GregP

Anybody else see empty spaces where the images should be?

Chambered solidbody "acoustic" does not exist. There are chambered solidbodies, and yes there are many threads about the subject. My own thread on my orphaned project (I'll get to it, I'll get to it...) has pics of chambering. As you would expect, they are just... empty chambers within the body, instead of it being absolutely solid all the way through. If the forum doesn't turn up anything, Google a bit or go to Warmoth, who sell chambered solidbodies. Greg

Wow!! I, too, have been proven wrong. Yes, you simplified the detail, but you DEFINITELY still kept much of the detail I thought was near-impossible! The difficult part is still to come-- cutting the "cavity" (what's it called for inlay?)... I hope your stubborn streak holds up, because I found that phase to be more of a challenge than shaping the shell. Congratulations-- looking forward to seeing this one inlaid.

I never woulda guessed.

Any company that I can think of that's achieving moderate success took an idea and found its own funding. Chapman... that newish company with the weird bodies that seems to have found its way onto a few magazine covers (I know, that doesn't help much. <chuckle>)... the original Steinberger.... Part of it, I'm sure, is that you won't hear about the specific "designers" very often when a company comes out with a new model. But I suspect that the majority of it is that the big companies (as stated already a few times) have their own design teams. It's pretty much-- if you have a dream, you have to make it happen on your own. PRS pulled it off and STILL only have 2 basic styles (with a few variations). Greg

Yeah, I knew it was meant to be joking, but you can imagine how often as a teacher I encounter those statements. I'm pretty thin-skinned when it comes to jokes about my "calling", even when I suspect they're meant light-heartedly. That "crushed" initial feeling when reading those jokes makes it tough to just laugh it off. Dunno why I'm so defensive, though-- my profession (in Ottawa at least) has served me ill, and I ended up having to take a non-teaching job. *sigh* The Ottawa teaching market sux. Sorry for getting snarky. Greg

Yup, but almost never in stock, and doesn't include the headpiece, which makes it only half-useful. The Synapse headpiece costs more than the R-Trem. You could use a locking nut and a "surrogate heastock" that's removable and only used for tuning up, but it's not quite the same. Greg

Chapman Stick.

Not true! I most recently came across this opinion at Gearslutz, when someone was talking about running a Metal Zone into a Valve Junior. As it turns out, though, what sparked the sharing of the "MZ is mediocre" opinion was that a posted clip DID sound awesome, and I gave kudos for that. Frankly, the tone was astonishing for a pedal + $99 amp. Simply astonishing. When I hear good tone, I'm going to give it credit, because of my ears rather than because of what's printed on the pedal's casing. BUT, I was rejoined by others who were blinky-eyed at the MZ having a great tone. Which is evidence that yes, the MZ can sound good, but that yes, other people share my opinion that it's generally mediocre. In any event, you're talking bollocks. I don't know what teachers you think you know, but I don't know them, and I'm not one of them. You know that annoyance you probably feel when people stereotype metalheads as closed-minded slacker idiot stoners/drunks with not much else going for them and very little in the brains department? You know and I know that stereotype is complete horses***. I suggest you take your stereotype of teachers (wherever it came from, I don't really know) and refrain from painting me with it.

I sold mine well over a year ago. I'm usually the one singing the song of "back off the gain a bit, add some more mids, you mushy scooped-mids fiends"... so I'm of the exact same opinion as y'all when it comes to what makes a decent metal tone. But I think the Metal Zone is mediocre at best. It's not the WORST pedal ever, but it has a deserved reputation...!

My verdict: cool-tacular! Once you've done the final processes you discuss, it'll be a cool guitar. That GFS pickup looks WAY cooler installed than it does in their inventory photos. Me likes. Greg

I'm surprised at how many people like (though it's also been clear that they don't "LOOooove") the Metal Zone. It's known as being a surefire recipe to destroy tone.

Can't PM this, which is my preference since I'm not really in a position to be didactic about dreaming big... I'm a small dreamer... But our PM system seems disabled unless I'm blind. You're better off working out a deal with a custom builder in which you simply commission a guitar like any other of his/her customers and you retain the rights to the design. If it's truly your own design, I doubt any respectable builder would have any trouble with that. If nothing ever comes of it, you at least get to see your concept come alive as a guitar that you get to keep with no questions asked. You don't own "50%" of a guitar, you own a whole guitar. I also don't imagine for the life of me that you could sell a design to a company. Sure, some companies get out-of-house work done, but they know who to call and they make that call. And those calls are made to players in the game. Cort liked Pagelli's work, so they called him up and hired him to design a guitar. Samick knew they could leverage Greg Bennett's designs (though, I have to say, I had never heard of him before the Samick relaunch)... and I'm sure there are other examples. But the vast majority of new designs are in-house, with the staggering majority of guitars sold still just being recycled designs (Strat.. Les Paul...) These large companies will have a whole team of people whose job it is just to come up with new designs. I'm not the sort to tread on anyone's dreams, but I have seen dreams turn to misery when the reality of this world wasn't accounted for, and I would save you that misery with this advice: if you really believe in your designs, you must at least re-think your approach. Building a prototype in order to pitch it to a company just isn't going to work. Either start small building your own (or sourcing someone to build them for you) or try to find out how to get your toe in the industry as a designer. I recommend post-secondary education in some sort of design (commercial, industrial, architectural) but I imagine there are any number of avenues you could take in order to develop a portfolio worth taking to the industry. Your best bet is trying to get one of those jobs I already mentioned-- part of a design team. You won't make millions from a few drawings, but you could design for a living and make a salary. THAT is a pretty cool "realistic" dream... and if your work is truly astonishing, you'll be in position to make yourself indispensible. There's very little chance that a collection of designs, unless they are truly genius to the point that everyone who sees them says "holy crap!!!" and you suddenly get a phone call from known people saying, "I heard from Bob who heard from Jim who knows Sheryl Crowe's guitarist that my life will never be the same after seeing these." There are such stories that have come true in this world (and therefore are not out of the realm of possibility) but which I suspect won't be the case here. Dream big, dream creatively, but dream healthy. Greg

After several WOD discussions, I've ultimately come around to seeing this as a good thing. ;-) There are good reasons to not just ship a "failed" guitar out to someone, and since they weren't being shipped out to anyone, they were just sitting around as bad reminders. They're just as good as firewood as they are as dust-collectors, and the catharsis was probably worth it. <laff> I certainly don't feel insulted. I understand that my poor abilities are not really in the same category as someone like David or Drak, and I'm not as relentless in my pursuit of perfection. I fully accept that what I might "live with," a professional and an artisan simply cannot (or at least, they can't and still hope to maintain credibility). The short: cool pics, thanks for sharing. Greg

If it doesn't need to be genuine pearl, some sort of decal would be the way to go-- and adding some sort of protective layer over top would be ideal. A coat of a clear glossy varnish or something. Something to consider: is this mainly for the purposes of up-close viewing or medium-distance viewing? Details that fine will be lost at any more than a meter viewing distance, and the up-close attention that it would require would be less awe-inspiring if the graphic is in the form of a decal. Myself, I like an inlay idea. I like a dragon. I just think the design needs to be reworked so that you can have some sort of dragon inlay within the realm of the materials' possibilities and your own skill set. Greg

I'm not the most experienced inlayer around (I've barely done ANY, but I have done SOME) but I could tell from first looking at it that there's no way it's going to be possible in shell. For the exact reasons Perry just gave. In order to enjoy the endeavour, you need to set yourself up for success, and that means understanding limitations of the shell (primarily) and also of the material being inlaid into (secondarily). Greg

That's the spirit.

Unless your shield is kept separate from the star, you can create a ground loop. I don't know the physics of it, but when I plowed through GuitarNuts, I just took them at their word. The theory is that all grounds should want to go to true ground. If everything feeds the star, which feeds ground at the jack, nothing will never ever have a choice but to go to ground via the jack. Any other combination at least creates the possibility for a loop. The pots DO come into contact with the cavity, and if your shielding paint is conductive to the degree it should be (you should get continuity between any 2 points of the cavity's walls), but they become a "part" of the shield as it were. Imagine your shield is a sheet of clay. You add a few lumps (your pots!) and smooth them down. Now you still have a surface, but with a few topographical irregularities. Still just one shield surface, though. Now, you WILL need to get this to ground, so: - pots are no longer connected to one another to create a "grounding path"... the shielding will do this (again-- IF properly conductive. I admit, I don't really trust the paint, but I've never used it) - Even the typical volume pot "bend-back-lug-to-casing" should instead have a wire that goes to the star instead - choose ONE pot (whichever is most convenient for your cavity) and attach an insulated wire to it. This goes to star, thereby sending the entire "shield surface" to ground. Greg

The magnetic field isn't nearly as precise as people like to think. That said, you generally want to position your strings OVER the polepieces, right? Problem being, it's an octave-style bass, so the strings are essentially "doubled". Conventional wisdom (though I don't know from personal experience, so someone can correct me) dictates that you will put your doubled strings quite close together, and position them over the polepieces so that the overall "width" of the combined strings is centered over the polepiece. You'll probably catch the outside edges of the polepiece with the strings in that kind of setup. But since you're building it, you get to be creative! Since the bass notes are more important ultimately, you can position it so that the bass strings are centered over the polepieces, with the secondary strings catching the outside edge. Make no mistake, they WILL be picked up in the magnetic field, but they'll theoretically be less pronounced. In any event, whatever configuration you come up with, try to get as much string mass over the polepieces as you can, and do not set it so that the strings go between.

The only way you could violate Feiten's patent would be to use his exact calculations which relate to his calculations of "ideal" compensation (at nut and also at bridge I believe) based on each string guage at a particular pitch, with the common scale length, PLUS his customized tunings which do not stick strictly to even-tempered tuning as per most machines. You can get the "Feiten" tunings for Peterson Strobe tuners. Other than that, the idea itself is not and cannot be patented. As with most patents, Feiten and Earvana's are based on a "significant improvement to a product or process." But they can't patent the original idea itself, in this case. Greg

Well, I went ahead and did it. Instead of "economy" of wires, I just desoldered the whole lot and started from scratch. Verdict: ultimately, success. It's fiddly work when you don't have generous leads with flexible sleeves... a few mess-ups, including: - had continuity between shield "areas" (pickups, cavities) but forgot to send it to ground. - had too many grounds for a straight-forward "star"... I need to find a better way. The snipped-off "O" worked, but I'm sure there's a better solution out there - forgot to ground the volume pot's 3rd lug. Whoops! I was like, "why the heck am I not able to get to zero volume?" - one of the wires snapped off from too much manipulation of the components in the cavities. I kept watching the cap because I thought it would be next to go. *gulp* In general, I don't love doing this work, with the setup I have. I have a mediocre iron, which is better than a crap iron. At least I have that going for me. What I really need are a few key techniques (ie. lengthening a lead that is too short with some sort of effective splicing technique), and someone who REALLY knows their stuff to give me a lesson. Everyone learns differently, and I've discovered that I can only get "so far" by reading and looking at pictures. I learn best by hands-on, but with nobody there to say, "nope, that's going to be a cold joint" or "you held the iron too long" or "don't worry, you're not going to fry your pot... yet!" I've hit my plateau for soldering skill. I'm suddenly glad I only do this a few times a year. I DO like having the willingness and ability to do this work, at the end of the day. This is a brand new guitar, mind, and I KNEW my skills are somewhat limited, but I went ahead anyhow. I tried to do some research, but it wasn't really necessary. I ultimately just "gave'er" and I shoulda done so right from day 1. Woulda been done a couple days ago. Greg

This is just an internet-speak meme, so don't take it literally: This thread is worthless without pics!! (that's just a way of saying, yup, we'd love to see more pics)

Good point-- I was assuming custom build. I have NOT confirmed compatibility with spacing for existing guitars.

There will always be some string noise unless you have some hella picky and weird technique of lifting and accurately pressing down each note. Some people don't like Elixir (or similar coated) strings, but I do; and part of what I like about them is that they reduce string noise and give me a smoother overall feel. I'm back on regulars for electric right now, but coated strings might be the ticket for you.