My hollowbody design..

[RaVenCAD]

Ok, here we go.. A little different, not an offset/melted looking thing anymore.. Still not mad about the f-hole thing, but I'm getting there. Probably looks too much like a Soloway now, but I'm ok with that for my first one..

 

Anywho, comments are welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ihavenofish]

Here ya go. http://www.lmii.com/CartTwo/thirdproducts.asp?CategoryName=Neck+Woods&NameProdHeader=Indian+Rosewood+Neck+Blanks

those wont do for his neck. too thin. unless he got 3 flat sawn blanks and laminated (which would get him 2 necks).

[RaVenCAD]

 

those wont do for his neck. too thin. unless he got 3 flat sawn blanks and laminated (which would get him 2 necks).

 

 

I was actually thinking rosewood/maple/ebony/maple/rosewood.. I've been told I have a black heart, so why not go with it?

[HighSpeedSpoon]

Not that I'm any expert, but I'm surprised that you can cut away a hollow body like this and still maintain firm enough support:




Looks real sweet though.

[RaVenCAD]

Not that I'm any expert, but I'm surprised that you can cut away a hollow body like this and still maintain firm enough support: Looks real sweet though.

 

I have a rather unique way of bolting the neck in. The new design has made it a bit more difficult though. Might need to lose a bit of that back cutaway because it's eating away at my internal structure.

[Floyd Rosenbomb]

That is cool, it's going to be fun!

[axegrinder]

I like the second one better...WAYYY better! And I am not seeing the top look curved much on the renderings, but I believe you. It still looks hot and no, not too much like a Soloway.

Love the renderings...that's some powerful software.

[metallica_00]

 

Okay, so these two pics of the neck joint caught my eye. I know you've mentioned you have a unique way of attaching the neck and body (and presumably you don't want to disclose of it for understandable reasons). It appears from these pictures that there is no heel whatsoever. The neck keeps its shape and just runs straight into the body. One thing I have always noticed with guitars is that there is always some neck heel that extends beyond the body of the guitar.

 

As an example, the neck of a Strat begins to square off even before it hits the neck pocket. The heel extending beyond the body is quite pronounced on a PRS. Even on most neck-thrus the neck begins to taper out as it hits the body. I've always been curious as to why this is - is there some need for a larger mass beneath the frets to avoid dead spots on the upper portion of the neck? Structural reasons?

[Zledi]

 

I think this design with a florentine cutaway would look sweet,

 

Also, my personal opinion, I'd lose the indentation on the back. Just looks silly to me. Unless it serves a functional purpose?

[LesPaulFetish]

That looks freaking sweet. Best of luck, this would be an epic build thread.

[LesPaulFetish]

I think this design with a florentine cutaway would look sweet,

 

 

I think a florentine would be too sharp, it looks perfect IMO the way it is, no sharp edges on the top.

[axegrinder]

Okay, so these two pics of the neck joint caught my eye. I know you've mentioned you have a unique way of attaching the neck and body (and presumably you don't want to disclose of it for understandable reasons). It appears from these pictures that there is no heel whatsoever. The neck keeps its shape and just runs straight into the body. One thing I have always noticed with guitars is that there is always some neck heel that extends beyond the body of the guitars. As an example, the neck of a Strat begins to square off even before it hits the neck pocket. The heel extending beyond the body quite pronounced on a PRS. Even on most neck-thrus the neck begins to taper out as it hits the body. I've always been curious as to why this is - is there some need for a larger mass beneath the frets to avoid dead spots on the upper portion of the neck? Structural reasons?

I believe Paul Reed Smith swears by having that extra mass. It has more to do with tone than structural integrity. Same goes for fat necks which many player prefer tonally.

[LesPaulFetish]

I believe Paul Reed Smith swears by having that extra mass. It has more to do with tone than structural integrity. Same goes for fat necks which many player prefer tonally.

That probably is it. I know when Paul Gilbert's Fireman came out he talked about how the neck joint, namely the nize, affected sound.

[RaVenCAD]

I don't want to give too much away about my neck joint just yet. If this build turns out well, and if this ever becomes a marketable product, it'll be patented because I've never seen anything even close to it. The wood to wood contact area is tremendous. It is a bolt-on, or more like a bolt-in/bolt-thru really. My answer to why the added mass on most neck joints is just that they need the bulk to make a stable joint. Mine has the bulk, but you can't see it. From tip of the rather stubby headstock to the end of the neck is over 30". I SO badly want to post a pic, but for the sake of any possible patent, I better STFU lol..

btw, when you guys say "florentine", do you mean the needle sharp one used on some Gibson hollowbodies? If so, I say no way! I want a guitar with soft, sensual curves, not Madonna and her rocket tits heheheh

The cutout still isn't right. It doesn't flow with the guitar in the least. I'm considering something with more openings, but much smaller.

My goals for tomorrow are to push the neck and pickups about 1/2" to 1" deeper into the body. That'll give me more mass to work with on the neck joint at the cost of making the upper fret access a smidge less open. Considering the fact that #24 is sitting on the edge almost, I think I can get away with that. Plus it'll help keep it from going neck heavy. I haven't calculated the exact center of gravity yet, but the top and back weigh almost the same as the body. By the time I get all the bolts and inserts, plus electronics and bridge, I'd say the body will outweigh the neck by a decent %.. That'll keep it from neck diving. The new design (before the pickup pockets) weighs in at a whopping 2.72lbs.. Niiiiiiiiiice..

EDIT: Oops, had an extra body shown in my model.. Make that 2.58lbs, including the frets and, umm, a few bolts.. =)

EDIT2: Curse you Android autocorrecting spell checker without a clue!

[Zledi]

Yeah, I meant a sharp cutout. I like them quite a bit, think they can actually be elegant looking on things like hollow-bodies. I'm also not a huge fan of the reverse(?) style cutout except for on the First Act Sheena.

[RaVenCAD]

Time for a headstock question!

Isn't there some sort of EVH/Musicman patent/trademark/copyright on a 4+2 headstock? I could use details on that right about now.

Also, and this is a loooooooooong shot, several years ago, someone got a fretjob and they had completely rounded the ends of the frets. They looked like steel rods instead of frets. Anyone have a clue who that was or where a photo of it went? It was beautiful and I want to consider that style for this one. The idea of no sharp edges, no screws, no points - just smooth, organic lines - is a theme I'd like to extend to the frets.

[Ratae Corieltauvorum]

Also, and this is a loooooooooong shot, several years ago, someone got a fretjob and they had completely rounded the ends of the frets. They looked like steel rods instead of frets. Anyone have a clue who that was or where a photo of it went? .

 

You mean the fret rods thats TK Instrumnets use, it's actually 5/32" SS bar stock

 

http://www.tkinstruments.com/id17.htm

 

[RaVenCAD]

Nope, that's not the one.

Turns out it was done by Michael Tuttle:



But our buddy Atrox did it too.. I think his turned out even better:

[Ratae Corieltauvorum]

 

That tends to be the way I do my stainless frets, except when a customer strongly insistes on low angle bevels

[RaVenCAD]

That tends to be the way I do my stainless frets, except when a customer strongly insistes on low angle bevels

 

 

I've never played one like that, only beveled. Is it at all clunky? I don't want to feel speed bumps as I go up and down the neck. Sure, you gotta feel something, but I want to minimize if possible.

[Ratae Corieltauvorum]

I've never played one like that, only beveled. Is it at all clunky? I don't want to feel speed bumps as I go up and down the neck.

 

I can't say that I feel that way about it, matter of fact I can't say that I can feel the difference when it's well exectued, with patient rounding, polishing and fretboard rolling, it can get to feel very organic (if that doesn't sound too vegetarian?)

 

There is a halfway point where if you use the big fat fretwire you can sorta take the wire down from about 1/2" in from each end sorta like a secondary radius, I used to take lots of pics, but this sorta shows it

 

[RaVenCAD]

I can't say that I feel that way about it, matter of fact I can't say that I can feel the difference when it's well exectued, with patient rounding, polishing and fretboard rolling, it can get to feel very organic (if that doesn't sound too vegetarian? )

Here is what I'm thinking - I want to round and polish the fret ends before they ever touch the guitar. I have models of each fret, so I know the lengths they need to be. I was thinking of making a tray with the exact sizes of each fret cut into it and using that as a gauge. Size the frets right, then install them. Any drawbacks to that idea?

[Ratae Corieltauvorum]

 

Here is what I'm thinking - I want to round and polish the fret ends before they ever touch the guitar. I have models of each fret, so I know the lengths they need to be. I was thinking of making a tray with the exact sizes of each fret cut into it and using that as a gauge. Size the frets right, then install them. Any drawbacks to that idea?

 

 

On paper it sounds good, when I do refrets on LPs I do them one fret at a time so remove the old, use that as a template for the new and then slip it back into the binding with a tad of CA on the ends.

Your method should work fine, but obviously may need twaeking once you get going....what fretboard radius you using?

[RaVenCAD]

12", same as on my Carvins. I was tempted to do a compound radius, like on my Charvel, but the added complications made me skip it. I love the Charvel, but the Carvins feel better to me.

[Ratae Corieltauvorum]

 

12", same as on my Carvins. I was tempted to do a compound radius, like on my Charvel, but the added complications made me skip it. I love the Charvel, but the Carvins feel better to me.

 

 

Actually compound radius makes fretboard manufacture easier.

 

Hope I can explain.

Think of a fretboard blank with parallel sides

Now add a 12 radius.

Now bandsaw the sides from say a 43mm nut size at one end and a 57mm width at the end near the neck pickup, now look in a sideways elevation at the side of the fretboard and the height of the side changes with the nut end being higher and the body end being lower....that make sense, thus requiring that the base is planed to make it parallel along it's length.............now add compound radius from nut to 12th fret....voila, difference negligible.....QED