Andyjr1515

That is a jolly impressive line-up

Sides trimmed and mahogany front and back blocks glued on: And the (unsanded) back also cut - leaving it oversize to allow both wiggle room and for the contraction when it is dished to its 15 foot radius: Much of the build will be done with the sides remaining in the mould: The top wood (sitka spruce) and bracing / kerfing wood is on order so not much more can be done on the body at the moment. While I'm waiting for the wood to arrive, I'll start on the neck and fretboard. Busy tomorrow but I should be able to make some progress on Wednesday

The bending irons are a sort of steam-bending to be honest. You comprehensively soak the wood first and then spray it frequently during bending. Some folks also use a flexi stainless steel sheet that keeps the steam in, although I find it easier without. The other common method is a fox-type bending rig with heating pads - common in the US but the equipment tends to be quite difficult to get hold of and expensive here. Also, it is a specific rig for each size of guitar. Fine if you are doing multiple builds of the same design, but a bit over the top for one offs For me, the bending irons work (as long as they are turned up hot enough) and don't take up a lot of space. With a workshop about the size of a public toilet cubicle, that's important to me

I think that would be hugely helpful. I've finally got to the stage of being able to sharpen planes and chisels successfully and repeatably, but it was a tortuous learning curve. I think there are a lot of folks around here, including me, that would find it very valuable to see a professional's approach

OK - we have a live project These need a touch more bending to take some of the stresses out, but I will let them fully dry, clamped to the formers and then do any extra bending at specific points where needed tomorrow. Minor rant. This bending iron isn't cheap and is pretty much the only one you can get: The heating scale goes from 'Low' through 1 - 6 to 'High' There is a slip of paper that comes with it that says something on the lines that you should never go higher than 4 as it will burn out the element. Well - I had forgotten but soon remembered when there was a lot of steam but then sounds of grain splitting and no magical 'relaxation' of the wood - you need to be on at least 5 for it actually to do its job. So what, I surmise, the makers/suppliers are saying is - 'we have underspecced the heating element and a lot of people have complained that their heating elements are burning out so don't try and claim warranty because if you have actually bent some wood then we know that you must have used it above 4 and so we won't cover the replacement element' Some very well respected suppliers sell these - and at a hefty price. Shoddy.

OK - rapidly onto the go/no-go stage. Basically, if I split the sides when bending them, then the project is dead. So I'm going to do that early on. A few tips if anyone is thinking of tackling their first acoustic guitar (some of which will apply to acoustic basses too): There are lots of 'I didn't know that' factors There are lots of things that aren't as they seem Such as that a flat-top guitar is usually not flat. Almost all of them have a slight dish - typically 25 feet radius The backs are also not flat. These are usually dished to around 15 feet radius There are lots of pretty essential jigs you need to make. Body mould; radius dishes (25' & 15'); go-bar deck to mould backs and tops to their respective radii Martin made a bracing pattern in the 30's (?) that happened to work and 90+ % of acoustic guitars use this EXACT pattern I follow every single hint and tip that successful luthiers suggest. No rebellious-against-convention Rogers here! So - the sides. First, I found my dreadnought mould that I knocked together for Chris's build. I then put a card former in with the back and front dimensions marked in a straight line: OK - so that's easy. So just cut the blank with that straight taper, right? Wrong. Look at what a straight taper does seen from the front: Imagine the left side doing the same thing and you have a 'v' shaped back So the shape of the sides needs to be more like this: I will fine tune it with some sand paper on the radius dish (don't worry - I will explain if it gets that far!) But the next stage is cut the sides to that paper template: And soak them. Am I using MrsAndyjr1515's leftover bubble bath water? No - I am following a respected acoustic luthier's conviction that fabric softener make a big difference to the bendability of figured woods. I question not. I just follow. And on goes the bending iron: So in the next couple of hours, the project continues or ends. Wish me luck

It's entirely possible that's where I will end up too

OK, good news is that all components are usable, size-wise - even the macassar ebony fretboard offcut It also gives me a choice of two neck wood combinations - maple/walnut /maple or mahogany/ walnut / mahogany. I'm tempted to use the maple...harder to work but might add a touch of brightness for the fingerpicking side of things...

Yes - the mpm-02 piezo/magnetic mixer is teeny weeny and works well. The info sheet provided is, however, rubbish. Jez ( @Jabba_the_gut ) had the same issue and John sent him a much clearer hand drawn sketch which Jez copied to me for Mick's Psilos bass. Why John doesn't just add a pdf of that on his web site or with the product I don't know, bless him, but if you get one give Jez or me a shout and we'll send you one.

In the early stages, my approach on this will be a bit brutal. The storage of the back and side wood has been poor - there's been a bit of dishing and there's been a bit of what looks like water damage on one of the edges of the sides set that was there when I bought it. So basically, rather than hours of planing, scraping and sanding - only to find out that there is not enough usable area - it's doing what you should never do with figured woods - through the Makita thicknesser down from about 7mm to 2mm at 0.5mm a time. And I've sort of got away with it so far. I say sort of because at the last pass of the last back piece like an eejit, I sent the panel through the other way round - and got some pretty impressive tearout! The other side is perfect, despite being reduced through a very, very harsh process. The sides too: I've lost a couple of inches off the length of the sides due to the unavoidable snipe of this type of thicknesser but - and I will check later today - this should still give me adequate length for a dreadnought The water (?) damage on the sides is on the opposite side to the bookmatch join and should be well within the trim allowance of the sides. Again, I will check later today the usable dimensions. So, assuming that the dimensions are usable, the next proper job is going to be bending the sides. If they bend OK, we have a live project, if they don't I'll use up the wood for headstock plates/inlay fills, etc.. Whatever, this will be a background project as it's only for my own use so may take some time!

Actually, John, the one I showed you was my smaller OM size: This is great for what I built it for - fingerpicking styles - but the king of strumming acoustics is the bigger dreadnought model and the OM is noticeably more limited. This is my own (look how much the top has darkened!) next to my dreadnought build for Chris, our band's vocalist: The reason I never made a dreadnought for myself before is that they are great for strumming (which Chris mainly does) but usually not so good for fingerpicking (which I mainly do). But - probably by pure luck - Chris's dreadnought just as good for fingerpicking as my smaller OM. If I can replicate that, then I have the best of both worlds

I've got a (welcome) gap between commissioned full builds. I probably have a rebody of a Cort Curbow coming up (more of which later) but, in the scheme of things, that isn't a major undertaking on a par with a full build. So, as some of you know, one of the things I've been doing in the extra time is sorting out a better arrangement with routing - I've invested in a self-assembled foldaway router table and am currently building a thicknessing rig. But I've also been looking at the crazy amount of 'oooh that looks nice' wood that I've acquired over the past few years. In amongst it is this - some of which isn't faring well in my far-from-perfect wood storage: On the left is a sister set of back and sides lacewood and mahogany/walnut neck offcut from Chris's (our band's vocalist) dreadnought acoustic that I built him back in 2015: Next to that is another neck offcut - maple /walnut and lastly an offcut of Macassar ebony fretboard from my recent 6-string electric build. Well....that's most of the wood for another dreadnought - with a choice of neck to boot! And I've got a bit of time on my hands And I've got a few new things in the workshop that need testing out. And I've always wanted, and never had, a dreadnought. Hmmmm….it's tempting!

There are some interesting observations above. With the risk of everybody telling me I'm wrong - because I usually am - a couple of further views to my earlier post: In my experience, the mass of the bridge can make a perceptable change to the sound of a bass - both unplugged and amplified. Whether that change improves it, degrades it or is just different is entirely down to the individual listener's opinion and taste. Adding a modern high mass bridge to a genuine 50's holy grail P bass therefore will change the sound. Whether that is a good thing or not, though... Beauty, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder.

Me too .

Thanks, Neil I'll track down one of your gigs sometime soon and take a few live shots in between some enthusiastic heckling

Hi Yes - I've done a few. This tutorial I did on ProjectGuitar covers quite a bit of it (I think it allows none members to see but let me know if not) http://www.projectguitar.com/tutorials/finishingrefinishing/bedroom-builders-wipe-on-varnishing-r67/ The only things I would change - because since that article Ronseal Hardglaze (if you used that) has had a formulation change - are with the new formula, I would thin it a lot less - more like 10% rather than 30-50% I have started using the lint-free white polishing cloths from Halfords - the micro-fibre cloths are OK but the new formulation of Ronseal doesn't level as well and the texture can leave wipe-lines Of course, you might be using something else. The principles will be the same - just do a few trials to get the best proportions of varnish to thinners. Just shout if you want any pointers along the way Andy

Not sure about the physics, but in my practical experience, the mass of a bridge makes a tangible difference to the tone, volume and sustain of both electric guitars and basses The most demonstrable (and here the physics is maybe a little more intuitive - I guess inertia values?) is the humble tremolo block on a stratocaster. Put a heavyweight one on instead of a cheap lightweight one - on the very same tremolo - and the sound comparison is like chalk and cheese. I suspect the effect on a bass, again is quite discernable for anyone who's tried it, is from similar causes but is certainly less pronounced.

I think it's a great idea For me, it would have to be a single pickup capable of moving from the Stingray position all the way up to the Jazz neck position, just to be able to see once and for all if there is a sweet spot or spots without the distraction of the other factors involved in most other such comparisons. Very tempted to do a sister build...

I used to make anodised aluminium extrusion and know how much it costs per metre, so biting my lip at the huge profit margins clearly involved by someone along the way (and I suspect that's not the Taiwanese), it does seem to be very well made...

Assuming the Andyjr1515 conversion of 3 Andyjr1515 months to the minute, then - for a mere king's ransom - of course...

I've taken a chip out on pretty much every build. Luckily always rectifiable so far but I think I was pushing my luck

You're most kind, Mick It's more about reducing the risk of an unplanned router gouge somewhere important late in the build - and also reducing the shower of chippings I usually end up being covered in every time I get the router out...

Hi Those of you who follow my threads will know two things: My workshop is TINY I absolutely HATE routers Well, based on MrsAndyjr1515's assertion that I fill every room in our house with my c**p already, the first item is unlikely to change But I ought to do something about the second one - if only because there still are certain things I have to use a router for and, hand routed, they remain the messiest and most risky operations pretty much of any of my builds. So, with a short break between actual builds, I decided to rethink my cellar / workbench arrangement and ask the question of whether there was any chance of all of getting a small router table in there. And I've just done it and I am so, so pleased with how it's turned out. The research and thinking process was long and painful (especially the thinking bit ) This is what I ended up with: Anyone who has also looked at tables will know that it is a complete minefield of partial and/or ambiguous information of what each option will do or not do, how portable, how big, what routers they are compatible with, what guide rings they are compatible with, what comes in the box and what is extra, how heavy, how easy to disassemble, how stable, etc, etc.. I also had a requirement to be able to easily store it in a very small space when not in use and small enough to be able to use it in the narrow standing space in front of the workbench And this latter requirement knocked 90% of the options out. So a bit of lateral thinking. Was it madness to consider using the folding stand from my £12.00 (yes £12 !!!! from Maplin, god bless em and RIP) lightweight workmate and do a 'bitsa' job on the table itself? Could I use my Draper router fixed base (on the right in this pic) that - against all odds - actually does fit into a so-called universal sub-base: ...and therefore be able to still use it as a hand router with the plunge base and remove it easily for storing the table and changing the router bits. And the answer was yes. Not cheap, but I think meets all my requirements. And - if early trials are anything to go by - SO, SO, SO much safer, more accurate, easier to set up and cleaner than hand routing. This photo was taken immediately after rounding all eight sides of a test piece. The sawdust in the tracks were from an earlier tryout without the vac attached. The rest of the chips - ie none - were what were left after the cuts: Can't tell you how chuffed I am

Thought had never crossed my mind Wonder if @Si600 would be happy to Parcelpost it across to me every now and again

Catching up on some much neglected threads! I've been following this on one of the other forums and @Bridgehouse is aware of how impressed I am with his build. Indeed, he is now a fully-fledged member of the 'Why Do Great Sounding Basses Have To Be So Heavy? Answer - They Don't' club And this one does look great. And it's super light. And it sounds fantastic!