GregP

My experience has been that chicks only dig guitars about once a month.. maybe once every two, when they ask you to play a song for them. Other than that, they'd rather you played with THEM, and can't figure out why you find the guitar more exciting. If anything, they'd be jealous of the guitar's elegant curves which are only ACCENTUATED by the lustrous finish. Therefore, a less shiny guitar enables you to keep a girlfriend more easily.

I must have a ****-tastic jigsaw (which... actually, I DO!), because my scroll saw does a superior job to my jigsaw, which isn't bad quality. I'd rather use the scroll saw any day. On the other hand, a bandsaw's the way to go, and there are places you can go to borrow/rent time on theirs. Greg

Carvin links never work for me. They send me to a Carvin portal, instead, and I never know for sure what I'm supposed to be looking for once I get to the site. Edit: Aha! They don't have them at the "Carvinworld" site yet (the one you get through to the portal), but it was easy enough to just enter "carvin.com" into my address bar. Nice-looking guitars! Greg

Of all the things you can do to modify your guitar, changing the electronics is one of the easiest to do on your own. I suck, and had some pretty crappy soldering, but the end result was still plenty usable; and though I'm still I'm not happy with it, I know I can always go back and give it a second shot.

Sorry about any pissy tone I was taking. It should have been obvious that it was a joke.

I guess instead of being diplomatic, I should have just said with a know-it-all and yet firm tone that nickel hardware is more yellowish and chrome hardware is more bluish. It is. You can see it in person, you can see it in photographs. It's not really a point of debate when it's a fact. Just so that there's some visual evidence for the debate, although it's a fairly pointless one: The one in the middle is nickel, the other one (the first, or the one to the left, whatever you want to call it) is chrome. Heavner-- only 25% of a nickel is nickel alloy. That means that the nickel content is some percentage of 25%. Your argument doesn't 'follow'. Furthermore, I actually looked at pictures and then checked in a real-world visual test once my perspective was challenged, instead of making further assumptions. Trust me, since I had already gone through the issue of deciding between chrome and nickel, I know which metal is which for my hardware. I don't even think you can GET a nickel slide without hunting one down.

Those bridges look excellent. Great recommendation! It's not too late for me to switch from TOM-style... ;-) I don't know if it's the exact same thing, but StewMac has a similar thing HERE by Hipshot, also. The price is different, and the contours on the Hipshot page make it look sturdier and smoother, but it might well be the same thing. Cheaper at StewMac than direct from Hipshot. Greg

Sounds like a slam-dunk for microphonic to me. Just because a pickup is new doesn't mean it won't be microphonic-- something may have gone wrong with the potting procedure, or it may not have gotten potted at all! Easily done at home for about $2 worth of wax and an hour of your time. Greg

Nothing's uglier than the tiger guitar I saw on e-Bay once upon a time, after following a link from some forum or another (not this one, though, I don't think).

For the kind of music you suggest, I'd go with 2 P-90s (or virtual P-90 / P-100 / other hum-cancelling equivalent) in their standard neck and bridge positions. But that's just me, and an opinion wrought from heavy bias.

I just want mine to look nice and shiny when I enter it for GOTM... er... one of these years when it's finished. After that, I don't mind some dings and scratches, though I'll polish it up a bit every now and then.

Chamfer? I thought it was a roundover bit! Dunno about the radius, but there's another topic going on somewhere within the past week, so you could do a search using the term "roundover" and/or "radius" for under 2 weeks and you'll find it. Greg

The concept is OK, but the image probably doesn't do justice to what's in your head. I can see where it could be taken to a good thing with a wee bit of tweaking. I also thought of the JS right off the top, which is a great guitar. Greg

Man, this is going to be SWEET! Nice work on the carve... it's droolicious. Greg

Some people use a bandsaw. I don't have the chutzpah for that, i don't think, but it's been done.

No shop is messier than mine. It's aggravating to work in, and the end result of my work could ONLY be improved by working in a clean shop.... But still, I couldn't be arsed. Mostly because the majority of it wasn't my own mess to begin with and I hate cleaning up other people's messes.

I think the $44 was for a TEMPLATE, not for just the template wood. Making your own template is a useful experience, but for any guitars I'm going to make in the future that use pre-existing body/neck shapes (ie. a Les Paul) I'm going to spend the money for the templates. That's just me, of course, but I think having a set (not just the body, but also the neck, headstock, pickup cavities, etc.) of templates will pay for itself in the time you save, if you consider your time to be worth money. Of course, for your own original shapes, you'll be making your own templates, but hey... if you like a strat-sized neck, for example, you can still use the neck template for your own design. Greg

Sweet Hay-Zeus... we need a photo that shows the pearl. Great work, as always. I'm still not as big a fan of Koa as you, but with testimony like that from a preacher like you, I'm starting to hear the word of the gospel.

I'd go with a black pickguard, but that's just me. As for an oak inlay... well... it's your guitar, dude. Strictly speaking, Jesus' cross was likely shaped more like a capital 'T' than a lower-case 't', but then nobody would catch the reference and would wonder why the heck you have a big "T" on your guitar. Hope the rest comes together as planned!

Somebody else already said it, but: "SICK"!! In a good way. Totally a tele with attitude. When I saw the steer's head, I thought it fit perfectly. As for the headstock... I have some ideas, but I don't even want to say them because I know whatever you come up with will make my idea look weak by comparison. As for the clear vs. dye option-- I think there are some really great options with dyeing that could make this thing look lethal, but clear would look OK, also. Me, I'm more thinking dye, but what the heck. Greg

I had already ordered enough stuff from the States, but those are some good links.

Welcome to the forum.

I'm sure you'll be done before me, and I've been 'building' (yeah.... suuuure...) for well over a month now. Nice looking sneakers at the bottom of the stairs there. Is that pink accent material around the tongue?

I agree with that, too. In my neck of the woods, there were no proper sized bits to be had, so I'm hoping to make do with the next best. If I could have found a 7/32" Freud bit, trust me I would have bought it.

You know... It's only been a fraction of a day since I posted my criticisms... and the guitar's already growing on me more. Straight-grained rosewood would have looked excellent for the headstock and tailpiece; however, give me a few days and I may come around to the koa. Even the elongated headstock is starting to have its charm... I'll comment again after living with it for a day. <laff> A new one, though-- are there any knobs with a lower profile that would still look appropriate to the guitar? Bell or tophat style, maybe? Greg