Setch

Aye, it does at that...

Sounds like a great offer from Henry.

If you're not able to get them from our man in Belgium, I know a place in London which would almost certainly have them. It's a proper, old fashioned specialist shop, called 'Clerkenwell Screws' which sells nothing but screws, in every flavour available.

Guitars with a neck angle usually have a little higher action. USUALLY, I said.

Sorry, I have to challenge that statement. The action on an angled neck can be set every bit as low as on a guitar with no angle, assuming all other things are equal. If anything, having an angled neck tends to make the action *lower* than on a guitar with no angle - that's the whole reason necks are angled.

Mich'Boy: Your post is unclear - you say that you lower your bridge as low as it can go without buzzing, and it's still high. This has *nothing* to do with neck angle, it has to do with how level your frets are, and how much relief you have in your neck. If (as you say) your relief isset right, and the nut height is good, then you need to level your frets to get lower action without buzzing.

If you're actually saying you lower your bridge *all the way till it touches the body* and the action is still high, then you may have a neck angle problem, but the problem would be not enough angle, not too much.

To be charitable, he may have accidentally repeated the 'super quartersawn' bit using a template from another auction. This one:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...52BSI%26otn%3D4

has an identical description, and actually is *super* quartersawn

This discussion reminds me of a Ken Smith factory tour video I saw a while ago (unfortunately, I can't seem to find the link now). I was always amazed by how quickly and fearlessly the guy at the shaper trims the body profile. He does it straight off the bandsaw in one deep, full-width pass, with no tearout. I almost always have problems with tearout around the upper horn. How does he get away with this?

If he's running a spiral cutter on the shaper, it'll make a huge difference to the tearout - that and practice, so that your feed rate and pressure are exactly right.

Actually, it was a bit of a brown-trousers moment - suddenly realised one of my sections of timber was about 1" too short to suit the normal scarf joint I use. After a few minutes of panic I realised that scarfing the other way required less length, and would be totally hidden by the back strap - result!

How would one go about purchasing some of your stock, and what would it run to (say, for 3 or 4 sets of LP trapezoid inlays)?

Untrue. If you use one-piece then you have the issue of grain runout with angled headstocks. The strongest neck possible would be the impractical combination of scarfing and single pieces laminated to the point of it being plywood! :-D

That would be plain crazy however. Little gain for too much work. In theory, sound. But theory isn't what's keeping the millions of operating scarfed headstocks out there in the world together. I digress.

I made this neck almost exactly as per your picture, except that the 2 outer lams' were scarfed, but the opposite way from the centre lam. It's not much more work than a standard laminated neck, and it allowed me to squeeze two necks out of the blank.

Trebuchet, says I.

All well and good if you have any shelf space. Mine played musical-worksurfaces, getting moved to a different place everytime I needed to use the tool or bench it was blocking. Eventually it ended up on the floor, and I had to either build a trebuchet and fire it into the sun, or do something useful with it...

It looks like much better system than the normal 'clamp in the drill - voila, un drill press' system, but I'm still scheptical about how rigid a small device like that can be. Any flex in the mechanism, and it's a total waste, the drill willjust go where it wants to.

You scarf with a thicker neck blank, then remove the thickness from the back of the headstock , not the face.

It's that simple.

It happens!

My Les Paul got sanded back to barewood when I realised I hadn't adequately filled the grain, and my colour coat just wouldn't get smooth - man I was pissed off! A couple of years down the line, the guitar still looks great, and the afternoon lost sanding is (mostly) forgotten...

Don't remove the finish! You can spot repair it with super glue, then cut back and wetsand it, then buff it all out smooth. It won't look the same as before, but it'll be smooth and functional,which is what a repair like this needs.

AFAIK Drak has only made bolt on guitars to date, using Warmoth necks. He's stated in the past that he has no interest in making necks, since the Warmoth necks suit him perfectly.

As for routing after finish, sure,it works. It's is however, far easier on a flat topped instrument than on a carved top, and would not be my preferred method if I had any choice.

It's a tough question. I've always had it drummed into me not to disturb someone until the tool is off (and like a couple of posters have noted, it's common sense) but you can't educate everyone.

I think a sign asking people not to approach if any machine is running is about all you can do.

Yup - if the algnment of the pieces is good, just flex it open and get titebond in there. If it's too viscous, you can thin it as much as 10% with water, without hurting the strength much. You'll want to make padded, radiused clamping cauls so you don't hurt the neck or fretboard. Don't fully separate the break - that'll make alignment very tricky.

Forget trying a cosmetic repair, go with solid and battlescarred, and you have every chance of accomplishing a decent job.

Ooooooh - yeah. That's nice!

I don't believe there's one on here, but there are a good few around online - try googling it.

*Sigh* Dry humour really doesn't translate over the internets does it?

Yup - this build is totally floating my boat! Love the inlay on the trussrod cover in particular.

I confidently predict that at 40 they'll still be touring and enjoying exactly the same critical and commercial success they do today. Perhaps.

Try clamping in some relief, and leaving the neck like that overnight. That may well bed the barbs down enough to do the trick.

You're on your own as far as the tax return and accounting side of things (Crafty's advice is bang on, and what I was going to suggest) but I can tell you that you don't need to register for VAT until your company is turning over a substantial amoutn of cash - far more that you're ever likely to turnover doing guitar repair! Since you're not VAT registered, you willstill have to pay VAT on all the parts and materials you buy, but you *won't* have to charge it to the customer.

I got a job!

Seriously, my job takes up a ton of time, and what little I had left has been spent on some furniture commissions I had. Soon I'll get back to guitars, and there should be some updates.

Thanks for your interest, and for keeping visiting despite the lack of updates!