Andyjr1515

Just to close a well and truly pink torpedoled thread, the guitar went to Tim yesterday evening. Here's the 'goodbye old friend' picture: I'm pleased to report that he is VERY pleased with it He's a great player too - and in his capable hands it sounded absolutely fantastic. Not an easy build at all but probably on my shortlist of favourite results

Oh.....oooops......

Don't worry, folks. The absence of progress photos, allowing the thread to drift a little off topic, is simply MrsAndyjr1515, reasonably but firmly, reminding me I was going to paint the kitchen before Christmas . Normal service should resume very shortly and we can get off materials and back to what a jolly good bodger builder I am

That's my boy !

I make enough of a mess with wood. Can you imagine the mess I'd make with composites

That looks really good, Andy

Watching with great interest, @Jimothey We all have those scary 'Oh c**p' moments, by the way. I've learned to force myself to turn a body round and always look at what's on the other side purely on the basis of the number of times I've routed into fresh air when I was expecting to be cutting wood chips!

A few mm once I've bent the tabs on the standard one, Jez. To be honest, it's not a big issue - it's just more a comment on how conservative the guitar and bass industry (and maybe buyers too) tends to be. As Mike says, the spec was always to transfer the electrics as is. It spurs me on to pursuing the slim and light design exploration. Apart from anything else, us old gits are starting to find heavy instruments verging on an impossibility

So, I've had a think and - I suppose you wouldn't expect anything different - I'm going with the more difficult of the various options As one of my fellow band members says (in this case about my sax playing), "What I like, Andy, is that you're always on the very, very edge of disaster!" This is what I'm going to do: But hang on, Andy, I hear you say....that means your hatch has a double bend in it. Yes it does......bring it on!

I'll have to have a proper think about this - that internal chamber is probably too close for me to do what I was originally considering. This is the fun part of the hobby . Especially if I don't pink torpedole it up.

Now this is where I have to be creative. If I was normal in the head, I'd carve it like this, sort the hatches and finish it: But I'm not normal in the head and two things would bug me. The first thing goes back to the 1950's. THAT'S OVER 60 YEARS AGO, FENDER!!! And because the Fender 5 way switch is 1.5" deep, then this surprisingly deep chamber is still only just deep enough ( and that includes bending the contacts down out of the way for the hatch to fit) : and that gives me the second thing that would bug me. That means a 1.5" body which, despite the chambers and the carving, will end up pretty much the same weight as the Rascal - and Mike would like it lighter. So my thoughts are this - but this will take a lot of thought and PM discussion with Mike. I'm thinking back to the 'wraparound' feel of @TheGreek 's Psilos. So if the front was slimmed down to more like the pencil line... : The central hatch needs to be flat to get a sit-in cover to fit so one option is to start that slimming from the neck side of the hatch (ref the fine pencil line on the top horn here): Or flat taper from the neck side of the small control chamber Or a really fancy carve from the tailstock end of the central chamber (and remembering there's a hidden weight relief chamber there somewhere! ) If it can be done, this last one has a number of advantages: I takes lots of weight out of it exactly where you want to lose it It will have that Psilos wrap-around feel (has to be experienced to believe it, eh, Mick?) It will still look like a Precision Lyte from the front - but look like anything but from the back Bet you can't guess which one I'd like to have a go at seeing if it can be done

Normally there would be a fairly hefty volume difference because generally the humbucker would be series and so you would be losing 50% of the signal when you split the coil). However, the MM humbuckers are generally wired in parallel with the dual coils providing the classic MM tone and the pre-amp adding the volume. And, as you say - assuming the Norstrands have been wired up like MM's in parallel (also worth double checking) then I'm guessing there normally would be a tonal difference but not a major volume drop if you dropped one of the coils out of the circuit. I'm sure there will be much more knowledgable folks than me on hand soon, but if I was doing it myself (I added a P-pickup to @PaulS 's EB Stirling and converted it to passive a year or so back) I would be looking initially whether the humbuckers are wired in series (because some of the MM substitutes are) or if the singles switching has been wired out of phase (usually cured by swopping two wires around). But as I say, there is bound to be someone here soon who can either confirm or refute that assumption

Have you tried swopping the hot and finish wires for one of the single coils of a pair? Just wondering if they are inadvertently out of phase in the paired single coil settings?

Thanks, @Norris Useful to have that swimming pool in the back too...these are relatively heavy timbers... And then the bit I think we both like the best - the start of the carve

Lovely job Top drawer stuff...

Yes, Jez....I've had to go back on the drugs to cope with the stress of it all. Must be costing the NHS a fortune.

No - we're going with a satin Osmo. If it works OK on some test pieces, Mike wants to try the Osmo 3011 which I used on TheGreek's Psilos bass, designed to minimise the darkening of the wood when the finish is applied.

The back glued on nicely. Final thing before trimming the edges is to double check that the neck is completely in line - when you've got a bookmatched line going all the way down the body, that becomes important! Then the trim. Under duress, I resorted to using the router. I HATE routers but there are times when other ways just take too darned long. Here it is trimmed: In this shot, you can see why I'm experimenting with super-slim designs . This is actually pretty standard body thickness for a Gibson or Fender (in fact, a touch slimmer). The Fender 5-way only just fits in this depth (which I suspect determined the thickness in the first place)! : Once I've carved the top to make it look pretty much like the Precision Lyte, I'll be talking to Mike about going a little more creative on the back which will take a bit more weight out too...

Yes, I will be, but for shielding rather than anything else. The walnut, although relatively brittle, is actually very stable (thank goodness! ).

OK - that went OK. The chamber base is now thin enough at the 5-way switch for it to work properly and the walnut seems stable enough even that thin (c 3.5mm). So, now I've run out of excuses to avoid doing it, the top and back are - at this very moment - being glued and clamped. Fingers crossed for the morning!

So far so good. Just doing the delicate work of thinning down the top underneath the control chamber to allow the controls to come through enough (especially the 5-way switch which is really designed for fitting on a pickguard. If I can do that without breaking through, there are relatively few 'oh well, that onto the bonfire and start again' tasks left. There are always some, of course....

Controls chamber and cable routing slot cut in the back: And the method of securing the pickups decided and incorporated: They will be fitted a bit like upside down dog-ear P90's - firm against the top. Height will be adjusted at set-up with spacers and the appropriate length screws to ensure no breakthough. Because of the full access to the pickups though the rear hatch, the heights can be easily adjusted subsequently if necessary. Plenty of height available if necessary:

This is going to look (and play) spectacular (and spectacularly well)