GregP

Who sez we don't talk like Prince? U need 2 B more acceptin'.

Wicked-awesome. A tip of the hat to ye olde Telecaster without actually being a full-on tele. I'm sure there's a hint of other axes in there, too, but I don't want to start naming a million guitars hoping to guess the right one(s). Plus, at the end of the day, it's an original design, not a copy. Very nice-looking! What did you use to plane off the extra bit of the... er... tenon (for lack of a better term) to make room for the veneer? Greg

You know the Dr. Seuss carved bass that's being made? Can't remember the thread's name offhand, but you know the one. 6-string neckthrough, I think. With the really 3-D looking carvings on the cutaways and headstock? I vote you do a carve like that on the lower horn, and make it look like a... Well... You know... Just kidding, please DON'T do that. (not that you would. )

The spam horn is still bothering me. The yellow one looks an awful lot like the Fernandes Dave Kershner uses. Is that his name? Velvet Revolver dude? Greg

Cheers for looking out for me, Frank. After seeing the pic, it occurs to me that the Hipshot-style one wouldn't work either, even if it had rollers. There would be too much friction generated by the string against the rear holes if I use an EZ-Bender. Greg

It's called a "micro" cube... the micro should give away the fact that it's not going to roar at much beyond bedroom levels. You can always thrown the line out into your stereo if you have a large enough one and you're feeling brave. <laff> Greg

Almost a great design! Both sides of the waist should at least 'complement' each other in terms of motion, in my opinion-- which they currently don't. But all that would take is making the top one less dramatic or the bottom one more dramatic, with the curves echoing each other either way. Greg

Yup, as I sadly discovered by phoning LMI. Unless I want to make my own, it's looking like the only options are mucho dinero. ABM makes some bridges with height adjustment. I need the string to be able to mount through the back, though (like on the Hipshot) so that I can use the EZ bender. Why, oh why couldn't I just know more about fabrication? Jesse James would whip me up a bridge in about 5 minutes. Greg

Change the last part of your statement to say, "Plus, it looks better" and I agree. Greg

He's like Chet Atkins except even better. Well, at least in terms of chops. Atkins certainly had panache. Greg

Yuk. ;-) Too much plastic'n crap all over the place. The triple-coil motherbucker is already a bit out there, but I can live with it if there's only one. A quad-coil (dual full-size humbuckers) would be nasty looking. Like a Black Beauty, but worse. Greg

haggardguy, you are positively addicted to upper fret access. I have to agree in this case that the neck IS pretty deep into the body. Sweet beast, though! Greg

I seem to have a tendency to self-bump, but you never know who could be looking for this info: I found the bridge that will work, and it's not too expensive, either! --> The Schaller one on this page Noticed it in the latest LMI catalogue. Now I just need either a roller nut, or to make one with ball ends as suggested by Frank. Of course, a Graph Tech type nut would probably work, too, but I'd need to research non-standard options (ie. blanks, classical sizing, etc) to go that route. [edit: hmm... I might have been reading wrong, I thought it was saying that the individual saddles can have height adjusted, but it might just mean the entire bridge as a whole... research is required] Greg

A motherbucker's a bit different. It's 2 single-coil-sized humbuckers (usually blades, like a Hot Rails) side-by-side. Greg

Just a guess (since I've never seen one before!) but you get the simplicity of a one-pickup design (though frankly I find this to be pretty inelegant looking), but give yourself the possibility to do phase trickery to get new tones. Plus, the single coil can be a 'real' single coil, not just half of a humbucker. To clarify the point about the 'single coil'-- the construction of half a humbucker is the same as a single coil, but single coils will be properly designed to sound good on their own, whereas the 2 coils of a humbucker are generally engineered to complement one another and don't necessarily have their own individual personalities finely tailored. Greg

Yuk. Abuot the above pic, that is. Pointy shreddy metal machines are about the furthest thing down on my list of guitar desirables. One day I may own one just to say I have one, but... well... yuck. <laff> (strictly personal taste, of course!) That said, this project isn't up my alley either, but the "yuk" is not directed at this particular endeavour. Despite not being to my personal taste, I like to encourage wherever possible, as long as the design itself is still good for the genre, which this one is. Greg

I getcha. How about at least making the lower horn a BIT shorter, and have the actual cutaway part (ie not the wood, the empty space between the neck and horn!) a little bit wider. It seems too narrow on both the top AND bottom of the neck, no? Or maybe not much 'wider', but just make the curved area less pointy. Have it a full circular curve instead of the pointy side of an egg. I am sh** at explaining myself today. <laff> Not to hijack the thread, but yes I really do think that upper fret access is highly overrated. Let's say you were fool enough to bring your cutaway a full five frets up the neck. That would make it more difficult for you to access a mere 2.5 tones. Whoopdee doo! I can BEND a string 2.5 tones if I really need it. Then there's also pinch harmonics if you really want to squeak. Ultimately, I think too many people spend too much time way up there anyhow. It's like "OK, I gotta express an emotion of excitement or screaming anguish... yup, let's go nice and high!" instead of using the melodic content of a solo to accomplish the same thing. Take the same widdly-widdly little high-pitched lick and transpose it down 2 or 3 octaves... NOW you have something tasty. Now, that doesn't mean you never need to go up there. In a recent thread, I was quite thrilled by the AANJ, and I can see myself using it in the future. So I'm not "dead set" against upper fret histrionics, I just think it's rated too highly. People make it seem like a guitar's design is sh** if you can reach every upper fret with ease. I got a non-cutaway acoustic (though of course, I had options) but I don't feel that the body joining the neck at fret 14 is killing my ability to play the guitar, or has made the guitar a piece of crap. I don't see why people get so anxious about it on an electric. Sorry for the thread hijack! Greg

Yep, I see it now in the description: "Year: 1998" They've not lied about the neck. The 'NOS' part isn't the giveaway, though. NOS just means (as the page itself says) "New Old Stock". You could in theory have a part lying around from 1962 that's never actually been used and it'd be NOS. That doesn't change the fact that they haven't lied, though-- I just didn't see the "Year: 1998" part at first. Are custom shop '62 replica necks REALLY worth $900 US? In my opinion you'd have to be very wealthy or a complete numpty to pay nearly a grand just for a replica neck. Greg

I haven't listened to the Roland myself, but judging by the reviews I've heard, plus the on-board amp sims (unlike the Marshall, which is just... well, a Marshall, but a digital one), if I could go back in time I'd definitely at least try the Microcube before grabbing the Marshall. Greg

I have a Marshall DFX30, which is the same thing. It gets the job done, sort of, but it's not a great amp. I don't know the other ones you listed by way of comparison, but I'd think long and hard before getting the Marshall. Greg

Am I the only one who thinks the $900 1962 neck looks fishy? I have to admit, I didn't read the details... is it one of the 1962 replicas? If so, why would it sell for $900? I dunno... very very dodgy. Greg

Dude, there's tonnes of upper fret clearance, especially because there's really no heel. It's going to be much easier to get at those frets than it is on many many guitars. 'Sides, upper fret access is very highly overrated. Greg

If you like the look of a reverse strat, there are going to have to be sacrifices made, I'm afraid. Hendrix managed to reach those upper frets, after all! You could make a reverse strat, but put the body contours in the correct spot. That's the most 'authentic and yet workable' compromise I can imagine. Beyond that, you'll be into new design territory, which you've already demonstrated you're willing to do. I agree with the Mosrite/Ramones comment, though! Why not pay more tribute to the Mosrite idea than the strat idea, then? RGGR-- I resemble that comment!

Horrible lower horn. Greg

There's no reason you couldn't. Swineshead pickups uses them for at least the top of the bobbins, on request. Not sure if he uses wood for the whole shedilly, though. Jon's a member here, so he may even see this thread and respond. Greg