drewfx1

spacey
Just don't go cutting one-piece body blanks in half and gluing it back together for any reason...it just makes you look stupid.

Unless you're putting a neck that runs between them in the middle. 
 
Good to see you back for a visit.

Sorry Drew...they sell billets much cheaper for that. (I have a stack of them just for neck-thru) Should one want to split a body blank at least cut one that is already pieces glued together and tell people it's the only wood you had left.
 
I'll say it one more time...there is no good reason to cut a one-piece body blank and glue it back together. On top of it being a stupid thing to do it's a waste of money and there is a substantial price difference even on the cheaper woods like Poplar for a single vs 3 piece blank.
 
Thanks for the welcome back but I'm not staying. I stated why I offered my views and I'm sure there's somebody somewhere cutting a one piece body blank in half...and people that believe there are good reasons to do it.
Just like there are people that believe it's ok to change what another says and people that believe it's alright for them to do it and for no reason other than they think it's alright to do. Which I know without doubt is not right. Makes the place intolerable even though I enjoyed conversing with so many here for many years.
 
Well if you do get a wild hair to cut a one-piece body blank in half and glue it back together...have fun...then you have at least one good reason :) (remembered me hat this time...bye)

Hey Spacey, thanks!
 
J

drewfx1

jbow
The tone is why Gibson uses a light nitrocellulose finish. A heavy paint job sucks some of the tone away.

This is complete nonsense.
 
On an electric guitar, what matters is the relationship between the PU's and the strings. Finish simply has no affect on this regardless of common mythology that any little detail must matter. The desire for nitrocellulose is a combination of aesthetics, perhaps the feel of it, and of course vintage mystique.
 
Finish plays a role with acoustic instruments as it can meaningfully affect the key factors of strength vs. elasticity of, say, an acoustic guitar top.
 
There is a common belief among some that the same rules apply acoustic and solid body instruments, but it's wrong. On an acoustic instrument the string energy is translated into acoustic sound by the top (and to a lessor extent the back and sides) vibrating up and down as a diaphragm. The key factors are for the wood to move as easily as possible (elasticity) without breaking. On acoustic instruments, one wants to use a finish that enhances rather than impedes these factors. 
 
But nothing like this happens with a solid body instrument - the physics of a thin piece of wood vibrating up and down are completely different than vibrations traveling through a solid piece of wood and arriving at a boundary. Which is exactly why solid bodies make for such terrible "acoustic" instruments. 

Cool... thanks for filling me in. I'm always glad to know when I am wrong. I had thought that to be true. What you say makes sense. I have always heard that about the big bridge plate on the Tele making a difference too, I wonder if that is true (or only true for Eric Johnson.. )'
Seriously, thanks.
 
J

jbow

drewfx1

jbow
The tone is why Gibson uses a light nitrocellulose finish. A heavy paint job sucks some of the tone away.

This is complete nonsense.
 
On an electric guitar, what matters is the relationship between the PU's and the strings. Finish simply has no affect on this regardless of common mythology that any little detail must matter. The desire for nitrocellulose is a combination of aesthetics, perhaps the feel of it, and of course vintage mystique.
 
Finish plays a role with acoustic instruments as it can meaningfully affect the key factors of strength vs. elasticity of, say, an acoustic guitar top.
 
There is a common belief among some that the same rules apply acoustic and solid body instruments, but it's wrong. On an acoustic instrument the string energy is translated into acoustic sound by the top (and to a lessor extent the back and sides) vibrating up and down as a diaphragm. The key factors are for the wood to move as easily as possible (elasticity) without breaking. On acoustic instruments, one wants to use a finish that enhances rather than impedes these factors. 
 
But nothing like this happens with a solid body instrument - the physics of a thin piece of wood vibrating up and down are completely different than vibrations traveling through a solid piece of wood and arriving at a boundary. Which is exactly why solid bodies make for such terrible "acoustic" instruments. 

Cool... thanks for filling me in. I'm always glad to know when I am wrong. I had thought that to be true. What you say makes sense. I have always heard that about the big bridge plate on the Tele making a difference too, I wonder if that is true (or only true for Eric Johnson.. )'
Seriously, thanks.
 
J

The Fender Jaguar has those saw tooth deals the pickups sit in. Leo F put them there to affect the magnetic field and eventually the tone. I would sure think the big Tele bridge plate has to effect the sound.

spacey
 
 
 
Thanks for the welcome back but I'm not staying.

Your call, but it's good to see you anyway, I think we all miss your guitar build threads, they were fascinating.

 
(If not, at least check in once in a while to let us know that you're still above ground!)

drewfx1

jbow
The tone is why Gibson uses a light nitrocellulose finish. A heavy paint job sucks some of the tone away.

This is complete nonsense

i have absolutely heard this happen to a guitar with a fresh poly finish...
versus the way it sounded as raw wood just before the decision to finish it.
 
it's a fact.
 

I think Spacey misunderstood the dimensions of the "blank" to be split.
A 2" x 7" billet is cut, then edge glued, to make a 1" x 14" body; I don't think anyone splits a 1x14 block.
Of course two separate 1x7's can (are) used as well; depends on the source material.
I also "beg to differ" in regards to finish on a solid body vs hollow body.
Vibration matters! End of discussion.
If a solid body sounds "bad" acoustically, it will sound bad electrified.
No pickup can fix that.
You can't make a silk purse from a sows ear; simple as that.
Just my nickel98 (although you can, and should, "take it to the bank")
 
Tom

It's

batsbrew
i have absolutely heard this happen to a guitar with a fresh poly finish...
versus the way it sounded as raw wood just before the decision to finish it.
 
it's a fact.
 

The only fact is that you believe it.
 
Otherwise you have to provide objective proof. That's the difference between "fact" and "belief".

I've also always heard that tone is subjective, I guess that is true but maybe it should be "good tone" is objective (DOH!) subjective.
 
I am glad we are discussing it. It is interesting to me as a guitarist guitar player.
J