Design-wise, what do you think?
Moderated By: mods
-
- .
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:12 pm
Wow. Looks good. I like the suggestions (and the efforts). The reverse offset fits the body very well. I think that it actually it super comfortible fit because it forces the neck to be straight when you sit. This guitar is one of the best balanced guitars I've ever played.DGNR8 wrote:It's a prototype, and a good one. A sketch, if you will.
My constructive comments are that the tail end needs a slant to match the horns. I also clipped the horns so that it doesn't look too Fender. I like the reverse offset because it balances better with long horn long tail. I have no idea about how it fits the hip and shoulder--you'd have to play it to see if it feels right. I am mental about margins, so I would like a slightly smaller guard to allow for thicker green edges.
Of course it now looks like a bird eating a worm. Well, it's a thought.
I like what you've done with the curve of the upper horn, and that you smoothed out the hump behind it. I also agree about the slant on the butt of the guitar, too.dodgedartdave wrote:Wow. Looks good. I like the suggestions (and the efforts). The reverse offset fits the body very well. I think that it actually it super comfortible fit because it forces the neck to be straight when you sit. This guitar is one of the best balanced guitars I've ever played.DGNR8 wrote:It's a prototype, and a good one. A sketch, if you will.
My constructive comments are that the tail end needs a slant to match the horns. I also clipped the horns so that it doesn't look too Fender. I like the reverse offset because it balances better with long horn long tail. I have no idea about how it fits the hip and shoulder--you'd have to play it to see if it feels right. I am mental about margins, so I would like a slightly smaller guard to allow for thicker green edges.
Of course it now looks like a bird eating a worm. Well, it's a thought.
yea, there's math involved, but I don't know what the measurements are. The Mercury is a 24", (just like a Fender shortscale) and I simply copied the distance. Now, I know there is something called an "invisible fret" where the neck pup should be located, but I don't know about the bridge pup, so I simply mic'd the distance from the center/center of the bridge to the center/center of the bridge pup.
-
- .
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:12 pm
- robert(original)
- .
- Posts: 7174
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:30 pm
- Location: somewhere in the midwest
-
- .
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:12 pm
- robert(original)
- .
- Posts: 7174
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:30 pm
- Location: somewhere in the midwest
I found my mustang a bit tough to play up high on the fretboard, and I got slender fingers, 23" would be crazyrobert(original) wrote:hey aug/ dave, how do you feel about a 23inch scale neck
i found a fretting template for one.
thing of it, an ultra scale, no one really has ever used one in mass production(to my knowledge)
let me know if you want any, asap.
Last edited by Rikki on Sat Jun 23, 2007 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.myspace.com/rikkiman
robroe wrote:my guitars are set up to do 2 things.
1. rock the fuck out
2. never go out of tune
- SmashingPumpkin
- .
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:15 pm
- Location: Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom
- robert(original)
- .
- Posts: 7174
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:30 pm
- Location: somewhere in the midwest
well the only reason i ask is cuz aug had a 64 with a 22.5 scale and he loved it.
its either 23 or a 24.3./4 scale(that i can do)
altho im waithing to see what 5 rosewood finger boards for 20 dollars looks like.
i got some really nice cocobolo from hibdon tho for 86 cents(its usually 60 a board foot.)
its either 23 or a 24.3./4 scale(that i can do)
altho im waithing to see what 5 rosewood finger boards for 20 dollars looks like.
i got some really nice cocobolo from hibdon tho for 86 cents(its usually 60 a board foot.)