|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 4, 2013 0:50:06 GMT -5
Eternal question that i have to ask myself. Im at this point when i finally really want to create "my" dream guitar, and i m gathering the different parts, starting with the neck: I want it to have a 24 fret-neck (for tapping and better access to high register) I want it to have regular Fender Stratocaster look - whatever that means, something that looks "traditional". I found the perfect neck on a 1987 Fender HM: flat, wide, straight, 24 frets, strat headstock I plan to get rid of the locking nut - I tried that Ebanol nut (below) But i m not convinced: - it needs at least 1 string-retainer - the height doesnt match right away so you have to remove the included chim and make one yourself (i made mine with 1.05mm picks) - it s really ugly - it would have to be replaced by a regular nut or roller nut - i prefer regular since you dont have to attack the fingerboard at all. In both case, some woodwork awaits me to recreate the missing wood. I plan to install Fender locking tuners, probably chrome so it looks more trad. I also plan on toning down the front headstock: - either just just erasing the not-so-discreet STRAT logo and replace it by a more "accepted" FENDER Stratocaster (or Strat) one (decal?), probably white, or light grey - or by stripping down the black paint and recreate a traditional "wood" headstock This is ok right? I ve had people telling me "Dont ever erase the brand blahblah..". I m still at the stage of setting up a plan while gathering the parts, so in the meantime, i m explaining what i m about to do in case anyone had anything interesting to say about it.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jun 4, 2013 5:30:59 GMT -5
I wouldn't worry about stripping down the headstock, it's not a vintage piece where the value is going to suffer if it's altered. Plus, I gather you intend on playing the thing until it disintegrates into a pile of sawdust anyway, rather than selling it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 6:13:43 GMT -5
OTOH this is an extremely rare neck. Long (fender) scale, FR locking nut, 24 frets, fender logo. Those guitars was Fender's short-lasted attempt at super-strats, still the only genuine super-*STRAT* (TM) by official terms, right? Personally i wouldn't touch it. This Ebanol nut surely looks ugly. Now about tension bars/string trees, i am puzzled the guitar didn't have them stock. Angled headstocks might get away without tension bars (or not), but strat type guitars surely need it. Oh ... almost forgot : - the height doesnt match right away so you have to remove the included chim and make one yourself (i made mine with 1.05mm picks) I wouldn't even dare writing such things with Cyn1 lurking around
|
|
|
Post by ux4484 on Jun 4, 2013 10:27:37 GMT -5
Now about tension bars/string trees, i am puzzled the guitar didn't have them stock. Angled headstocks might get away without tension bars (or not), but strat type guitars surely need it. Possibly not if the tuners have graduated post heights, and the locking nut (Standard Fender locking have 3 high/3 low, Sperzel's have 2/2/2 high to low. I like the uniqueness of the headstock, I'd leave it the way it is. I see your point on the nut, but if ugly works good, don't fix it. See if you can get some nicer looking small head screws to replace those with (allen button heads would look more tidy).
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Jun 4, 2013 14:15:05 GMT -5
- I tried that Ebanol nut (below) But i m not convinced: - it needs at least 1 string-retainer - the height doesnt match right away so you have to remove the included chim and make one yourself (i made mine with 1.05mm picks) - it s really ugly That Ebanol nut is about the easiest nut to replace a locking nut with. Ebanol is just a hard phenolic resin and paper laminate. You can also find fingerboards made out of the stuff. It's some pretty hard stuff. As to the string retainer, most guitars would benefit from a string retainer or string tree. They're left off to save the OEM a step and an additional cost. Unless it's an esthetic deal breaker, I wouldn't sweat the string retainer. The height on virtually all new nuts is never a glue and go thing. Shimming the nut shelf can be permanent or temporary\removable. Since you've got screws holding down the ebanol nut, a removable shim is nothing terrible. You might want to find a different material than old guitar picks...but once you fret a string it's academic. Greekdude just went through a similar exercise with a nut shelf on a Carvin. Gotoh lock nut installation on Carvin DC135 '88 It does run long, but towards the end he's got some good pictures and did a very respectable job documenting his work. Cutting the slots on this nut will also allow you to fine tune your setup, but the ebanol is some pretty hard stuff so the DIY route will be time consuming. Depending on your style, how light or heavy your touch is and your string gauge, the depth of these slots will vary accordingly. My point is, these factors all contribute in making an out-of-the-box scenario highly improbable. You can invest in nut files. They get expensive quick and unless you're going to be doing a lot of nuts getting your money back on the investment is a non-starter. You can make a fairly respectable set of nut files with a Dremel tool and a good set of feeler gauges. With either route, there is a learning curves, but not an impossible task to accomplish. The easiest pat is to just go to your trusted guitar tech and have him do the nut cutting. As far as it being ugly...well, that is a pretty big piece of real estate to cover once that locking nut comes out. The average nut width runs from 1/8" to 1/4", which leaves a big ugly spot behind it. You could work in a filler wood or brass piece to install behind a more common sized nut. I've made rosewood filler pieces in the past that did the trick. Just a side note, you might want to find different screws that fit the countersink on the ebanol nut, or just enlarge the countersink so the mounting screws don't stick up. That does contribute to the "ugly" part. Not wanting to "attack" the fingerboard is the most common objection to roller nuts. This can be done without a router, if you're patient, or just cringe at using power tools on a guitar neck. I double checked the dimension, and the recommended depth is .105" from the highest point of the fingerboard radius. The scary part is the .094" you'll need to work into the fingerboard towards the bridge. I did find a very good walk through on this method: Fender LSR roller nut installationAnd yes, Virginia, there will be some woodworking involved no matter what direction you intend to go. That neck was built for a locking nut. Once you remove said nut you have to rework it to accommodate the nut of your choice. I plan to install Fender locking tuners, probably chrome so it looks more trad. If you have the coin, look into the Schaller locking tuners. Dead horse beating time again, but if you do it right, you do it once. Good call. That's a bit too 80's... Is the "Strat" script logo under the clearcoat, or just silk screened over it? Makes a difference on whether you can just "erase" it or not. Finding an "original" decal might get involved. You can make one, haunt eBay or the more established older music shops to scare one up. These decals will require a clearcoat...or many clearcoats if you want a flush "buried" look versus the "bump" once its buffed out. Stripping the headstock would get you back to a more traditional look for a strat. Odds are this is some hard catalyst finish that will just sneer at chemical strippers. If you go this route be prepared for a lot of sanding, especially if you don't have an electric palm sander... Refinish could range from lacquer up to a hard automotive clearcoat. Just tape off everything else and go. This is another thread on it's own, so I'll abandon my normally verbose tendency and leave it here. And they told the Wright Brothers it'd never get off the ground... You are already planning on making several other mods to this guitar. Any "collectible" value this guitar may have had went right out the window once original part #1 left the building. This is a customized guitar you are building to your spec. Honestly, putting a decal of your own design on there along with whatever other Fender decal is not a sacrilegious act. Let's be honest, how much did you pay for it? Do you really think this think is going to finance a retirement down the road? They are correct that a modified guitar will never fetch the money invested in the short run...perhaps never. However, if your motivation is to make this a versatile "perfect" guitar to your specs, you probably aren't planning on selling it anyway. We always have interesting things to say. Whether they are pertinent or not is always a crap shoot. Happy Trails Cynical One
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 4, 2013 14:58:01 GMT -5
This Ebanol nut surely looks ugly. Now about tension bars/string trees, i am puzzled the guitar didn't have them stock. Angled headstocks might get away without tension bars (or not), but strat type guitars surely need it. No tension bar/string tree/graduated post: the Kahler locking system comes with some sort of all-in-one locking-nut-string-retainer actually. You can see it better here, naked
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2013 1:32:06 GMT -5
^^ aha, cool design. So you may try without string trees/tension bar at first. If you get the sitar-sound effect on some string then three factors might contribute to this : a) the new nut is badly cut, b) the string dimensions do not match with the nut holes, c) the sitar-sounding string needs a string tree.
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 5, 2013 15:52:14 GMT -5
Definitely sitar-sounding E and B The angle is flat as one can see I do not mind string trees anyway - with some HB pencil graphite treatment, they dont seem to put my strat out of tune - it s just more stuff to buy and install.
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 5, 2013 15:58:14 GMT -5
I thought so too, that s why i was surprised that it came with a shim (sorry for spelling) that was WAY to thick. In my naive mind, i thought at a FloydRose/Kahler locking nut was one-size piece of metal, and therefore that the Ebanol nut would just fit right in with minor adjustment.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jun 5, 2013 20:25:56 GMT -5
I'd go with the roller trees. I like 'em and I don't even use the whammy, they just feel so much better when I'm restringing, like they'd be easier on the poor strings.
If you're going to be using the vibrato, then all the more reason. String trees are cheap, and the roller ones are only marginally more expensive. And no pencil lead necessary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2013 3:23:21 GMT -5
+1, roller trees are nice, and fairly cheap as well.
|
|
|
Post by lunaalta on Jun 6, 2013 9:50:11 GMT -5
From your foto of the fretboard (neck to the head), it looks like you have quite a bit of wear on the frets. I'd think that might have something to do with the 'sitar' problem. But I might be wrong....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2013 23:37:14 GMT -5
From your foto of the fretboard (neck to the head), it looks like you have quite a bit of wear on the frets. I'd think that might have something to do with the 'sitar' problem. But I might be wrong.... Good observation. The neck needs major fretwork (refretting). However , this is about open notes, where the only culprit is the nut.
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 11, 2013 21:26:54 GMT -5
Hey Cyn1, you said
I want good locking tuner, light and tight, in chrome finish, and wouldnt love anything more than going for the best: which model do you recommend?
Schaller.com is of very poor help (?), and i cannot seem to find any Schaller locking tuners in real Chrome.
To each his own, but that brushed chrome of whatever it s called, well it s not my taste - and now that i ve ordered a chrome X-bridge, i prevents me from making the guitar look like a macbook or a fridge-doorknob..
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Jun 11, 2013 22:27:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 11, 2013 23:10:31 GMT -5
Thanks Cyn1 - german precision in your answer too.
So these are the one you recommend: nice indeed. I dont have any locking-tuner on any of my guitar, is that top-mount thing a real advancement? It seems i can even have the Top in chrome in case that black metal top happens to be too obvious.
They are on the pricey side, but i suppose there s a reason for that. Just for the sake of it, what would you think of Sperzel or Gotoh or Hipshot?
Also, if i want to be precise, i d have to order them directly from Germany (in Euro) or there s a cheaper way around?
In listing all the qualities i d like to have: switching to drop D - regular would be super nice. I know Hipshot has a device called Extender for this - to be installed on the tuning gear itself i guess - though not cheap either (about US$100). I m gonna see if Schaller offers that too...or i might just stick to manual tuning (time consuming on stage though...). (that ll probably ask for some sort of Tremol-no of some sort under the floating vibrato-bridge, but this belongs to another thread maybe..)
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 11, 2013 23:21:49 GMT -5
E to D (actually D to C in my case), this is what i which i d be able to do on stage!
Sperzel has it under the name D-thing Tuner
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 11, 2013 23:35:53 GMT -5
Researches are going on the right direction: here it seems that the HipShot Extender is installed on Schaller tuning gear, right? This plus a Trem-setter seems to do the trick perfectly!!
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jun 12, 2013 8:24:10 GMT -5
Due to forum change problems, I cant post pics and such...however there are pics of things in teh gallery of my kahler guitars. For the nut the fender roller LSR is fantastic if you can do the work to fit it, come with dampeners and you can see that on my tele. The older ones are a bit larger and suitble perhaps for this kind of thing.
For locking tuners, I have fender branded schallers on my fenders with staggered posts. With a conventional nut on my strat I used roller trees and the tele with LSR did not require them.
I just fitted 18:1 open locking hipshot tuners. These can be customised with buttons of choide and are perhaps superior to the shallers. They also make closed shaller styled versions I beleive.
With d-tuner type things, be aware if your trm is floating, the whole guitar will go out of tune. Players like EVH have the the trem to be down only with enough spring tension to lower the strigns and still bottom out. Same applies to hipshot extenders, and these are expensive and are not suitable for floating trems.
My Lp and tele in the gallery ahve flaoting kahlers and my strat a more conventional 2-point normal fender style trem system. All work well for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2013 9:24:12 GMT -5
With d-tuner type things, be aware if your trm is floating, the whole guitar will go out of tune. Players like EVH have the the trem to be down only with enough spring tension to lower the strigns and still bottom out. Same applies to hipshot extenders, and these are expensive and are not suitable for floating trems. BYW isn't smth like joe.emenaker.com/TremStabilizers/ a sort of tremolo stabilizers, tremsetter, etc.., same theory behind auto-adjusted car suspension, when the height remains the same regardless of the weight? Ok, i believe you did your research, obviously i didn't do mine, but it just seems weird to me, why invest 200 EUR for a trem stabilizer and *still* not work for working trem.
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 12, 2013 12:44:09 GMT -5
I m still debating on which nut to choose: i like bending behind the nut, as well as plucking the strings in this area (Kalimba/West Africa ThumbPiano type of sound, or EVH just before the first chord of "Running with the Devil") Q: do the dampeners on the LSR allow the string to vibrate enough for such thing? Thanks for warning, this is precisely what i m talking about. Although on the video youtu.be/8MLpOiJQ5Jk , dude has a floating bridge fitted with a trem-setter and seem to switch from Regular to Dropped-D without tuning problem it seems - he doesnt really play chords either.. But you say it s not exactly working that flawlessly in the real life? I really need to figure this thing out as i d love the possibility.. 18:1 sounds nice (especially since i m gonna get rid of fine-tuners with the X-Bridge). As said, i dont own any "locking tuner" guitar, but you seem to say that Schaller/Hipshot/Sperzel are in the same quality range? What makes a locking-tuner better than the other one? Dont they all lock in the same way? In which way the Schaller "Top Mount" an improvement? You put a lot of tricks and creativity in your guitars 4Real, i like the "stealth" way of doing it, very inspiring, congrats indeed. Will most definitely welcome your input in my future threads about wiring/pickups/sustainer/piezo/killswitch/splitter in a nice and fashionable way
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jun 12, 2013 14:47:30 GMT -5
Researches are going on the right direction: here it seems that the HipShot Extender is installed on Schaller tuning gear, right? This plus a Trem-setter seems to do the trick perfectly!! Ok, I missed that you were looking at trem stabalisation. I have a tremsetter like this in my strat, they are kind of tricky and you need to be able to set them up. The alter the feel quite a bit and as the guy says, you can't 'divebomb' and such but does help stbalisation, not sure if it would cope with a broken string, I've never broken one. The sperzel thing I'd not seen before but only work with sperzel machine head. Neither of the ones shown are 'locking' but perhaps the hipshot is a better bet for that kind of thing perhaps. All these things take a lot of finicky stting up and not foolproof as things like the set screws can move a little and so tuning can not always be accurate. The sperzel guy also says that it is only from E to D, though D to C may work it's hard to know. The tremsetter in my strat was intended to assist in oblique bends and tuning stbalisation when bending and because I ahve quite an extreme float and didn't want detuning while it floats, well that was the idea. To that extent it does seem to work but it alters the feel quite a bit. The feel of the traditional trem with this kind of system is very stiff compared to many systems, such as my khalers that have an ultimate float and range (ie, till the strings fall off!) and extremely smooth. on my strat I did use two roller trees (see the gallery for the guitars mentioned) with a conventional nut even with staggered tuners as there are no dampeners as with an LSR (see my tele). I prefer the LSR but it does require taking 1/8" off the fretboard as you rightly assessed. Graphtech nuts seem to work fairly well, but it depends what kind of response you want from the trem system. The entire trem systems on my guitars generally are the most expensive and finicky parts and often, more expensive than the rest of the guitar. So, you may well be stepping somewhat into the unknown and not entirely clear to me, what kind of performance you are looking for. There is a bit of fine work involved in this project as well, so you'd need to be fairly sure that you 'chops' in modification is up to some of this work. Remember that it all looks fine in the ads and easy and all, but they are not going to show you the 'down sides' of a bit of this. Generally, people that detune like EVH don't have a floating trem which is the ultimate 'tremsetter' I guess as there is enough spring tension against the body or a 'plate as with EVH' to allow that to occur without altering the other strings. If you want something very loose and a wide range though, all these things to help stablise things, tend to 'stiffen' things up I'd imagine as my tremsetter does. I can't speak for other types of device but imagine they work in a similar way. Anyway, check out a few of the guitars in the gallery there for ideas perhaps. All three of my guitars there have advanced trem systems that work perfectly. None I suspect would cope really with dropping the E to D, but perhaps the strat, perhaps the D to C would be easier. You might also want to pay special attention to the string guage and action if you are going to play that low though. A low string needs space to move and a thicker string is often better but to do that you need a reasonably high action on it to stop it just crashing into the frets and being too 'sloppy'. I now regularly tune my acoustic all over the place, from E to D to C and sometimes even B and even with a reasonably heavy 54 guage, it gets a bit 'sloppy' and have to play with care and the intonation can be a little dodgy too at times.
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jun 12, 2013 21:09:19 GMT -5
I see we walked the same path 4Real ;-)
All the points you mentioned crossed my mind a some point.
For years i mainly tuned 2 semitones below (DGCFAD) and like to drop the low D in C. I experimented with many string gauges, though these days i seem to like regular light 10-46 (for bending like butter) or 11-52. This is still in progress, depending on the day, the air, the weather, the music.
I play mainly with fingers, a la knopfler, or 8 finger tapping, so i like the action quite low. My vibrato bridge floats and usually allows a 4th or a 5th on the G (F) string. I use it a lot, up and down, on chords and single notes.
I m going to buy some tuning machines (light, locking, staggered) and do some test with the ebanol nut to see whether or not i need string trees. Then i ll decide for TUSQ nut or LSR.
Thanks for comments about these bridge-stabilizer items: i m thinking that i could keep the vibrato free in standard tuning, and maybe block it (at least one way) when i want to drop the low string.
To be continued...
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jun 13, 2013 5:43:56 GMT -5
Thanks, these things can be a bit tricky and not sure anything is 'perfect'. Most of my electric guitars are in mothballs and will be busy for a few days over the weekend but might take some out and do some tests as I've not been playing them for the last year... The above are locking hipshot open locking tuners I installed on my acoustic recently. More than happy and the service great. My other guitars use fender branded schallers that are also very good, was not so impressed with the sperzels used on my LP you can find in the gallery. They are very light though. The hipshots can be customized with a range of different buttons, I chose to change out the original chrome and 'unique/odd/distinctive' buttons for these nice black ones. Was pleasently surprised byt he quality of these and that they ahve a nice kind of non-slip matt feel to them. You do notice the 18:1 but the normal 16:1 closed versions would be fine too I am sure. There are a range of buttons, the ones here are small and would fit on a strat, so if you are doing that, make sure you get the right kind and if a strat, that they are staggered and all that. Now, I think the closed things are schaller compatible but you might want to check with them to see if they are compatible with the dropped tuning device, pretty sure these open locking tuners WILL NOT fit that device, the other ones MAYBE. In fact, as they make both, you might want to check all that info and ask if they have experience of advice regarding using it with a trem. So...no some are better than others. For me I like my fender branded schallers that I got form 'reliable fender/stratoshpere' that parts out new fenders on ebay. These lock from the back. I don't have experience with top locking tuners, think i'd prefer the back version. You may have to enlarge the tuner hole if using very thick strings perhaps. I use 10-42 on my electrics, a 54 fitted in my acoustic ok and I think my jazz box thing is a 56 or something...light top heavy bottom set. Oh, I used a set of GFS locking tuners, I'd not do that again. I broke a feww strings just locking tehm and had to file the holes and such and even then, no where near the quality of schallers and found out that considering postage, I could ahve gotten the real thing so...probably give the cheap alternatives a miss. Similarly, was not so impressed with the sperzels. I used the hipshot trilogy multi-tuning system on my last project...not in the gallery...and was extremely impressed. The locking tuners that I got are a work of art and very sure and customisable and at least on a par with the schallers. Again, they lock from behind with a thumb screw that won't fall out. However, if you are doing the dropped d thing, you need to be very sure about compatibility and these will not work it seems. Inf act, I've never seen locking tuners used with them, but I don't see why not, they are likely preferable. I changed to locking tuners on my acoustic as I am exploring alternate tunings and need to change a bit. You do notice that extra ratio a bit and they are very sure and accurate, important as tuning is vital in the stuff I ply now. The Seagull is fitted with tusq nut and bridge and the unusual headstock is designed to have a straight string pull to stop sticking in the nut too. I like strat trems, but the khalers are an amazing if expensive bit of kit and take a bit of setting up. They might not like too heavy a string either, you might need to buy wider claws of modify them to get the ball end in. On 'flat' guitars like my tele or a strat, you are going to want to tilt the neck back too to get a good break over the saddles. On my LP, I found a thumbscrew to replace the hybrid's grub screw so it can go to a hardtail with a few twists. You need to do a bit of playing around with the spring tension so everything balances right so it locks in tune exactly. They feel very smooth and kind of a cross between a bigsby and a floyd. The strings do not raise as with a floyd or fender, which might be an issue if you like a really low action. They can go as low as the strings falling off and sticking to the pickups and up till they break...so a huge range! Personally, though I've put a lot of work and $$ into the trem systems, I use them largely for a more subtle bigsby like effect or scoops, but they do stay in tune even with extreme bending...i think there is a sound clip on the tele that would demo that kind of thing. EVH has always had his trems flat to the board and under tension to allow for dropped tunings...hence the 'D-tuna' thing...i just feel a bit dubious about a lot of that. The tremsetter or similar might be ok, but I have my doubts frankly. They can be a bit tricky to set and does change the 'feel' and limits some effects like that satch or beck 'gargle' a bit...fender used to fit them but abandoned them for some reason. But perhaps it might work...if I get the guitar out I'll see what happens if I tune down to D. The LSR has these tiny 'dampers' built in and likely stop a fair bit of that noise, though I dare say it would transfer the vibration form behind the nut to the pickups with little if any sustain...again tricky. I used trees on my strat to put a bit more pressure on the nut, but largely to stop sympathetic vibration due to not having the dampers. There could be problems using the LSR with thicker stings though and of course, need to cut out some fretboard...I used a dremmel router bit but I have some experience and checked many times, scored with a knife, used a bit of tape for protection and secured a stainless steel ruler on the line to ensure I did not go too far and was straight...so a bit of prep and such. I cleaned it off with a file. A lot of this is fairly specialized work, you need tools and a lot of care, so be really sure. I also worry about putting too much into a guitar. I know some of mine are a bit excessive but in recent years aimed for a very 'clean' functional look and feel. try not to be too ambitious or put too much stuff into things. While I too am interested in the dropped things and even have ideas for behind the nut benders and some people do great things with Kieth pegs, there are always drawbacks and limitations it seems. The trilogy does work, not suitable for your project, but with a lot of fiddling around had the e string set to drop from E to D and to C in three steps ok with thick strings. I figured, that with a good acurate locking tuner, I can retune pretty fast, though I'd not attempt it mid song or anything LOL. Simce you only are retuning one string, you might conside r this option or seeing how that goes before going the full d-tuner thing. That device is not suitable for my acoustic of course, so a good set of locking tuners was my solution to a few 'problems' and seem to work well. It is not just trem systems that can cause problems with tuning, though just one string and super low tunings perhaps less so. The whole neck can bend and put things out from altering the tunings, this was made a little apparent with the trilogy thing, though eventually got a decent enough compromise. As that is a 'solo instrument' I was not too concerned if the whole guitar went a little flat, as long as it was in tune with itself. So...yeah, beware going too far on projects as they can really overburden an instrument and end up costing more than a couple of guitar you know. Perhaps a good aim is to get the guitar working decently then adding to it the 'extras' as you go and can afford as it sounds like you will get into all kinds of problems and things and somethings might not work or be compatible. Sustainers for instance are notorious for incompatibility and very tricky. Trem systems too can take a bit of planning and work and you need to consider the whole system as you are doing, not just the bridge or nut or tuners, as you seem to be doing. Though I used the trem subtly on electric, it became a part of my 'sound' quite a bit and tuning stability and reliability became a very important factor along with no-noise and such. When I started out, I thought I'd get one 'super guitar' which in those days, was a black Les Paul Custom. I had it modified with dual HB splitters and a lot of brass...well, it was the late seventies...refretted with jumbo frets and new bridge and brass nut, grover tuners...all that 'stuff'. And it is a great guitar but not played in years. But, I did play it exclusively for perhaps 20 years! I'd always fiddled about with guitars and did stuff when i was young, but got into them again in earnest to tell the truth as I'd always had a bit of 'strat envy. I started modding very cheap pawn shop strats, working out how to get the best out of them cheaply, especially things like trems and such. Just for their lightness compared to a real LP was reason enough to play them all the time frankly! In more recent years, I figured that there was no 'one prfect guitar' and set about making the custom trilogy of strat, tele and LP that you see int he gallery as a kind of 'set' devised for my 'style' and ideas in a more developed neater form. However, I seem to be going back to a 'one guitar' thing, at least for this acoustic stuff which is taking all my time. Like you, for different reasons I imagine, i needed a wide flat-ish fretboard. I was impressed with a lot of the basic features and construction of the Seagull for the price and chose a size that looked good and could handle the lower frequencies, a good balance and midrange. It was tempting to go for something with a cutaway and they have 'prettier' models, but the sound and all solid wood construction kind of tipped the balance. I also like something that looks a bit 'individual' but not too far 'out there'. I think you can see that in the other guitars, they are different yet familiar. The seagull branded schaller copies were decent, but I've been spoiled by the locking tuners on the electrics and these look and work superbly for the guitar. There are numerous advantages to locking tuners, and a new set of string went on in a flash settled immediately and have been in tune ever since. The strings will also come off quick that will aid in the next stage of things I am sure. So, hope this is of interest. Be careful with these things, often you only get one go so it needs to be right, plan and really consider what you really need as it is easy to get over enthusiastic, and work within you capabilities as best you can. Typically my guitars take months if not longer to fully evolve and sometimes things change along the way... best of luck...pete
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Aug 8, 2013 22:06:16 GMT -5
So i finally did it: stripped down a perfectly legit Fender Strat headstock with my dremel! It felt a bit weird while doing it, but this is going the right direction for me. I wanted to share the experience with anyone who dreamed of doing it but did not dare..yet
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Aug 8, 2013 22:44:08 GMT -5
Good work...I tend to 'panic' when I hear the word 'dremmel' but seems it worked out ok... BTW...I just took out my tele with LSR... Even though there are tiny dampers behind the rollers (the small black bits under the strings are rubber) to reduce sympathetic vibration and eliminate the need for string trees, you can in fact get all those 'behind the nut' ping sounds ok with it. Obviously the pitches will be different if it had trees. The use of staggered 'fender branded' schaller locking tuners (3 are lower than the others) are necessary to do this. That would be a job that would require a bit of modification, some of which is a little drastic...but since you already ahve a route there for a locking nut...hmmm That is a job for a dremel...I measured very carefully and taped a steel ruler in place to remove the necessary, about 1/8" off the fretboard to widen the slot to fit it, using the 1/8" router bit on the dremel very carefully and filing the slot falt and level, filling if necessary. As my board is maple, I scored through tehe finish to ensure the finish did not chip, probably advisable in any case as well for a clean cut. The rollers are the nut, not the front edge of the unit...hence the need to take the nut forward, but obviously the nut placement is as important as the bridge so you got to be accurate. There are some other advantages to this too, the nut screws in, and height adjustment is done with shims...it is precision made to the size and 'curve' of a real fender...on my squire you can see I only just got it to work as the string spread is quitre wide on the squire neck and sticks out 1mm each side. But all that is preferable to shaping and filing a new conventional nut. Of course, once you modify the fretboard like that, there is no going back so you have to want to do that. The older LSRs were a lot wider than these ones, I think there is an adaptor to fit the older style...but regardless I think to fit one you would need to rebuild that area under and behind the nut to make a new slot to fit it. I can report though that the LSR and locking tuners, no string trees and a really good trem (mine is a khaler) and you can go any amount of 'trem' and yet the guitar still springs back in tune. In fact, my tele lives in a padded bag with teh arm in and so is depressed when stored...yet I've not seen nor tuned it for a few weeks and it popped right back in tune taking it out now, even with over year old strings...!!!
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Aug 8, 2013 23:49:10 GMT -5
Thanks. Indeed, Dremel are nice little toys that makes me never want to stop.. can be dangerous yup..
This is the result i want yes!
My 60 reissue strat reacts a bit like that too: arm is bolted on permanently and i only use soft - but quality (www.mooradian.com) - gig bags. I still have to retune it now and then though. It s exciting to know that maybe this would be thing of the past!!
Yet i m not sold on the LSR yet. I tried it, it works very well indeed. I guess this is the "idea" of these ball-bearings that i dont like. That plus the limitation on the heavy gauge for the lower strings. And cutting off the fingerboard.
TUSQ wears off. Graphite too.
So far, i m carving the "missing bit" of fingerboard out of a piece of poplar - that i plan on coloring to match the rosewood. Then i ll have to make a decision.
Actually I m thinking of going back to old habit: bone and pencil powder..
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Aug 9, 2013 1:47:49 GMT -5
Fair enough...the LSRs are not good for heavy strings and such, I use 10-42's so fine but would not go more. Tusq are pretty good and well cut, I used a white graphite version on my trem LP and pretty good (dont know what you mean about 'tusq' wearing off...the nuts are impregnated by the stuff and similar to bone really)...my squier is very good and kept the original nut, not sure what it is, could be a good plastic for all I know...a lot is to do with the cut and such. I did find that I needed to use roller string trees on the strat though. However, one could experiement with your own 'pad' behind the nut if it turns out to be a problem...try without and add as needed perhaps.
You will need to do a bit of work on that locking nut shelf anyway to get a normal nut on it though...
Well...'thing of the past' is not really an option, tuning is really a vital component of sounding 'good' along with intonation. If perfectly tuned almost anything can sound like 'magic' IMHO
keep up the good work...
|
|
|
Post by strat80hm on Jan 30, 2014 1:51:58 GMT -5
That graphite nut (Dimarzio for Gibson) fits pretty well as an almost-direct replacement of the original (Kahler) locking nut. I started to recreate the missing fingerboard (with rosewood or bamboo) but then realize that i didnt even need that. It s a tad too narrow on that wide fingerboard, but it s ok. Is it ok if i just use some watered-down-Titebond to hold it in place?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2014 3:45:10 GMT -5
Why do 4 of the 6 strings in the slots seem to be covered with smth black (graphite)?
|
|