Couple general questions

tfarny

Master Member
Messages
4,481
Hey have any of you guys noticed that this guitar building thing is a little addictive?  I'm still settling into my first and can't stop planning the second. GAS is supposed to subside after you feed the beast, isn't it?

So, I've got a couple of general questions:

1.  Anybody ever played / held a Musiclander body? It looks like it'll have a strat feel but lighter / smaller, but I've only seen the few photos that are in the gallery, and a couple 'fender swinger' things on the internets. Is it good (comfortable both on the lap and on a strap?  balanced?)

2.  Who can tell me the sonic / tone / sustain / tuning difference between a TOM or wraparound style versus a string-through hardtail? Near as I can figure, a string-through hardtail offers the best possible string-to-body energy transfer, individual saddle height adjustment, and a more elegant design overall.  Is TOM mainly a holdover design from archtop days, like the bigsby? 
I say this thinking both TOM and bigsby are super cool, but they are the way they are because of historical reasons to do with mounting strings on an archtop, from what I understand.

3.  I can't get my head around how the compound radius works with a 12" radius TOM or wraparound design.  Doesn't the bridge HAVE to have around 18" radius to accommodate the expanding radius?  So, don't Warmoth guitars with compound radii and TOM bridges have weird action (too high on the D and G strings in the upper register)?  Or am I just being a pollyana and it all words itself out?

4.  As you can maybe tell, I'm mulling a mahogany or Korina musiclander with P90s, a hardtail bridge, and a rosewood neck with old-type Gibson specs (the low frets etc.).  Suggestions / ideas?
 
I've never seen a post get zero replies.  Is it because I don't like Pink Floyd? :help:
 
Yes, you are being punished for your inferior musical taste!  :icon_biggrin:




Seriously,
I don't think I have seen anybody else with a Musiclander on this forum. We are waiting for you to make one so you can tell us :)
on #2, what you are saying is making sense to me.. I would assume that String through would improve the sustain.. not sure though.. in case of doubt go for the recessed TOM+string though combination ;)

If I am not mistaken there was a discussion a while ago on TOM vs Compound radius.. not sure where it is exactly

good luck with your project! :)
Be careful with that axe eugene!!
 
Yeah you got put on the non-Pink Floyd liking shitlist, what you expect?

Actually it's probably because there aren't that many people doing Musiclander builds and the string through bridge option hasn't been around a long time or used a lot.

I have my guitars setup by a pro as I he charges a laughably small fee, no issues with setup of any bridge with W. Pro 10/16 necks to date.

"Near as I can figure, a string-through hardtail offers the best possible string-to-body energy transfer" might be theoretically correct in some manner, but as the strings on the other side of the TOM don't vibrate regardless if you have a string through or stop piece I doubt there's any real difference in reality...
 
I THOUGHT it was the infamous "Wall" of silence punishment!

Thanks for the info. Though I still wonder about the bridge radius v. compound neck radius issue.  Seems like it all needs to line up straight, or else the saddles need to be height-adjustable. I've read in at least two places about people who weren't happy with the compound radius because the 'action was weird' on their TOM, so I wondered if anyone has experienced this.
Tim
 
Well if I remember correctly the Schaller Floyd is built for a radius of 10 inches (I think) and they've used them (with a jackson stamp) on charvel and jackson guitars with compound radius fretboards and people love them. I've haven't read any comments about it feeling weird.
 
I've got a tunomatic + stoptail setup on my tele deluxe, which has a 7.25" vintage radius. I don't have any action problems, just as much of a difference as TOM versus compound radius.
 
Part of a great setup for a tune-o-matic (as opposed to a half-assed setup) is to grind the individual bridge pieces to accommodate the radius of the fingerboard. It's easy to buy 'em, they're like $20 a set or so. Some pretty big manufacturers (like Godin) have gotten away with shipping out expensive guitars with different radiuses on the bridge & fingerboard, that haven't been set up properly. Hmmm - what do you want to bet that the Godins John McLaughlin & Al DiMeola got came out playable right from the box? :laughing7:
 
tfarny said:
2.  Who can tell me the sonic / tone / sustain / tuning difference between a TOM or wraparound style versus a string-through hardtail? ..... string-to-body energy transfer....

3.  I can't get my head around how the compound radius works with a 12" radius TOM or wraparound design.  Doesn't the bridge HAVE to have around 18" radius to accommodate the expanding radius?  So, don't Warmoth guitars with compound radii and TOM bridges have weird action (too high on the D and G strings in the upper register)?  Or am I just being a pollyana and it all words itself out?

4. Gibson specs (the low frets etc.).  Suggestions / ideas?

2.  The tone is about the same, bending a bit easier on the TOM when done the W way, as they leave a good deal of string space between the bridge and stopbar.  A wrap or string through are both a little tighter feeling... not much though.

Whats this crazed thought of "energy" transfer?  Brother, what you want is ZERO energy transfer!  If it was an acoustic, yes then transfer energy through the bridge to the acoustic's top.  On a solid body... the whole idea is zip, nada, nuthin... no transfer.  Think of it this way, the more energy you transfer, the less the string has in order to keep vibrating...

In truth, the neck is the big tone creator.  It does, in fact, take some energy from the strings, and "resonates" at certain frequencies, and not others, and all those resonant frequencies resonate at different energy levels, and vary all over the place when you play.  The neck wood, the neck thickness and profile... are the #2 shaper of tone, behind pickup selection, and far far far more important than body wood, top wood, fretboard wood... etc.  Body design - solid vs hollow (thinline) makes the #3 criteria.  String type makes #4 tonal variation, in order of how important.  Electronics #5 (or maybe #4 with strings #5... depends).  After that... sure.. fretboard, nut type, body wood, top wood, color of the knobs, plated or stainless screws, neck headstock label,  Really, bump everything down one number, cuz your HANDS are really #1.

3.  Even on a 12 inch radius neck, you often have to do an understring examination, to see how the radius of the strings follows the radius of the neck.

4. Unless you REALLY like low frets... mediums seem to be much better for bending.
 
I've been ordering Gibson style 6130 "medium jumbo" frets for may "Fenson" builds and find I actually prefer them to the 6105s I had been ordering; no issue bending strings, all that takes is hand strength, anyway....
 
Thanks guys.  CB, what I meant was, which method of attaching strings to the guitar is the most 'solid' - ie most direct string-to-wood contact, resulting in most sustain?  As always, I bow to your wisdom in all matters guitar-physics related. I gather that your answer and Jack's answer was 'it doesn't really matter, TOM and string-through body setups are about the same".

Interesting stuff on the radius question. Lots of different answers out there.

As for frets, I've got 6150s on this Warmoth Telecaster build, and while they are fine modern-style frets, I still like the low frets better.  I had occasion to play a vintage spec les paul yesterday (a Guitar Center opened up next to my house!!) and that convinced me on the frets. I think my playing style is better suited to the low and wide frets. Next build will definitely have 6130s.
 
tfarny said:
'it doesn't really matter, TOM and string-through body setups are about the same".

Interesting stuff on the radius question. Lots of different answers out there.

For sustain they're about the same - that is - The TOM and string-thru.  Both are solid.  Forget the Tone-Pro hype of extra solid meaning this and that and the other.  Just "unlock" one and see that it doesn't change....  In fairness, the lock screw means the part wont fall off when you have no strings on the guitar.  The TOM, specifically the angle of the strings over the TOM bridge, as adjusted with the stopbar, does make for a looser spongier feel versus a tighter feel.  On the two Tele's I just did, with TOMs, the difference is there when you raise the stopbar, but, not as much as you see on the LP with TOM.  On the LP, the TOM has the stop bar set fairly close, and the resultant change in angle is pretty great.  Vary that angle and you can have big changes in how the guitar feels.  Generally, with more shallow angles the strings have less tension on the bridge.  As you bend, the string pulls over the bridge easier and you have a softer feel to things.  Make that angle a harsh one, and you get a stiffer feel.  The sustain is immeasurably different.
 
tfarny,

I just found your post so thought I would reply.  Here's the specs on my Musiclander:

- Padouk Musiclander custom 24 3/4 scale body (natural/unfinished)
- Padouk/Rosewood Warmoth custom 24 3/4 scale compound radius neck, with angled pocket (natural/unfinished)
- TOM bridge
- Zakk Wylde pickups (will be replaced soon, sound doesn't match well)

I had a tech friend of mine put it together.  Be aware of where you put the strap holders.  With the weight of the (my) neck and the placement that the tech put the pin makes it a little top heavy.  That has been my only complaint (other than the pickups).


Take care,
John
 
Thanks John, but you didn't post any pictures! I've actually started a thinline in the meantime since beginning this thread but I'd love to see your padouk musiclander!
 
Back
Top