GAS Alert!!!!

rick2 said:
Sadie your a little off on your specs there ... strats tales and a few others. ... mostly flat tops do not require binding when chambered.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with you, they could be built without binding. However Warmoth only builds those designs with binding, the choices are - black, white, cream, ivoriod, pearloif, and tortoise. I'd be ok with no binding or a wood binding, however all of the options are synthetic, and I think aren't going to take an oil finish.

So I called W and asked if they could either do a wood binding, or not install the binding, leaving the rout open so I could add my own in wood and the answer was no. No worries, I considered going ahead with that design and decided against because the remaining option was pay $85 for the binding feature, remove it, and install in wood myself.

So I went a different direction, and as a benefit, there are more available quilt maple choices for soloist and I picked a pattern that's going to finish up pretty spectacular. I've been testing out my Tung + solid pigments method on a figured maple sample and am quite jazzed with the results.
 
It seems the chambered designs are being conflated with Hollow body designs with chambers. Chambered are available without binding whereas Hollow come with binding.

https://warmoth.com/guitar-chambered-bodies
 
stratamania said:
It seems the chambered designs are being conflated with Hollow body designs with chambers. Chambered are available without binding whereas Hollow come with binding.

https://warmoth.com/guitar-chambered-bodies
Click to expand...

Ahh, yes I misstated, meant to say semi hollow, post corrected :).
 
So I mentioned thinking about an SCGC acoustic and dayum, I sat down to play one of their OMs, next to my Martin OM28.

That's a hell of a guitar. The thing is now when I play my hand-built side by side against the Martin, I have to say, the new guitar is for now my go-to. Sure, it doesn't have the tonal depth of a beautifully made acoustic.

The SCGC is a whole different thing, my word, that guitar has sweet overtones and sustain.

Good thing none of these turns around quickly, I have time to think on it at least :).
 
Sadie-f said:
So I mentioned thinking about an SCGC acoustic and dayum, I sat down to play one of their OMs, next to my Martin OM28.

That's a hell of a guitar. The thing is now when I play my hand-built side by side against the Martin, I have to say, the new guitar is for now my go-to. Sure, it doesn't have the tonal depth of a beautifully made acoustic.

The SCGC is a whole different thing, my word, that guitar has sweet overtones and sustain.

Good thing none of these turns around quickly, I have time to think on it at least :).
Click to expand...
Very nice Acoustics are a totally different territory than electrics.  It’s normally make the 1st of the 4 numbers at minimal a 4 and 5, and yes there is a difference when you get close to or at 5 digits.
If you’re looking for that M tone, SCGC probably does it better than M.  Fantastic guitars!
For my high end, I went on the cheap (?LOL) and got a used HI made Goodall.  Great guitar that has nuances I don’t have the skill to explore. For my M tones, I got an Alvarez BG which is a cheap mans D-18 in body wood but with some adornments ala a D28.
It works for my hog body acoustic needs currently.
Having tried a McKnight Diamond, I understand what is possible.
 
how about this?

vmt-13183a.JPG.jpg
 
I've about decided that my memory of a seafoam crackle Charvel from the 90's was just a synthesis of a couple different guitars. Or maybe at some point I went from saying "I wish I could get this with this" to "remembering" I saw one.

But check out this style of crackle  - (the bulk of them seem to be black over color - I like these color over black crackles)
rtobjysmem9ensbn0bac.jpg



Here's the Gimp (think Photoshop) approximation
index.php
 

Attachments

  • seafoam-crackle-hs.png
    seafoam-crackle-hs.png
    170.9 KB · Views: 393
i tried to copy and paste , anywa, ted mccarty
gibsonguitar's profile picture
gibsonguitar
Verified
On March 18th, 1957, former Gibson president, Theodore ‘Ted’ McCarty detailed and signed his drawing for a new solid body instrument which was never produced…until now.https://www.accordo.it/cloud-assets/730x450/redazionea5/images/deco/103539_theodore-g.jpg
 
@teleme01 you need to put the img tags round the link...like so

Code: 
[IMG]https://www.accordo.it/cloud-assets/730x450/redazionea5/images/deco/103539_theodore-g.jpg[/IMG]

And this will show up...

103539_theodore-g.jpg
 
TBurst Std said:
If you’re looking for that M tone, SCGC probably does it better than M.  Fantastic guitars!
For my high end, I went on the cheap (?LOL) and got a used HI made Goodall.  Great guitar that has nuances I don’t have the skill to explore.
Click to expand...

Goodall looks like a wonderful luthier, that sounds awesome.

I did pull the trigger on an SCGC OM yesterday. I'd been through a difficult bout of depression this winter and set aside any major decisions. With better weather, a drug allergic reaction and pandemic not gone, but moving to a place that qualifies as manageable, I finally felt ok to go ahead.

After playing the BRW OM last year and then an SCGC cocobolo prewar style D that came to the local shop, I stopped worrying about my perceived need for a dreadnought, and settled on OM.

Among the happy bits is we're going to do a labrys headstock inlay that will make it a (distant) cousin to my W-strat :).

Now an 8 month wait for construction, good thing I'm ok with delaying gratification.
 
I have always wanted an OM! I think it has enough volume but is more comfortable to play.
 
TBurst Std said:
Congrats! You can’t go wrong with a SCGC
Click to expand...

Thanks & that seems so! They're remarkable sounding instruments & the OM I played last year approached what I've heard in the best prewar Martins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top