lot of people say) by using an EQ pedal to shape the sound? And from there, can I use the EQ pedal just for active pickup guitar(s) and take it out of the loop for passive guitars so I am not constantly tweaking my amp? I currently play a Marshall Vintage Modern and use a Fulltone OCD for overdrive, as well as a few other pedals or a Digitech GNX4 processor, and do not want to have to change setting everytime I change guitars. Otherwise, I might eventually pick up another amp strictly for high-gain stuff at some point. -Cheers The EQ thing is BS if you ask me. EMGs sound fine on their own. For clean sounds... again... fine with me. The EMG clean is certainly different than a PAF, or PAF Pro or something like a single coil in a Strat. Different isn't necessarily bad. Different guitars and pickups for different sounds, right? The only thing with clean sounds is that the EMGs really hit the input of the amp hard so you might need to roll down the volume knob on your guitar. If you find that you need to EQ your sound with EMGs, don't buy EMGs. Just my opinion. What exactly does less toneful mean anyways? Its all subjective. Listen to artists that use EMGs and go from there. Do you like their sound? What kind of music is this for? BTW, nice amp choice with the Vintage Modern. If you like the Zakk Wylde sound, you'll be happy with EMGs combined with the Marshall. In a mahogany guitar, they should scream. Thanks for the opinion(s). I will just give them a try. If nothing else, it will give me something different to play with, and at worst I can always replace them. -Cheers

In regards to this: With something like the EMG 81 & 85, can I get past the "less toneful and somewhat sterile sounding" attributes (which I hear a lot of people say) by using an EQ pedal to shape the sound? And from there, can I use the EQ pedal just for active pickup guitar(s) and take it out of the loop for passive guitars so I am not constantly tweaking my amp? I currently play a Marshall Vintage Modern and use a Fulltone OCD for overdrive, as well as a few other pedals or a Digitech GNX4 processor, and do not want to have to change setting everytime I change guitars. Otherwise, I might eventually pick up another amp strictly for high-gain stuff at some point. -Cheers

Thank you for the input! If you get a chance with your new V30 cabinet I would be interested in your A/B comments/clips. Thanks for the thoughts & opinions thus far though. There is actually a guitar I am interested in getting (it's an ESP LTD V-500 and I have heard V's can be kind of unforgiving to build) what comes with EMG 81's so I could just try them. However, if I do not like them, it is nice to have advice on some backup options. I greatly appreciate it! -Cheers

Well, I currently use Vintage 30's in a 4X12 setup. Not sure how (if at all) that changes your recommendations (either in pickups or in speaker recommendations). -Cheers

Thanks for the recommendation; I will try to check them out. How much difference in gain and tone between an active pickup (EMG 85, or Guitarheads active [w/ passive tone], etc.) and something custom wound for high-gain but more natural tone like WCR pickups? I guess I am inclined to go with an overwound passive because I like warmer sounding melodic metal and not necessarily as-heavy-as-possible metal (although having one such guitar in the future might be nice, not what I am looking for now . . .), or something that sounds like a computer or synth created distorted guitar. I will definitely consider all options though; if I was totally sold one way or the other I would not bother asking, hence this thread. Anyway, thanks for the great responses so far as well as any future replies! -Cheers

Would something like a Dimarzio D-Activator work better if I wanted a nice high-gain bridge pickup that I could clean up moderately well by rolling the volume back, and still retain the ability to let pick attack dictate how hard the pickup drives the amp? Or should I stick with a JB (or similar) pickup in the bridge and rely on my pick attack, OD, boost, or distortion pedals to drive the amp harder? Is the route size between the EMG 81 (and similar) different than the route for a typical humbucker pickup? -Cheers

Not entirely wood-working related, but . . . I am curious what people's experiences and thoughts are with active pickups. In particular, what do you like about them or hate about them over passive pickups? The one that comes up the most is the EMG 81 (and the EMG 85 and 89 getting some nods here and there), but I have gotten at least one recommendation for Seymour Duncan Hot Rails. Then again, Seymour Duncan JB's and Jazz pickups (both passive) still get a lot of nods as well. So in short, my questions are: 1) What are the advantages and disadvantages of active pickups over passive pickups (or vice versa)? 2) Are there certain active pickups that are better than others? In my case, looking for a nice high-gain sound without it sounding like crap (I want a nice metal sound, but not harsh or ridiculous), but also at least passable clean tones (even though that is not their forte), but any generalities are welcome. 3) Is there a thread already talking about this? I found one that was nice, but this subject came through almost as an after thought and was only partially covered and can be seen here: http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.ph...ssive*++pickup* If there is another great thread that I missed, or some other great web-source, if you post the URL I can check it out to save you some typing. Thanks a million! -Cheers

Thanks for the replies so far. One final question . . . Do any of you find it is difficult going from one scale length to another (e.g. Les Paul to a Stratocaster to a PRS, or similar sort of scale length differences), in particular switching between guitars? Or is it something that most people tend to adjust to pretty readily? In other words, should I stick with a scale I usually play or just expect it to be no big deal and be able to adjust after a little time on the guitar with the new scale if I go that route? -Cheers