1959 LP Burst build...

[mistermikev]

trying hard to get back on this saddle.. (i know what you are thinking: "mike, that's not a saddle at all")

 

.

[ScottR]

Wow.

SR

[mistermikev]

On 6/11/2024 at 8:26 AM, ScottR said:

Wow.

SR

thank you sir.  Will have to do a full size back of guitar one someday... when I can afford the mop!

[mistermikev]

having the hardest time capturing the rainbow effect I'm seeing on this gold mop...

[Bizman62]

4 hours ago, mistermikev said:

having the hardest time capturing the rainbow effect I'm seeing on this gold mop...

Your photoshooting skills have improved by a margin!

Re the rainbosity of the MOP, photographing it is tricky. Indirect light from several angles, tight aperture, low ISO value (100) and a bit longer exposure time are the key elements. If you go below 1/60" you'd need the stand. You can use reflectors (white sheets of paper or styrofoam) instead of direct light to prevent washing (like on the right side) and a solid dark background to help the automatics concentrate on the actual target.

And post processing isn't a sin, for digital photography it's the same as the dark room magic is for film. Some added saturation and contrast can do wonders! Here's what Paint.Net did to it with -20 light, +20 contrast and 130 saturation, does it look even closely like what you actually saw?

 

[mistermikev]

3 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Your photoshooting skills have improved by a margin!

Re the rainbosity of the MOP, photographing it is tricky. Indirect light from several angles, tight aperture, low ISO value (100) and a bit longer exposure time are the key elements. If you go below 1/60" you'd need the stand. You can use reflectors (white sheets of paper or styrofoam) instead of direct light to prevent washing (like on the right side) and a solid dark background to help the automatics concentrate on the actual target.

And post processing isn't a sin, for digital photography it's the same as the dark room magic is for film. Some added saturation and contrast can do wonders! Here's what Paint.Net did to it with -20 light, +20 contrast and 130 saturation, does it look even closely like what you actually saw?

 

while it certainly looks better... you can't put something back that isn't there.  when I look at this at dif angles there is this rainbow effect happening mostly on the 59 that got washed out in the photo.  I tried backing off the light... but then the flash would kick in.  probably should have turned the flash off... but then you get blurr issues.   It's a lot like capturing chatoyance... your eye is seeing light from dif angles bouncing off it... while the cam always seems to capture one angle. while I'm sure a good photographer could capture it... it'd take me 105 photos before I got one that caught it.

edit: btw, thanks for the reply!

[Bizman62]

5 hours ago, mistermikev said:

when I look at this at dif angles there is this rainbow effect happening mostly on the 59 that got washed out in the photo.  I tried backing off the light... but then the flash would kick in

This and the likes may help: https://picupmedia.com/blog/jewelry-photography-tips-how-to-photograph-pearls/

There's also plenty of videos about building a light box for photographing small items.

[mistermikev]

1 hour ago, Bizman62 said:

This and the likes may help: https://picupmedia.com/blog/jewelry-photography-tips-how-to-photograph-pearls/

There's also plenty of videos about building a light box for photographing small items.

they do indeed capture that rainbow effect on the pearls there. 

[henrim]

10 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

you go below 1/60" you'd need the stand.

In general I think it is a good idea to have the camera on a tripod when shooting macro. Even with fast speeds. Anyway that 1/60 is kinda old school figure with current cameras having up to 8 stops of image stabilization in the body. Or maybe even more, I don’t know. Even back in the day it was up to the photographer what was enough to keep the camera steady. Anyway “sharpness is a bourgeois concept” like my name-sake Henri Cartier-Bresson said

[Mr Natural]

this is some really impressive inlay Mike- I cant even imagine hand cutting all of that. 

[mistermikev]

7 hours ago, Mr Natural said:

this is some really impressive inlay Mike- I cant even imagine hand cutting all of that. 

well....thank you... in all fairness  I'm pretty sure hand cutting at least some of this would literally be impossible.  I'm all cnc now... this is done with a .0177" bit.  Some of the little tails on the letters are so fine that lifting them off the substrate is almost impossible w/o breaking.  I sit there with an exacto and a very fine tweasers... not breathing... trying to move them into their places lol.  Honestly takes me hours to cut them (small bit has to go very slow) and then takes hours to release them from the veneer they are glued to.  I like to pretend sometimes I'm an archeologist while using a paintbrush to apply acetone to release some of the glue... then working the pieces delicately with an exacto lol.

anywho... thank you for the reply!!

[ScottR]

On 6/15/2024 at 6:11 AM, mistermikev said:

On 6/15/2024 at 6:11 AM, mistermikev said:

well....thank you... in all fairness  I'm pretty sure hand cutting at least some of this would literally be impossible.  I'm all cnc now... this is done with a .0177" bit.  Some of the little tails on the letters are so fine that lifting them off the substrate is almost impossible w/o breaking.  I sit there with an exacto and a very fine tweasers... not breathing... trying to move them into their places lol.  Honestly takes me hours to cut them (small bit has to go very slow) and then takes hours to release them from the veneer they are glued to.  I like to pretend sometimes I'm an archeologist while using a paintbrush to apply acetone to release some of the glue... then working the pieces delicately with an exacto lol.

anywho... thank you for the reply!!

Seriously-

That is an amazing display of patience and obsession.

I'd be a gibbering fool after attempting that.

SR

 

[mistermikev]

1 hour ago, ScottR said:

 

well full disclosure I was a jibbering fool to start but... yeah it def shot my nerves!  Thank you sr... your comments keep me going!

[MiKro]

On 6/15/2024 at 6:11 AM, mistermikev said:

>snip<  (small bit has to go very slow) and then takes hours to release them from the veneer they are glued to.  >snip<

Try an 0.010", that 0.0177" is large compared to the smaller one and requires even slower cutting. In metal it is a real bitch, more so than pearl . 

MK

[mistermikev]

1 minute ago, MiKro said:

Try an 0.010", that 0.0177" is large compared to the smaller one and requires even slower cutting. In metal it is a real bitch, more so than pearl . 

MK

hey mikro, nice to hear from you brother!  no thanks on smaller... I go through 2-4 of those .0177 every time I use them.  accidentally drag a wrench past after I chuck them up, accidentally go to far when setting depth... and accidentally blowing on the -PING!  I've used them in recon stone quite a bit but I can't imagine how slow you'd have to go for metal!  talk about patience.

 

[MiKro]

3 hours ago, mistermikev said:

hey mikro, nice to hear from you brother!  no thanks on smaller... I go through 2-4 of those .0177 every time I use them.  accidentally drag a wrench past after I chuck them up, accidentally go to far when setting depth... and accidentally blowing on the -PING!  I've used them in recon stone quite a bit but I can't imagine how slow you'd have to go for metal!  talk about patience.

 

Yep, I get that. I have only done 0.010" in aluminum, Not sure I could in steel. I know it is done but I am not going to try it. LOL!!!  Sloooooooww is not even a word when it comes to doing that. Micro Sloooowwwww maybe. LMAO!!!

mk

 

[mistermikev]

1 hour ago, MiKro said:

Yep, I get that. I have only done 0.010" in aluminum, Not sure I could in steel. I know it is done but I am not going to try it. LOL!!!  Sloooooooww is not even a word when it comes to doing that. Micro Sloooowwwww maybe. LMAO!!!

mk

 

right on brother... well it's nice to hear your voice.  I haven't forgotten that I made a promise about a guitar... as you may have guessed i'm not great on working fast... but I'll get there sooner or later.

[mistermikev]

would love to hear from anyone who has experience gluing in a bend to a fretboard for a compression style single action rod.

I have read that musicman and gibson and a few others do this.  I believe I have it right in my mind... but all prev builds have been dbl action so just want to shore that up w a couple queries.

background: so the idea is... that with a single action compression rod style neck... there is at least a chance that with light guage strings... there might not be enough relief in the neck with the truss rod completely relaxed as far as it can go.  a single action rod will only remove relief when you tighten it... ie it straightens the neck. 

So, many builders use a (if I understand correctly) radius piece to essentially bend the neck upwards at the nut.  you use this as a 'caul' and clamp the neck and fretboard to it when gluing on the fretboard to make for a bit of relief in the relaxed position.

q1) anyone here done this on a build?  

q2) I typically use pins to align fretboard... would seem the pins might fight me here?

q3) I'm pretty sure I saw a drawing for the caul that was used by some big name builder... but if someone knows the radius one might use... I'd appreciate.

q4) so... on the historic lp 59 they do a straight channel that gradually lifts towards the headstock.  On more modern les pauls they have a radius channel that the truss rod is forced to conform to.  do they do this on both straight channel and radius channel truss rods?

 

[Bizman62]

I've only seen a vid or two by Jerry Rosa where he straightens a bowed acoustic neck by reseating the fretboard over a bent back neck. AFAIK he did it just by intention and feel, trying to guesstimate the right amount of backbow needed, taking into account that when released from clamps the neck will bounce back to its original shape and the fretboard will give in. If I understood correctly you're trying to do the opposite, creating a bow which you can then straighten with the truss rod. Same technique.

[mistermikev]

33 minutes ago, Bizman62 said:

I've only seen a vid or two by Jerry Rosa where he straightens a bowed acoustic neck by reseating the fretboard over a bent back neck. AFAIK he did it just by intention and feel, trying to guesstimate the right amount of backbow needed, taking into account that when released from clamps the neck will bounce back to its original shape and the fretboard will give in. If I understood correctly you're trying to do the opposite, creating a bow which you can then straighten with the truss rod. Same technique.

yeah, sort of the reverse.  It's even more complicated here because in the case of the radius truss rod channel... that is already (I would think) wanting to straighten out... which in theory would add a little fwd bow.  

I've seen vids of music man doing this... they have a form that they use string or tubing to secure the neck and fretboard to... forcing it to conform.  my guess would be it is a VERY slight radius... possibly oblong... as moving even 1/32" would be a LOT of relief on a neck.

[mistermikev]

i came here to chew bubblegum and complain about how hard life is... and I'm all out of bubblegum.

<therapy session begin>

so I've made 2 complete necks at this point... and my process is really defined.  so the first one... (I process the back first) got all the way to the truss rod route and somehow my rout is off center.  I figured I did something wrong in terms of indexing my work piece so set it aside and figure I'll use a dif truss rod later.  then got all the way to the truss rod slot again on a new one and immediately recognized sm problem and stopped my machine before cutting very far.  turns out that the version of my software is fing stupid.  I have this 3d truss channel... and when I use the tools to center it... it is visibly not centered.  (riggem raggem fligger pisssten munkel groc).  So i double check everything and recreate the 3d channel... sm issue.  so in order to get a centered truss channel... I create 3d object of my radius, then run a regular cut (non 3d) based on centered rectangle shape and force it to "follow the 3d object".  crisis averted, works like a charm. 

then I go clamp my filler strip into the neck... and as I do - summon gorilla strength to clamp it... and proceed to clamp my filler strip so hard that the truss rod breaks out the other side (it's complicated... since I have to tile my neck it's mounted to a slide fixture and the clamp was not on the neck on the bottom side but on the bottom of the fixture).  this IS a very thin neck profile. 

lessons learned... perhaps too thin.  as I look there is maybe .09" of wood behind the truss in the thinnest spot.  so we'll beef that up and go w a slightly less thin profile... but you should have heard the creative string of four letter words uttered in my garage last night.  working my ass off the last 4 weeks in a row in a 116+ deg garage to spin my wheels and go nowhere!  well, tech not nowhere... now I have to rescue a truss rod... so I've moved effectively -2hrs in 4 weeks.

 

</therapy session begin>

[nakedzen]

You could always take comfort in that you found the flaw in the design during making it, not after it's already finished!

[mistermikev]

On 8/11/2024 at 1:50 AM, nakedzen said:

You could always take comfort in that you found the flaw in the design during making it, not after it's already finished!

I suppose there is some consolation there.  that said I still reserve the right to bitch and complain about it at length lol.

[mistermikev]

so... whatamilookinathere?  well there's a luthier, terry mcinturff... he's renting a space in my head.  I don't know him... but he posts over at the gear page and is a well respected luthier.  He once said that dbl action truss rods are bad... because there is gonna be an air gap... and air does not transfer vibrations well.  Now... I'm not saying I necc agree to that... I prefer dbl action truss rods... but this build is about learning new things... and one of those new things is a compression rod in a radius channel.  while I'm in there I figured I'd make both sides of the radius channel cut to a 3/16" bull nose... and eliminate any air gap.  was a shit ton of work and likely not worth the effort... but that only encourages me.

and here we have a headstock and neck... doesn't look quite right yet cause it'll be double bound... more on that later...

fairly good fit for "prior to tweaking"

and now this... what is it?  bunch of artsy fartsy stuff?  well no.  this is my work on a jig for pre-bending and cutting the "meet ups" for my binding - whole lotta pita.

[Bizman62]

6 hours ago, mistermikev said:

and eliminate any air gap.

Two questions:

When adjusting a single action rod, the entire length of it should move more or less freely. A tightly fitted rod may snag which is why some builders have used plastic straws to reduce friction. Notice that friction can increase because of corrosion on the metal, direction of wood grain and fluids crystalizing in the wood cells. Have you taken that into account?

Moisture is my other concern. Just a few weeks ago the hygrometre was at 40%, now at 60% despite not having had much rain. Actually we're breaking hot weather records this September! Anyhow, as wood swells with humidity, increasing thickness rather than length, will there be a risk of cracking if there's no wiggle room?