GregP

I assume your amp has a distortion stage? The pickups don't generate their own distortion. You probably knew that, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyhow because the name "Super Distortion" is sort of misleading to people not in the know, IMO. Next, though, if you have to crank to get anything, you need to double-check your wiring. One of two things is happening: 1. Your signal return (ground) of your pickups isn't connected properly-- it's either completely not connected, or it's short-circuiting somewhere. Without the right "ground", you won't get a signal. 2. You have wired your pickups out of phase with each other, and the frequencies are cancelling out. This produces a very thin sound throughout the majority of the guitar's usable frequency spectrum, leaving a little bit leftover in the lows and highs, but obliterating the mids (where the heart of a guitar's tone lives). Both of these require double-checking your wiring diagrams and possibly re-soldering. One thing to be aware of is that not all pickups use the same coloured leads. So even if you drew a picture of your old pickups with coloured wires, and replicated it with the new pickups, you might be wired up incorrectly because of differences in colour coding. Dimarzio and Duncan are definitely different from one another, which is leading me to suspect that you didn't know that and therefore ended up wiring them out of phase with each other or even with themselves (the two individual coils being out of phase). Can you get a usable signal out of -any- of the positions of your switch? Greg

I'm totally on the dark side with you. On a related note, here's a site for a luthier I met over this past weekend. His name is Chris Forshage, and he currently plays with the group OHN, along with probably a few other projects. Click for OHN 'myspace' type site He actually makes Bendetto-style archtops (his first build having been such a guitar! That's what I call guts), many of which are featured at his site: http://www.forshage.com/ However, the one he was playing the night of the gig was a thinline Klein-style headless. It had a teeny-tiny headstock-like bit of extra past the nut in order to simulate the feel of the start of a headstock. The top bout extends a bit deeper into the neck than a Klein, and a few other aspects were different as well. I got to noodle on it just a touch (no amp) and it was brilliantly executed. I wonder if I can nag him to put a picture in his gallery-- though, he may be focussing on archtops and hollowbodies to get a bit of a niche market. Nice guy, friendly, and and excellent guitarist to boot! Check out his site for a few unique archtops, though I'm a fan of his hollowbodies even a bit more. Greg

Mainly cosmetic. You might be able to scientifically measure differences, but just go with the one you like the looks of (and the execution of... which is more to your liking in terms of mounting) better. Les Pauls aren't known as sustain-killers (au contraire, they sustain quite well) and on the other hand, string-through guitars aren't having their names shouted through the cosmos as the saviours of sustain. So, the difference is pretty minimal, if noticeable at all. Besides that, I dunno why everyone goes on about sustain so much. How often do you just sit there and hold a note forever without the benefit of feedback (which is a different story altogether and doesn't require a "sustaining" guitar)? Not often. I've never held a note for 30 seconds and then thought, "Man, if only I could have squeezed an extra 2 seconds of sustain out of that." Greg

The pickguard was the right choice. That looks simply awesome. I want one. I LIKE the slightly less contrast for the burst, actually. Not much else to say other than: I love it. Greg

That is some kickass mahogany. Shame that it's not the front of the guitar. I know you probably need and/or want some flamed and curly maple pieces to showcase for a certain demographic, but I really like the look of the mahogany better than the maple. Greg

My dad's router (which I used at first) scared the pants off me. The collet wouldn't "grab" the bit properly or something, because no matter how much I tightened it, it would eventually show signs of slippage. In truth, I shouldn't have used it at ALL, but I covered myself in safety gear and made sure to stop and check the collet FREQUENTLY and re-adjust if necessary. Eventually I realized I needed a new router. Greg

I first looked at it with exactly the same eye as RAI6. In other words, I really DO think they have continuity and form a nice pattern. I like it WAY better than typical bookmatching, and these particular pieces hold a lot of visual interest. I say give'er. Greg

I've definitely thought of doing the same. I went to a show by a band called OHN recently, and the lead guitarist had a Klein-inspired guitar. It's making me swing more fully toward that kind of design rather than the broom. After all, it's really the lateral space that I need to save, and the distance between fine tuners and nut is the same on both. One thing I liked on this guy's guitar is that he had a mini "headstock" just past the nut, which served essentially as a placeholder for the "beginning" of the headstock so that it feels more familiar to the hand. Greg

Ansil, I'd be curious to see the final product of that all tidied up-- with just the Great Stuff, it looks a mess and it's hard to tell what's happening! Greg

I saw the coolest ergonomic guitar on Thursday. Much like the Klein, but with refinements and improvements. Played like a dream, and the luthier (guitarist for the band OHN) himself was amazed and surprised by how amazingly it has held up considering it was meant as a prototype only. If I heard correctly (we were talking in a bar), it doesn't even have a truss rod. Greg

I'm using fingerpicks while learning lap steel guitar, and it's been a really interesting experience. Naturally, I've tried them out on guitar as well and I like them quite a bit. The thumbpick makes it tricky to do a pinch harmonic, though. One thing worth mentioning to people reading this topic-- a lot of folks (myself included for years and years, and even a music store employee I met) try to wear them as a "surrogate fingernail", i.e. backwards. The curved bit should go along your fingertips, not over your fingernail! Greg

Oh yeah. Well, if it's a solid then I especially wouldn't worry about it. All those 2- and 3-piece body blanks you see... the glue join may be "up and down" instead of "laterally" (trying to think of better terms) but it's the same idea. You don't see a 3-piece Fender body with these 2 mysterious lines through them where the glue shrank back. I'd say you're sweating a non-issue. Greg

I've used roundover bits on cherry and maple, and there's no more or less risk of tearout than any other routing job. Maybe there's even a bit less, but that could've just been my imagination. So, the roundover shouldn't be a "special" problem, though you always need to take care. As for chambering, I think people are hesitant to answer because they're not sure if they're missing something by pointing out the obvious: just chamber it only as close to the edges as you can go without getting into the rounded over part... problem solved. If your roundover bit has a 1/4" radius, then don't go any closer to the edge than 1/4" and you should have no problem. Depending on the thickness of the cap/drop-top, give yourself an extra fraction of an inch for wiggle room. Regarding the glue: If you've glued the top to the body nicely, there won't be any significant gap left. In some cases, it's so seamless that you can't even tell that 2 pieces of the same species have been glued up. I wouldn't sweat something like "shrinkback" at this stage of the game. By the time you've finished'er up, there won't have been enough shrinkage to even notice. And in the worst case scenario-- is it so bad to see a little line? The difference in colour and woodgrain will already show that they're 2 different pieces. That's my opinion, anyhow. Greg

Friggin heck... upper fret access is WAY overrated! Acoustic steel-string guitars join at the 14th fret and I still reach all up in there. Just give'er! If you can rework it to get your hand in there, cool, otherwise don't sweat it. The link to Bo Diddley's guitar shows a distinct lack of upper-fret access. My bigger concern is-- how's he supposed to play it while sitting down? Slip, slip, sliding away.... Other than ergonomics, it looks hella nifty! Greg

The cherry I used on the lap steel was almost indistinguishable from maple. Assuming it's the same kind, it's more rigid than, say, mahogany-- which many people use for necks. By design, the lap doesn't have the same requirements as an actual neck; however, I'm sure it'd be usable. Greg

Simple. Instead of using push-pull pots and such, the switch itself gives you three "master" options. Either the pickups are in series, in parallel, or are split into single-coils. I like this idea much better than push-pull pots, which I've always found cumbersome. Either a superswitch or an option like this for me, thanks. Greg

Looks GREAT! Does a guitar get buffed once again once the curing process is done?

I haven't tried the rotary shaper, but I LOOOoooove Microplane's rasps. I think the shaper is probably a good investment. And with Lee Valley now carrying it, I can get it in Canada, which is (amazingly) unlike a sanding drum with follower. Haven't seen a "robo-sander" type bit EVER up here. And when I asked at Lee Valley about a year ago, they looked at me like I was a moron. Hah, joke's on them! Morons. Greg

Looks like plenty compared to, say, certain SGs. Then again, the same SGs are renowned for breakage.

Shouldn't be a problem unless the drill press is already weak, I wouldn't think. You could even make some sort of jig that holds the drum in place at the bottom, too, for extra stability. Greg

If you put too much lateral pressure on the drill press collet over an extended period of time, you'll probably eff it up. If you go gently, and have a good drill to begin with, you're probably going to be fine. If in doubt, get a separate cheap drill press and convert it to sanding duty, for cheaper than a dedicated drum sander. (of course, allllll depending on your needs and how often you use such things; after all, if it's your main tool, you might want an actual drum sander after all). Greg

No doubt, that IS a difference. On an interweb forum, I'd say that the majority of the people are hobby tinkerers. This holds true at KvR Audio (recording software and techniques) and Steelguitarforum.com, also, and those are the 2 biggest websites in their respective fields. I strongly suspect that every forum dedicated to a particular pursuit will feature mainly hobby tinkerers. I just hope that's not seen as a bad thing... after all, it's the raison d'etre for a forum: a meeting place for beginners and experts alike. I certainly appreciate the experts on this board, and I also reserve the right to disagree with them, based on my own ability to reason things through. In this case, though, I agree completely with Perry regarding the secretiveness. I couldn't previously explain WHY his expertise is more believable, but it's right there in his post-- on his website, he doesn't make any stupid claims or talk himself up. He walks the walk and just builds guitars. Zachary seems to glorify the strangest things (as mentioned above, "Look, mom, no precision!" and that's the main reason it rings untrue. You're quite welcome to keep your secrets, IMO, Perry. It's no secret that I'll never be able to play one of your guitars, anyhow. Greg

Not that we're Dan's business advisory committee or anything, but I see nothing wrong with doing both at the same time, particularly until his calendar is filled with true custom orders. In the meantime, I say keep making guitars (as long as you can afford to), and thereby build up a collection of saleable "on-hand" items, plus grow the gallery pages so that customers can know what kind of variety, quality, and aesthetic to expect when they decide to approach for a quote. Greg

I have to admit, that first pic from Frazzled's links was AWESOME! Great-looking guitar. However, the Ed Romanism of the whole site tells me-- stay away! Nothing sends me packing more quickly than Tone Voodoo. As mentioned earlier in the thread, ALL the companies (even ones I respect... there's no avoiding it) have a little bit of it. It's the excessive amount of it, combined with the condescension here that does it. Greg

Drak, that's illogical, incorrect, and more than a bit condescending. But 'salright... it takes all types on these boards, and I'm happy to disagree with you here and to agree whole-heartedly with Mick. It's practically self-evident that different guitars almost 'beg' to be played in certain ways, which was my point. The fact that my tele-style guitar has a Little '59 in the bridge doesn't stop me from snapping the strings and getting twang for days. But when I pick up my p90-equipped guitar, I don't really play it that way. I might be in the minority, but I strongly (VERY strongly) suspect that most people (even you, I think, though I certainly can't speak for you) would agree that different guitars demand different approaches, and a telecaster-style guitar, even with a non-magnetic bridge and a bright humbucker or a P90, will sound like a Telecaster when approached as such. I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss people's opinions based on whether they've played a host of teles or not. Valid opinions can be formed from a variety of sources, and "having played many different telecasters" is definitely one of the (if not THE) most important ones, but that doesn't make it the only one. Now, this is more of a question (not necessarily rhetorical either, since I actually DON'T know the answer), but weren't the G&L ASAT special pickups a lot closer in sound and engineering to a P90 than to a Tele-style single-coil? On a related point, Will Ray and others definitely sound like they're playing a "telecaster," even without the benefit of a stamped steel bridge. Greg