Prometheus
Junior Member
- Messages
- 135
Hi All
This is my first post here, and it's gonna be a big 'un. I considered making separate threads for the multiple aspects of this, but decided that - because a guitar is the sum of its parts - it would be better to have the entire formula in one place. It could have gone in "Neck Woods" or "Body Woods", but it really has to do with both. So here goes.
I'm starting my first S-style build. It'll be S-S-S with tremelo, and I'd like to have a "characteristically Strat" essential tone, or something pretty close to it. Not necessarily 100% vintage, just not anything too off the wall. Here's my recipe:
BODY ---------------------------- (sorry, tabs don't seem to work)
Model Soloist, carved top, right-handed
Core Korina
Front Laminate Quilt or Flame Maple
Top Finish Blue Dye
Back Finish Black-Yellow Burst
Control Cavity Rear route
Jack Route ¾” Side hole
Neck Pocket ? Strat with 720 Mod
Mounting Holes Standard 4-bolt
Contours ? Contoured Heel
Tummy Cut
Battery Box Double battery box
NECK ----------------------------
Style Stratocaster
Construction Warmoth Pro Angled
Shaft Wood Maple, flat-sawn
Fingerboard Wood Bocote
Orientation Right handed
Back Shape Clapton
Radius 10-16” compound
Frets 22 frets, SS6150
Nut Width 1-11/16”
String Nut GraphTech Black TUSQ XL
Tuner Ream Schaller
Mounting Holes: Standard 4-bolt
Fingerboard Inlays Mother of Pearl Dots
Side Dots Mother of Pearl Side Dots
Finish Clear Satin Nitro
no scalloping, no binding
Headstock Finish matching body
THE OTHER STUFF -----------------
Bridge FullContactHardware (Babicz) 6-hole tremolo
Pickups Kinman Impersonator 54 set
Controls Volume, Tone, Tone, 5-way selector switch
Tuners Schaller mini locking
I prefer playing pretty clean, ranging from all-clean to SRV. No punk, metal, etc., and not a fan of Jazz. A lot of classic rock, blues, and some other odds and ends. Strings please, not cables. And now on to the meat of the matter...
1) One of my biggest sources of anguish has been the neck choice. I've seen enough "thumbs-down" reviews of the Warmoth Pro necks to make me a little bit nervous. And my local guitar hero/guru also warned me off of it, which carries a lot of weight with me (and he plays a "Warmoth Tele"). But I like the idea of having a non-vintage headstock, and the matched-to-body finish. And non-esthetically, the angled neck. If I went the Vintage Modern way, I'd give all that up. So I'm waffling. Please convince me that I'm OK with the above.
Just as an aside, (not an official poll), but it seems to me like more of the Warmoth Pro nay-sayers are T-type than S-type. Just my impression. And it seems that most of the negative reviews are fairly old. Also, I have been VERY encouraged by the posts of Bagman 67, AprioriMark, and StubHead in the thread "pro neck vs vintage standard neck " http://www.unofficialwarmoth.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=ajiad6tpcphb9jahe4mbau7jo7&topic=18323.15
2) Due partly to my dilemma about the neck, and partly because I want a "full and balanced" tone, my other dilemma is about the woods. Keep in mind that I'm pretty convinced about the pickups and bridge, so I'd rather we left that out of the discussion.
The way I feel about woods is that they contribute to the tone according to their abilities to conduct, absorb, and resonate. These will depend upon their density, hardness, strength, and elasticity. And how these are distributed through the piece (grain and uniformity). But as much as I hear people talking about how "XXX is brighter", I translate that into "it's conducting more highs and/or absorbing more mids and lows". Or "YYY is fuller" into "it's conducting more mids and/or absorbing more highs and lows and/or it's resonating more in the mids". Yeah, I know, too scientific or semantic for many readers, I'm sure. But consider this... if I have a neck/nut pair that scoops (absorbs) mids, and a fingerboard that subdues (absorbs) the highs, and a body that mutes (absorbs) the lows, then what have I got? Well, a particular tone, for sure. This example is tricky because all the components subtract a different part of the spectrum. And the rub is that in fact, that's always going to be the case! So if the parts aren't chosen with a specific tonic goal in mind, then they could combine to rob the best of what the guitar would otherwise be capable of - in other words, random choices = mud!
What many of us consider as the "classic" Strat tone is a mid-scooped spectrum. I have an idea that is where the problem comes into the picture for the Warmoth Pro neck nay-sayers. If the neck is stiffer, it could be more likely to conduct more, and absorb less, of the highs. And it might resonate less. Which means that to some it may sound too bright, and/or the mid tones are either more apparent (presence), or just "off".
For the most part though, I don't have a big problem with that. Because I know that if the higher tones are too strong (apparent), then I know how to cut them out "downstream". On the other hand, if they're not there, I have a heck of a time putting them in!! And rather than just band-aiding it by hard-wiring in a tone cap or permamently setting an EQ, I'd just as soon try first to "offset" the "brightness" of the neck by making appropriate selections for the other woods. This is why the Bocote fingerboard. This is why the Korina body. I'm hoping that this combination will help to "tame" the "bright" Warmoth Pro neck. And still produce a nice voice. What do you think? Impressions? Suggestions?
Of course, if the neck turns out to be as toneful tuneful and wonderful as the yeah-sayers claim, then I'll be one happy camper. But if that's the case... then what will my "compensatory" build choices sound like?
So I'm looking for feedback about my choices. Here's a couple things to head you off at the pass. "Hey, don't sweat it, wood variability is all a crap shoot anyway!" True enough, but why not at least try to get a good recipe anyway, and at least start out right. "Why not a neck wood other than maple?" Because I like its looks and its tone (how and what it conducts), and its strength-to-weight. Other choices seem too "colored" (absorbing or resonating in a way I'm not fond of), or too heavy (ugh), or too rigid (even brighter!). But if you have a really convincing idea, I'll listen! "Why not change the pickups/bridge/tuners/etc?" Because I truly like my selections, for various reasons. Not to say that I might not change them out someday, but if I do, then they're still gonna have to live in this guitar, so it's easier to just keep the discussion to that for now. "Hey, the right amp/EQ/pedals/volume can overwhelm or overcome anything having to do with woods anyway!" True, but recall that I like clean, and whether or not I decide to "post-process" the output, I'd just as soon that's everything it can be, a voice that's even, full, and pleasing.
All other ideas, suggestions, criticisms and support are up for grabs.
This is my first post here, and it's gonna be a big 'un. I considered making separate threads for the multiple aspects of this, but decided that - because a guitar is the sum of its parts - it would be better to have the entire formula in one place. It could have gone in "Neck Woods" or "Body Woods", but it really has to do with both. So here goes.
I'm starting my first S-style build. It'll be S-S-S with tremelo, and I'd like to have a "characteristically Strat" essential tone, or something pretty close to it. Not necessarily 100% vintage, just not anything too off the wall. Here's my recipe:
BODY ---------------------------- (sorry, tabs don't seem to work)
Model Soloist, carved top, right-handed
Core Korina
Front Laminate Quilt or Flame Maple
Top Finish Blue Dye
Back Finish Black-Yellow Burst
Control Cavity Rear route
Jack Route ¾” Side hole
Neck Pocket ? Strat with 720 Mod
Mounting Holes Standard 4-bolt
Contours ? Contoured Heel
Tummy Cut
Battery Box Double battery box
NECK ----------------------------
Style Stratocaster
Construction Warmoth Pro Angled
Shaft Wood Maple, flat-sawn
Fingerboard Wood Bocote
Orientation Right handed
Back Shape Clapton
Radius 10-16” compound
Frets 22 frets, SS6150
Nut Width 1-11/16”
String Nut GraphTech Black TUSQ XL
Tuner Ream Schaller
Mounting Holes: Standard 4-bolt
Fingerboard Inlays Mother of Pearl Dots
Side Dots Mother of Pearl Side Dots
Finish Clear Satin Nitro
no scalloping, no binding
Headstock Finish matching body
THE OTHER STUFF -----------------
Bridge FullContactHardware (Babicz) 6-hole tremolo
Pickups Kinman Impersonator 54 set
Controls Volume, Tone, Tone, 5-way selector switch
Tuners Schaller mini locking
I prefer playing pretty clean, ranging from all-clean to SRV. No punk, metal, etc., and not a fan of Jazz. A lot of classic rock, blues, and some other odds and ends. Strings please, not cables. And now on to the meat of the matter...
1) One of my biggest sources of anguish has been the neck choice. I've seen enough "thumbs-down" reviews of the Warmoth Pro necks to make me a little bit nervous. And my local guitar hero/guru also warned me off of it, which carries a lot of weight with me (and he plays a "Warmoth Tele"). But I like the idea of having a non-vintage headstock, and the matched-to-body finish. And non-esthetically, the angled neck. If I went the Vintage Modern way, I'd give all that up. So I'm waffling. Please convince me that I'm OK with the above.
Just as an aside, (not an official poll), but it seems to me like more of the Warmoth Pro nay-sayers are T-type than S-type. Just my impression. And it seems that most of the negative reviews are fairly old. Also, I have been VERY encouraged by the posts of Bagman 67, AprioriMark, and StubHead in the thread "pro neck vs vintage standard neck " http://www.unofficialwarmoth.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=ajiad6tpcphb9jahe4mbau7jo7&topic=18323.15
2) Due partly to my dilemma about the neck, and partly because I want a "full and balanced" tone, my other dilemma is about the woods. Keep in mind that I'm pretty convinced about the pickups and bridge, so I'd rather we left that out of the discussion.
The way I feel about woods is that they contribute to the tone according to their abilities to conduct, absorb, and resonate. These will depend upon their density, hardness, strength, and elasticity. And how these are distributed through the piece (grain and uniformity). But as much as I hear people talking about how "XXX is brighter", I translate that into "it's conducting more highs and/or absorbing more mids and lows". Or "YYY is fuller" into "it's conducting more mids and/or absorbing more highs and lows and/or it's resonating more in the mids". Yeah, I know, too scientific or semantic for many readers, I'm sure. But consider this... if I have a neck/nut pair that scoops (absorbs) mids, and a fingerboard that subdues (absorbs) the highs, and a body that mutes (absorbs) the lows, then what have I got? Well, a particular tone, for sure. This example is tricky because all the components subtract a different part of the spectrum. And the rub is that in fact, that's always going to be the case! So if the parts aren't chosen with a specific tonic goal in mind, then they could combine to rob the best of what the guitar would otherwise be capable of - in other words, random choices = mud!
What many of us consider as the "classic" Strat tone is a mid-scooped spectrum. I have an idea that is where the problem comes into the picture for the Warmoth Pro neck nay-sayers. If the neck is stiffer, it could be more likely to conduct more, and absorb less, of the highs. And it might resonate less. Which means that to some it may sound too bright, and/or the mid tones are either more apparent (presence), or just "off".
For the most part though, I don't have a big problem with that. Because I know that if the higher tones are too strong (apparent), then I know how to cut them out "downstream". On the other hand, if they're not there, I have a heck of a time putting them in!! And rather than just band-aiding it by hard-wiring in a tone cap or permamently setting an EQ, I'd just as soon try first to "offset" the "brightness" of the neck by making appropriate selections for the other woods. This is why the Bocote fingerboard. This is why the Korina body. I'm hoping that this combination will help to "tame" the "bright" Warmoth Pro neck. And still produce a nice voice. What do you think? Impressions? Suggestions?
Of course, if the neck turns out to be as toneful tuneful and wonderful as the yeah-sayers claim, then I'll be one happy camper. But if that's the case... then what will my "compensatory" build choices sound like?
So I'm looking for feedback about my choices. Here's a couple things to head you off at the pass. "Hey, don't sweat it, wood variability is all a crap shoot anyway!" True enough, but why not at least try to get a good recipe anyway, and at least start out right. "Why not a neck wood other than maple?" Because I like its looks and its tone (how and what it conducts), and its strength-to-weight. Other choices seem too "colored" (absorbing or resonating in a way I'm not fond of), or too heavy (ugh), or too rigid (even brighter!). But if you have a really convincing idea, I'll listen! "Why not change the pickups/bridge/tuners/etc?" Because I truly like my selections, for various reasons. Not to say that I might not change them out someday, but if I do, then they're still gonna have to live in this guitar, so it's easier to just keep the discussion to that for now. "Hey, the right amp/EQ/pedals/volume can overwhelm or overcome anything having to do with woods anyway!" True, but recall that I like clean, and whether or not I decide to "post-process" the output, I'd just as soon that's everything it can be, a voice that's even, full, and pleasing.
All other ideas, suggestions, criticisms and support are up for grabs.