New Build: Theories & Opinions invited

Ok, so I am a month or two away from starting, but I'm formulating a plan for building a guitar from scratch.

I have a pretty well equipped workshop and I'm confident I can carry out all the activities except cutting the fretboard, which I will purchase. It's the materials and other details I'm wondering about. Here's my list of considerations:

Haven't decided on single coil or humbuckers, yet. I think that may be influenced by the materials I use.

Going at least 2 pick ups & 3 way selector. Probably single volume & tone. Electronics are not my forte, but maybe I should go for more configurability?

Planning on a through-body neck so I can avoid the bulk around where the neck & body normally join. (Does anybody know a good resource for that type of construction?)

Tentatively planning an exaggerated cutout along with that. (Just an extra finger width or two.)

The neck will be along the lines of my hagstrom: Very thin and narrow, probably with the Gibson scale length. 24 3/4 I think it is.

The body's going to be unique I guess; I'm not trying to make it look like any other guitar. Whatever it becomes after I trace a guitar, shorten this, elongate that, etc. I'm not planning on going far off the beaten track, though.

For wood, I'm hoping to use native species except using Rosewood or Ebony the fingerboard. (I prefer how looks over time, otherwise would just go with Maple and keep with the "locally grown" concept.)

I'm thinking of Rosewood fretboard on a Maple neck and Spruce for the wings.

What does anyone think of these materials? What pick-ups would you recommend on that? I'm assuming one type or another would enhance or compensate for any qualities the wood selection might leave lacking.

I live in Nova Scotia (all the same wood species as would be in Maine, I suppose), so those are what I'm thinking are the available materials. Alder is supposed to be a good all-round material, but what I call "alders" around here would never grow big enough to build anything out of. :)

Any other local type species I could consider?

Etcetera. Once I get my current project done, I'm ready to go, so I have to start making decisions and ordering parts.

Would appreciate any thoughts or opinions. Thanks!

Here you go my friend...

http://www.projectguitar.com

Lots of good info and some tutorials there as well. Have an active forum. I've not considered a neck through so I can't offer up any help there.

My next build will be a body I make, and I'll purchase a neck.

Well, I've already been disabused of the notion of making a through neck. Supposedly they are extremely prone to twisting and warp. I just came from my local guitar shop where I was shown one. Made in 5 pieces with opposing grains.

Basically, my whole plan is shot on my friends advice. :rolleyes: I'm now looking at a mahogony body, maple neck & ebony fretboard in either glue-in or bolt-on.

DO... post lost of pics on your progress. People love a nice guitar build photo essay. :D

Originally Posted by: RazboHaven't decided on single coil or humbuckers, yet. I think that may be influenced by the materials I use.[/quote]
Everything (pickups, body material, style, neck, etc.) will be determined by what you intend to achieve with the finished instrument.

For example, what style(s) of music are you going to want to play with it? What do you want the guitar to be able to do? How do you want it to sound?
[QUOTE=Razbo]Would appreciate any thoughts or opinions.

1. Figure out what your goals are. That will help you decide on materials.

For example, a harder wood like alder (at least in the bridge area) will be required for a locking vibrato like a Floyd Rose. Otherwise you might like trying the tonal richness of a softer wood like basswood. The pickup config will be drastically different if you are a classic rocker, or metal head, or blues man. Or if you want to be able to do all three or some combination of them. Make sense?

2. www.stewmac.com

The best place for parts, tools, kits, templates, etc.

Originally Posted by: CSchlegelThe pickup config will be drastically different if you are a classic rocker, or metal head, or blues man. Or if you want to be able to do all three or some combination of them. Make sense?

Are you saying placement? Distance away from the bridge? Or are you referring to the type of pups being used?

Originally Posted by: RickBlackerAre you saying placement? Distance away from the bridge? Or are you referring to the type of pups being used?

Yes. All of the above. And more. :)

People insist on bringing me back to earth! =D

Here's the thing. I want the best of both worlds and I know I will not be able to have that, so my approach was to "let the method define the goal" for lack of a better way to say it.

With it I would like to perform piercing lead solos on Eruption (some day!), then click off the dirt and play a nice warm rendition of Blue Spanish Eyes. If I have to define the goal (and the sacrifice), then I would lean toward achieving the piercing lead solos. ...But I want the warm broad tone, too!

I'd like to try for that middle ground and versatility. I am definitely not trying to emulate any particular sound or guitar. I'm more like interested to see how it turns out. When I try considering beyond the woods I think that pick-ups are probably going to be the most defining thing. I'm thinking of S-H (B to N). That should give me some bite with a warm potential. Maybe even S-S-H.

That all said, I still need to be guided by some logic. I know nothing about this and am bound to make some dumb assumptions (see original post :) ). I thought I was onto something by mixing the woods, but the issues with the thru neck make me nervous.

It was reading a Stewart Mac mag that got me all inspired up in the first place. I thought I might be premature in posting, but the whole thing requires some consideration, so I am glad to be getting input. I definitely need to do some research, and getting a few opinions helps give me a starting point.

Thing is, you will sacrifice if you try to hard to make it the 'everything' guitar. I know you understand that you can't but even by trying a little bit to go down that road, you may still have less than satisfactory results. A buzkill for all the hard work.

My thought is to understand what you need. If you are inclined to any hard rock, a humbucking bridge pick up is a must. You can always do a coil tap or EMB 89 type of deal. after that, it gets a little sticky. For me personally, I would lean towards single coils and have a mid and neck position set of singles. I tend to not use the neck pick up on the solid body if it's a humbucker (I do on the hollow body for the woofy, jazzy sound). However, I do use the neck pick up on a solid body with single coils because of it's more bluesy tone.

While you want the guitar to do everything, understand what it is that you will really do.

I'm cogitating...... I hate commitment! :)

Ok, upon consideration, it would seem what I want most is that transitional element: the electric acoustic. Now to begin research from another perspective entirely!

(This may now seem like a wasted thread, but this discussion has helped prevent me from building just another version of something I already have and is, therefore, a success. Thanks for all the input!)

Still thinking. I have played electric acoustics and they still sound 'electric'. What about a solid body build with clean, warm play in mind? Is that a possibility or should I just be planning on building a hollow body?

I'm in the process of my finishing my own builds, so I understand your pain.

For shear versatility I went with an HSS design. With some simple wiring modification you can achieve quite a wide variety of tones from a single instrument. If you want to avoid the noise inherent in a standard single coil pickup there are multiple noiseless single coils offerings out there you can pick from.

For help with wiring designs, as well as a source of information for your own concepts, I would suggest dropping by Guitar Nuts 2.

The best advise I can offer you is to use the best parts you can lay your hands on. If that means haunting eBay for months, then so be it. The neck is the most critical component you’ll buy, so don’t go cheap here, or all you work will yield poor playability and even less fun… After that, the bridge and tuners need to be of the best quality you can afford as well. For a nut, I was very happy with the Tusq nut I put on my bass, and have bought them for both build guitars.

Much ado is made about tonewood. I would suggest that the quality of the work and the skill of the craftsman will have more of a direct effect on the quality of the tone from the instrument. I would bet that most tone snobs could not readily identify an alder, ash, mahogany or maple body blindfolded, so stick with your choice of build wood.

Happy Trails

Cynical One

Thanks for the input. After much vascilating I think I am finally onto my "goal" as it were. Either a EVH Frankenstein, but with a single coil along with the HB, or maybe more along the Frankenstrat H-S-S idea. I probably won't go Trem on this, since it's my first ever build and just to keep the costs down.

I finally settled after having an epiphany, of sorts. VH I was the single most influential album on my entire life. Not only for the ground breaking guitar work, but the drum styles, vocals and showmanship. I still remember the first time I heard it...

Anyway, so I figured I would head my build in that direction. I haven't been able to find any clear plans on the web yet, but have been collectiing some info wherever I can. I already know it won't be "the same" since I am not yet willing to wind my own coils and whatnot, but I hope to get close.

My info so far is:
-Ash Body (not sure what kind... anyone know for sure?)
-Maple neck (was going to build, but think I'll order a Strat neck, 'cause I'm getting chicken)
-Strat style body
-HB from a Gibson 335 (I assume this is a reference to the closest thing off the shelf, since the actuals were hand made, but also this could be what Ed started with)
-It had a brass nut. (Really?)
-No locking nut, but mine will. (Shouldn't it? My geets are vintage and none have this.)

Since I'm not going tremolo and not building an exact replica anyway, should I just copy stuff off a regular strat to fill in any blanks? Whatever tuners are good at the time will be fine, my build will have a 3 way selector (assuming I settle on H-S), things like that.

If anybody has info on getting the tone I obviously want or input on my "deviations", please post.

Originally Posted by: Razbo... I am finally onto my "goal" as it were. Either a EVH Frankenstein, but with a single coil along with the HB ...
[/quote]
Awesome. :) I didn't know EVH was an inspiration in this project.

Originally Posted by: Razbo
I finally settled after having an epiphany, of sorts. VH I was the single most influential album on my entire life...

Anyway, so I figured I would head my build in that direction.

If anybody has info on getting the tone I obviously want or input on my "deviations", please post.

I was also very influenced by "Classic" VH (i.e. DLR era).

There are a few things to keep in mind about EVH's tone on VH1. You might know all this but I thought it was useful enough to post for anyone else who is curious. :)

First, he used two guitars: the original Frankenstrat & the Shark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstrat

Note that the original version of the Frankenstrat had a standard Fender vibrato, brass nut and only one string tree (holding the E & B strings). And yes the brass nut was important because it more easily lubbed the strings with the 3-in-1 oil he put on it to minimize the string friction which helped keep the guitar in tune through his extreme dive bomb whammy action. All that results in a different sound than a guitar with a Floyd. His later Franks had a Floyd without fine tuners and then one with them. Slightly different tones.

The Shark had no vibrato being an Ibanez Destroyer (Gibson Explorer replica) and only had the one rear HB functioning.

Also important is that the Shark was used on at least two songs (RWTD & YRGM) and possibly others in which there is no vibrato bar techniques present. If you listen carefully to the remastered CD versions there are subtle, yet still fairly amazing differences in the tone from song to song (also from album to album). You can hear for example that the non-vibrato rhythm parts of Jamie's Cryin' & Feel your Love the tone is noticably different from say I'm The One & Little Dreamer. On those last two he is obviously using the B & W Frank.

Second, a great deal of the classic VH brown sound had to do with running either guitar through a maxed out, modded plexi Marshall. Most of what EVH did to his Marshalls (the Variac, the Jose mods, etc.) is exactly why we have modern rock amps with the added gain stage set to add overdrive.

If you listen to old bootlegs and concert footage you can hear that his sound is very naturally "undistorted" and much more simply "natural overdrive" or as EVH said, "Just raw power" from the amp and not a distortion pedal or any other such device.

Third, you can easily buy pickups from StewMac that simulate the classic Gibson PAF sound. You don't need to wind your own from a 335. :)

Finally, Cynical One had good comments about the overall quality of the work being most important. But I disagree with this:
[quote=cynical1]I would bet that most tone snobs could not readily identify an alder, ash, mahogany or maple body blindfolded, so stick with your choice of build wood.

The fact is most people never get a real chance to hear such a difference. How often have you ever gotten the chance to hear identical guitar body styles, pickups, setups and everything, except a different species of wood?

I have worked in at least 10 different music stores as a repair assistant and tech. I worked in two guitar manufacturing companies. So, I have had that opportunity to A/B wood, pickups, etc. in this way. I think most people would be able to hear the difference. It's pretty obvious and amazing how much difference it can make.

The real issue is would you prefer one more than the other after you heard the difference? And in this regard, perhaps, most people would say, "Wow it really does sound different, but I can't say one sounds better than the other."

I think just about any wood can sound good. It just depends upon the quality of the build and the player. Hey, the body of my most loved Strat copy is plywood :rolleyes: probably made from spruce, pine or some kind of evergreen. But it sounds great.

For your purposes I would suggest that either is fine, Ash (typically the "old Fender pre-CBS sound") or Alder (more associated with "post-CBS Fender", post 1966). You might ask a woodworker which is easier to work with. I have each and they are slightly different, I prefer one over the other depending upon what kind of music I am playing with it. The Ash is louder and harsher in the bass and treble ranges (my black Strat). The Alder is a bit more even and mellow, with the mids sounding more in balance with the bass and treble (my main red Strat).

Maple neck is fine. Definitely buy one if this is your first time out, that stuff is tricky. Warmouth and StewMac sell great quality necks.

Have fun!

You should contact RobSM, who posted his progress and results here. He's in Australia, so his wood selection was different from what's avaiable to you, but he could definitely give you some useful tips on how to do things, and what not to do.

LP doublecut

P90 T5

SG

336

Search result - RobSM in Tech Talk

Originally Posted by: LordathestringsYou should contact RobSM

He do appear to have a bit of experience!

The LP has what I think I want for a finish. I really liked that tiger stripe effect. Similar to HPCrazy's (not sure what wood his is), but once I saw it I loved it. This is perfect, because I was not sure if the wood is literally torched or some other method.

Thanks, you might warn him I'll be in touch. :)

[Edit] I checked out his price list. Neck and body are going to be the killers. =P

So thinking (and reading and watching) about the Frankenstrat. The neck pick up wasn't working apparently, but I figured mine should.

Also, until now, I had thought there was a middle pick up crammed in that center hole at least at some point. I might cram one in, or would it be overkill? I'm thinking go hard or go home. :)

A big question I have is the slanted humbucker. Would this not take the poles badly out of alignment with the strings? Whatever the case, I guess it worked for Eddie.

And I'm also hooked on the finish like HPCrazy's Godin, so I'll have to see what Ash looks like and if it would take a similar effect and decide if I'll need a maple or other veneer on it.

...I'll have about 50 pages here by the time I actualy have a part in my hands. I'm hoping the epic posting has a good ending. I've eliminated a woodshop project that was in my way, so I am good to go. :)

Originally Posted by: RazboSo thinking (and reading and watching) about the Frankenstrat. The neck pick up wasn't working apparently, but I figured mine should.

... I had thought there was a middle pick up crammed in that center hole at least at some point. I might cram one in, or would it be overkill? I'm thinking go hard or go home. :)

[/quote]
The red neck pickup was non-functional. And the middle cavity had a five-way switch that was also totally non-functional. At that point EVH was purposely (perhaps jokingly) misleading people who had been trying to copycat his guitars. :p

Originally Posted by: Razbo
A big question I have is the slanted humbucker. Would this not take the poles badly out of alignment with the strings? Whatever the case, I guess it worked for Eddie.

EVH originally slanted the HB because the string spacing on a Fender is wider than a Gibson.

Since the body, neck, and vibrato bridge was Fender sized, when he put a HB pickup in it from a Gibson he noticed that the pickup pole pieces didn't quite stretch far enough to be directly under the strings. He figured if he slanted it slightly it might catch a bit of each E string with an opposing bit of each pole piece.

Nowdays, pickups and bridges are manufactured in multiple sizes and configurations to make it easy to match. Hence the modern Fat Strats do not need to have a slanted bridge pickup.

BTW - the original Strat design of a slanted single-coil was in order to make the bridge pickup catch more treble on the treble strings and bass on the bass strings. This is a really peculiar thing when you think about it.

And it also factors into a good build: the pickups should be in a favorable position under the strings, right? But where is that and how does one determine it?

Usually, it happens that Fenders and Gibsons typically were designed so the pickups are right under the strings at a harmonic node. You might even find conversely that cheaper knock-off copies have the pickups in a place that is NOT under a node. Which is why sometimes they sound "dead" or "flat". Or just plain crappy, if you prefer. :)

Did you see the other stuff I posted about EVH guitars and the sonic qualities involved in VH1? I know people that have bought strat-style Franks thinking they will get a decent brown sound. But then they discover that the more "heavy crunch" sound they were aiming for was like in YRGM. And they can't really get that with their Frank copy.

Because ... oops! He was using the Shark on that song.

That guitar sounds much more heavy and "Gibsony" than the B&W Frank. Because of course it was a Gibson style guitar with a tune-o-matic stop tail piece bridge. The B&W Frank sounds much more like a screaming Strat, with the slightly natural "boinging" echo of a guitar with a Fender vibrato block and springs in the back.
[QUOTE=Razbo]
I've eliminated a woodshop project that was in my way, so I am good to go.

Have fun! I wish you success.

I appreciate your input and info; I need all I can get!

I had never given the tunes much analysis from this perspective. (As a drummer in my 'past life' I just didn't pay much attention to the non-percussion details. I am seeing all music from a completely different side these days.)

The inspirational sound for me is in Ain't Talkin Bout Love. I believe this must be the Shark if he played it on the first album. I started looking for info on it and found

http://www.celebrityrockstarguitars.com/rock/vanhalen.htm

... Maybe not the best source. But the first picture I have of The Shark is on any albums I think is is W & C F. Are you sure he played on the first?

It's been a while since I played these on my main stereo. Might be time for a recap. :)

Originally Posted by: Razbo
The inspirational sound for me is in Ain't Talkin Bout Love.[/quote]
He used the B&W Frank on that song. Listen for all the vibrato bar licks. He starts it with a slight delay or echo (probably his Echoplex) and kicks the MXR phaser on a couple of times.

It is unique in that it mixes an electric sitar in as well for the solo. He doubles the solo with it and pans it right which makes it easy to pick out in headphones because the first 3 albums all have EVH mixed hard left in the stereo field. The huge reverb from Templeman's mix of is almost all you can hear of EVH on the right side.

The celebrityrockstarguitars VH site page is fun for pix and info.

Originally Posted by: Razbo
But the first picture I have of The Shark is on any albums I think is is W & C F. Are you sure he played on the first?

Absolutely.

Listen to the first thing he does on RWTD: plucks the strings behind the bridge. Can't do that on a Fender style vibrato. Has to be a Tune-O-Matic stoptail bridge. And the tone, the metallic warmth of that riff is monumental. Same as YRGM. Listen to the little Jimmy Page-esque pickup switch trick he does at the end of the solo. His Shark had a functional pickup selector switch; the B&W Frank had none.

Further, there are no vibrato bar licks in either of those songs. And if you really listen to some of those tunes back to back you can hear the differences in guitar tone I mentioned earlier.
[QUOTE=Razbo]
It's been a while since I played these on my main stereo. Might be time for a recap. :)

Absolutely. :)