ToddW

Cyclone, Since it's already routed to need a pick guard, have you considered making a maple pick guard that matches the headstock. I think that might tie it all together better than the black pick guard. Just a thought. Either way, I'm sure Uncle Mike will love it. Todd

I think a steel acoustic could be done at a reasonable weight if you used thin Aermet sheet and maybe a nomex core. But . . . . why? If you don't want to use wood, there are composite materials that seem like better choices than steel. Todd

Hey Adam, No offense to you, but most people prefer to build their own stuff unless they're getting paid. So if you want to start a guitar company based on your guitar designs, you'll probably have to pay someone. Is that what you were thinking of doing? If it is, you might want to find a production type shop or pay for a prototype, line up a manufacturing facility/option, and market it. In other words, you need a business plan. Regards, Todd

Double check your color codes. Might be you wired it out of phase or something. That'd be my guess. Todd

ROFLMAO . . . nope, didn't realized that. Thanks for the heads up

Almost sure it can be adjusted for drift. Me, I just use a flat 6/4 board that's 12x6" or so and clamp it to the table. As for Coplanar, it's not as important as you might think. Check amazon for the bandsaw book and see what it'll run you used. Probably can have it delivered to you super cheap. I have this one, which is also great: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/076210215..._pr_product_top all of $8 at your door. Duginske's might be better, but it'll cost twice as much both are super cheap references that are worth having.

It's a great value and if you spend a little time learning how to set it up, it should work out really well for you. Congrats on the new toy! Todd

Hey Paul, I've actually got the PSB for a firefly sitting in my closet, and I'm waiting for Mike (Komboking) to finish a chassis for me. Not for the firefly, I'll just get the hammond chassis for that, but Mike is making me one for a CA Dreamer type build. Chibi, Turning the 15 watter into a 200 watt tube amp sounds easy to me. Just rip out the entire output section of the amp but keep the phase splitter. Then all you need is another power transformer, a rectifier, a few large capacitors to filter the supply, two to eight tube sockets and some tubes, a few dozen resistors and capacitors, some 20g wire, a soldering iron, a bunch of turret board or circuit cards material, and an output transformer capable of handling 200 watts. Hammond's 1650W is only $195 plus shipping. I doubt it weights much more than 15 or 20 pounds and it's canadian! That stuff won't set you back more than a four or five hundred dollars, assuming you don't wire it wrong and destroy the OT. You'll need two power supplies because you don't want to fry the pre-amp section of this little amp. I'm assuming we don't care about this thing being quiet, so I didn't list a choke or mention that you may need to figure out if there's a feedback loop. I'm assuming the splitter in your little amp is sufficient to drive the new output section. Hmmm, I guess I did forget to add it the price of the tubes. Oh yeah, you're going to need to drill a lot of holes in the cab and maybe add a fan to stop it from catching fire since we're putting such big bottles in it. But just think how HOT it's going to be I guess I just don't understand what the problem is guys? Todd PS) Just messing with you, Chibi. Kevin O'Connor has a design in TUT 5 for the Super Scaler, which takes the output of a little amp and makes it bigger. I think the listed design would get you to 80 watts or so. He also has plans there for the "Stentorian", which is around 150 watts. May be voiced for bass, but that's an easy thing to tweak. Those are not beginner projects, so the bottom line is, if you want clean tone and more volume, , you're going to want to buy a bigger amp. But 200W is just too HUGE. It'd destroy your speakers. If you have 4 x 50W cones, stick with 100W or less!

Woaaaa, you're an 18 y/o college sorority chick with a goat ? Chicks with goats, See that, this is an educational thread. I didn't know Texas colleges were so liberal before reading it.

http://www.veneersupplies.com/default.php?cPath=42 Cheapest prices I've found for TransTint. Think the stu mac stuff is the same, but not certain. McFaddens sure wasn't. Be aware, the trans tint bright red is pretty candy. Made my maple look like my kid's were playing after eathing candy canes!

My top was 1/4" thick maple over the controls, so it was a lot of work to cut that slot. Next time I'm hoping to use the dremel with the router base and a jig. I'll test it first though to make sure it won't wander off the line. Walmart and most drug stores sell these diamond grit nail files for a couple of bucks. They don't last long on wood, but they are very thin and work well to clean up slots and such. Good luck, Todd

I'd probably get something in addition to the 8000G stone. That's really just for the final polishing of the edge. Even a sharp blade will benefit from a few passes over something in the 1200-2000g range, and a pack of wet dry sandpaper is only $2.47 at WallyWorld. Course they only had up to 800g last time I was there, so had to head to the auto parts store for the 2000g and spend $3.50 Todd

I just did one with the drilled holes and a saw blade. It cleaned up ok with sandpaper and my secret weapon, those fingernail emery boards. But it was sooooo much work, that last night I ordered the 335 plunge router base for my dremel from amazon. For $25.xx (so free super saver shipping ) it will pay for itself in annoyance savings on my next build. Todd

I use the scary sharp method. Glass plate and sandpaper. It's pretty easy. I didn't see that Mattia mentioned a honing guide. I just got the cheap Grizzly sells, but Lee Valley has nicer ones to hold the blade at the correct angle. You can also make your own. Todd http://www.grizzly.com/products/Honing-Guide/G1482

Cute. What is that, a little Hammond PT? That's what I'll be using when I build my firefly. Curious, what circuit are you using for the single knob tone control? Todd

Looks like it's going to be beautiful. I'm very jealous

Hi Sami, If the plane is like my stanley, then you need to do two things, tune up the body, and tune up the blade. Do you have something super flat that you can use. I use a piece of 5/8" thick glass, but 1/4" might work too. Once you find something like that, get some wet dry sandpaper from the auto store. A variety pack will be best because you're going to go through the grits from as low as 180 or so, all the way up to 2000. Besides the flat surface to put the sandpaper on, you're also going to need a guide to sharpen the blades. Tune up the body first, making sure it's flat. It' doesn't have to be perfect perfect, but you when you run it over the flat sandpaper, you want to see most of the base getting sanded. As to sharpening the blade, google "scary sharp" and blades and you'll find a tutorial If you don't, let me know and I'll find it. Best, Todd

Hi Martin, I don't know the best way to reinforce that glue joint with screws. A screw will stop the piece from falling off when the joint fails, but it won't stabilize the joint line any. My suggestion, if you have a 1/8" router bit, is to route some slots that cross the joint line on the back of the guitar. Then glue in the equivalent of rectangular biscuits. Once you sand them flush with the back and paint, you'll never know they're there and they will act a lot like dowels or biscuits would have. Another thing I would suggest, possibly going against conventional wisdom, is that you put a reasonably thick finish on the inside of the pocket. That area is right next to the joint, and a finish will minimize how rapid changes in humidity affect the joint. I'd personally put a coat of shellac in there as a basecoat because at a given thickness it's one of the best water vapor barriers, because whatever you finish the guitar with will likely adhere to it without any problems, and because I like how easy and safe it is to use. Just make sure you have enough room in the pocket to add the little bit of thickness the finish will take up, and don't forget to post progress pictures. Regards, Todd edit PS) Looked back and noticed Wez already suggested this. He called it a splice. and it's what I'd do.

That's really nice. When you say you carved the top from the inside, to you mean it's thicker under the bridge or something else. I've thought about doing that and using just the wilkinson style saddles graphtec makes for their ghost system. -Todd

With a 14" saw, you're not going to be getting a carbide resaw blade and are likely looking for plane old carbon For that, these guys: http://www.suffolkmachinery.com/ are awsome. They have a lot of good info on their website if you go to vertical saw blades and read through some of the options. They will help you choose the correct blades too based on your uses and their blades always do well in comparison tests. Grizzly also sells blades ain certain sizes and may have the size you want. This one is also supposed to be good: http://www.highlandwoodworking.com/index.a...amp;ProdID=1293 I've been more than satisfied with the Timberwolf blades from Suffolk. By the way, did you get the Rigid saw? Todd

But welcome to the forum anyway !

So do it easy, just buy a HSS pickguard, and put it one with the pots and switch you have now. Wire the HB injust like a single coil, with it's coilds in series, and see what you think. If you want to "thin" the HB tone a little, you can buy a push-pull switch pot and wire it as a series parallel switch. But if you are simply looking for a deeper lead tone, you might not need to. Start easy, and take it step by step. Best, Todd

No argument from me, I think it's a great idea other than the problem with fret replacement. When they offer a classical fretboard, I'll seriously consider it because it'd be great to have the same temperment on a guitar and our piano. But I'll see what the Earvana sounds like with our current "equal" temperment tuning first. Regard, Todd

Haven't heard it yet, but I hope to someday. And I did write them a letter last year asking about purchasing a classical fretboard, they said they hoped to be able to sell them in the near future. I'm still waiting. Even so, you still tune each string, not each note.

Does that help? Not really. For one thing, some of us don't want every key on the piano to sound equal, so Equal Temperament is not the "only logical way to tune an instrument". Bach wrote the well tempered clavier pieces for a "Well" tempered piano, not one tuned to equal temperment. There's a huge difference, and in fact there are several Well temperings. (We can ignore that the modern piano in my home is nothing like what Bach was used to.) Bach lived in the 17th and 18th centuries when "Well" Tempering was popular. They tuned the piano with essentially pure octaves, and while C and related keys had relatively pure 3rds and 5ths, the distant keys were less pure. So no keys sounded bad, ie. no major wolf tones, but they all sounded different. If you wanted a harsh sounding tuning, you didn't write your piece in C . . . I don't mind you're "splaining" stuff, or acting like you know more than I do. I'm sure about many topics you do. However, I actually do find your saying Bach wrote those pieces for an equal temperament piano slightly offensive. Bach took advantage of the difference in the keys on the instrument he had. That's part of the magic. Your statement makes it seem like he was writing in different keys just to keep the fingerings easy and shows a true lack of appreciation of the genius behind the work. So if you want to talk down to me, that's fine, but at least know what you're talking about. Getting back on topic, the different attempts to improve the guitar, I agree with a tiny bit of what you say. It's correct that spacing the frets on the guitar makes it seem to be an easy instrument to make for an equal temperament, but we all know it doesn't actually work out that way. You stretch the strings when you fret them, different gauges change different amounts, the action height isn't always the same down the fretboard, a given amount of stretch will have a different effect at different frets.... Since the biggest problems making a guitar sound "equal tempered" occur with the open strings, Feiten, Earvana, and others, try to "compensate" for that. The piano player doesn't have to, and in fact can go beyond equal temperament (If their tuner is really good). So no, Bach didn't write in different keys to demonstrate the wonders of equal temperament, he'd probably hate what it does to his music, and while the guitar isn't broken, it also isn't perfect. If you don't feel Feiten is an improvement, that's fair. I think it's a reasonable attempt to "compensate" for the shortcomings of a very nice instrument. Not one I'll pay for, but one I can appreciate. I'm going to add an edit here, because I'm not annoyed anymore. I want to make sure I state clearly that I don't know what Bach's piano temperament was. He tuned it himself, so I'm not sure anyone does. Did a search after I got a PM and apparently someone analyzed the curlycues at the top of the front page and it matches with a circular temperament. I have no idea how valid that analysis is. I also don't want to sound or act like I think I'm some expert on historic temperaments or Bach. I'm not, so if the above sounds arogant, snotty or rude, I apologize.