GregP

Heh, well... if it's a one-off for himself, one can chalk it up to flattery. Obviously the original WOMD is superior. OT but seemingly on-topic: Perry, if a commercial establishment ripped off the WOMD (including such giveaways as exact placement of panels), does that mean you could litigate? That's reassuring that you can do stuff like that. I guess it makes sense-- EVH probably has the Frankenstrat-style paint-job copyrighted, too.

Looks AWESOME. One of the best EVH-type guitars I've ever seen.

I'm afraid I'm no help... I'm not very knowledgable about finishes at all. My first instinct is that Prostheta's idea sounds like the "best" one, but it's just intuititon and not at all rooted in fact or practice. If I had no guidance from anybody whatsoever, I would stabilize with CA and then use tinted lacquer. But again, that's not speaking from any experience.

Heh, well there ya go. It really IS flattery. Instead of doing a Zakk Wyle, EVH, or any number of other possibilities, he did a WOMD imitation. To me, that's a feather in the cap more than anything. Greg

Heh, yeah, definitely familiar. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery? Don't think you can copyright/trademark a camoflage paint job with hazard paint (the yellow/black), though... and if I'm a guessing man, Perry wouldn't have bothered to anyhow. Wonder where this one came from? Perry's paint job certainly paid better attention to the "little things" like the airbrushing between panels and the appearance of the rivets.

Following up on the "manufacturer's defect" theme-- What is the measurement from the nut to the 12th fret, and then from the 12th fret to the high E saddle (fully forward)?

I haven't worked with spalted maple before, but my fear is that since it's not a stable wood, won't the oil just kinda vanish into it? The inky bits are like little sponges, no? Soft, rotten wood....

Yeah, I've taken pains to refer to "EMG active pickups" in this thread, because EMG's covered epoxied pickups are certainly not the only ones. Often, though, if it's an otherwise passive pickup that goes through a preamp and active EQ, they'll say "active electronics" instead of "active pickups". I'm not sure which category the MM pickup fits into, but I've always thought of it as an active pickup, too. In short, all the points I've made above have always referred to the EMG pickups in specific. Otherwise, it just becomes a debate in semantics.

A half a note?! That's way far out for it to be anything but a ) a manufacturing defect b ) human error during intonation process I don't think any amount of hints will save you if it's option A. On the other hand, if it's option B your fix is only minutes away!... I absolutely do not mean to be insulting but genuinely helpful here, please believe me, but-- are you fretting on the correct fret? It's a longshot, since it should be more than just the B and E that are "out" if you're doing it wrong. When you're referencing your intonation instructions, are you following them to a tee? Retuning the string after each saddle move, etc? Greg

Holy heck. 1500 smackers?? You can probably find hundreds of faux-marble techniques on teh intarwebs. To be honest, I think marble looks narsty, though my first attempt at a refinish (the guitar got stolen... I doubt for the paint job!) I did a dark green faux marble. Cost about $15, but back then I didn't realize that I was using completely inappropriate paint (it was like, hobby paint in a faux marble kit... I was a kid at the time. ). Even using correct paints, you can probably do what you want to do for about 10% of what Ed wants to charge you. Greg

Agree with the above-- also, is your saddle flipped around so that the contact point is closer to the nut? It probably is by default, but it seemed worth asking. If you follow all the above advice, and your fretted note is still flat compared to the open note/harmonic, then I'm not sure what else you could do. I have a Wilkinson roller TOM that mounts the saddles differently and might therefore let you set compensation a bit further toward the nut. Plus, it has quasi-TonePros allen-screw locking which might allow you to seat the whole bridge a bit further ahead without repositioning the studs. Just an idea, and possibly not the right one. Just thinking aloud. ;-)

Yeah, one's not feeding into the other. They're discrete. The "distortion switch" is just going to the "high" volume knob instead of (rather than in addition to) the low one. Exactly! Some people find that going direct to an output jack (without even a pot in the way) is too open and 'brash'. A wee little cap sucks off some of the treble and puts the tone back into more familiar territory. It might not be a cap, but since a cap is used for passive tone controls, I just assumed that's what would be there. I'm only 60% sure on that one. Greg

Guess it depends on your definition of 'better'. Ultra-hot Quad-Rails pickups don't do it for me.

I don't have an answer to the OP's question, but this phrase makes me suspect you're not visualizing what he's trying to do. What he wants to do is be able to have 2 different volume "presets" and then switch between them. If each volume pot is discrete and selectable, how can it double the resistance? I mean that as a genuine question, not smart-arsey-- I don't know that much about electronics, but it seems to me that what he wants to do is put it through either one "circuit" or the other, or kill to ground. As long as the signal is only travelling through one pot, how can the resistance be doubled? As for the distortion, it's not that he wants to generate distortion, but rather when you "back off" on your volume knob, most tube amps will clean up in tone. Most guitarists make effective use of their volume knobs to control the sound of the distortion generated in their amps. But instead of 'rolling off', he wants to be able to just switch between his 'full' and 'cleaned up' volume presets. Which brings me to another point, which the OP can take or leave-- it can be safe to assume that in "distortion" mode, you'll almost always just want full volume. So you might be able to make the circuit more efficient by wiring up a switch to bypass a single volume pot (the single volume pot can be for setting your 'cleaned up' preset) instead of alternating between 2 different volume pots. It sounds good in theory to be able to set them both independently, but I bet you dollars to doughnuts that one of those knobs is always going to be "full" anyhow. Again, not an electronics guru so I'm not using the right term here, but if bypassing directly to the output jack sounds too 'brash', you can always wire some sort of resistance inline... with a capacitor, I assume, but I dunno... maybe you DO need a resistor. Other more capable people could provide more info than me. Greg

Intonation issues are caused by pressing the string down to the fret, which can pull the string sharp. Compensating at the bridge makes up for it. But the bottom line is that with higher action you are more at risk of pulling the string too sharp. Since TOM bridges don't have as much "travel" as some other styles of bridges, it might not be able to sufficiently compensate. I have 2 TOM guitars, with medium action and "light" (10-52) strings, and no compensation issues. So it's not necessarily JUST the bridge, but it CAN be a contributing factor depending on the rest of your setup. How would you describe your specific intonation problems? IOW, how have you identified that there's a problem? During the intonating process, or while you're playing chords?

It'd "work," sure. But would it work much better than a standard floating trem? Debatable. If you're not going to lock down on both ends, I see only the most minor benefit to locking down on one. So you have all the bulky hardware of a Floyd, without the real benefit. Not a good tradeoff in my opinion, but your mileage may vary. Greg

What's backlash?

Although I've seen the 1-piece metal thing on production guitars, I haven't seen any around for DIY stuff. Not to say it doesn't exist, but I haven't seen any readily available. Typically, builders will opt instead for separate "string-through ferrules" which are available at Stewart-MacDonald and other suppliers. You could always make your own string-through "retainer" (?) bar. [edit: it's a cross-post extravaganza!!]

Drilling so that you have "1mm of wiggle room" requires the exact same amount of accuracy as drilling so that the high e is forward. But ultimately, you have to do what gives you confidence and makes you happy, regardless of logic.

As long as you're that picky about every single other wire in the cavity, this can be your one bare wire without any stress at all. Mind you, I think that like the poster above, if you have sufficient 'air' anyhow, it'd never be an issue. As for the electrical tape, it'd be just fine. ;-) The idea isn't for it to stick to the metal so much as to itself. Fold it over those lugs+wire, and it'll stick to itself, too.... with good adhesion! If you could get that stuff in a teeny size, that might be neat, and worthwhile going into the future, too, for further upgrades/restorations. Definitely! But some people are literally paralyzed unless they flick a switch exactly 3 times, so who am I to judge someone who's overcautious about something that IS a logical concern at least on some level? I can't say with any honesty that any of my electronics projects has EVER gone perfectly smoothly. I always get the vague sensation that there's something I'm doing wrong or that I could at least do better. After hearing and reading so much about perfect solder joints (and how imperfect "cold" ones can eventually create a loss of conductivity) I STILL haven't felt comfortable with many of my joints. Once in a while, you just "know" you did it right... but the rest of the time I think to myself, "I think that'll do" rather than "yup, I KNOW that'll do." Greg

I always wondered how the cutting mechanism of an auto-trim tuner could stay sharp over time? I've never seen a guitar with the auto-trims, so I don't know exactly how the cutter works. It's too bad there have been a few reports about the Steinbergers (which contrary to an earlier post, are not used primarily as bridge tuners). If they stepped up quality a bit (eg. replacing the earlier-mentioned pot metal) they could have a legend on their hands. That said, I know of some pretty high-class builders who have used the Steinbergers. Godin had a problem with one set... I wonder how the replacements are holding up?

dh7892-- that sounds about right. I'll retract the word "amplify", which was just kind of thrown into my post without thinking of the actual science. I agree with what you wrote. probus-- absolutely agree that the main construction should be something dense. But you'll need some sort of spacer between the boxes (for the box in a box design I was mentioning) and rockwool would be as good a filler as any and better than most. I'm thinking that you'd need some sort of absorption inside the box, too, though. Otherwise, you'll end up with unexpected resonances inside the box which will affect your ability to record. A couple layers of heavy carpet might be enough, too... can't say I've ever tried. Gluing or screwing on some random small-sized scraps of the construction material (mdf or whatever) to the "back" and "front" of the inside walls will also help diffuse any standing waves. This can be done before the absorption material is added. Greg

Still, it's fun to dream. ;-) The problem I see with the 'tube' idea (even with larger tubes) is that there would still be non-vacuum area, where the pipe walls touch each other. The "stitches" in the quilted jacket, as it were.

Nope, aidlook has it right... underwater, sounds are amplified and carry a great distance! Wonder how feasible a DIY vacuum 'barrier' would be. I have no frame of reference... might be butt-simple, but I suspect not. Takes an awfully rigid sealed structure to support a near-vacuum state without air pressure crushing it.

I'm quite sure that someone is missing a point. I'm not so sure it's me. I definitely understanding what you're saying about the similarities. My post was meant to illustrate that there are key differences that make all the... er.. difference! in the world. You won't convince me that your scale for measuring the differences is the "right" one, and if my above post didn't convince you to see things by a different scale, then there's not much more I can do. I just don't buy it when it's claimed that somebody who disagrees or has a different perspective is "missing a point," because that would mean that only agreement demonstrates that the point has been understood. And that's not the way it should work. I see your point, I just don't agree. I think the differences are more important than the similarities, and I feel that an EMG active pickup is NOT the same as a passive pickup with a preamp. For the reasons already listed. Greg