JCH
El Nacho
Yep, it has some tele traits, but no part of it fits a tele template. In fact side by side the similarities are less pronounced. If it were a double cutaway, you'd probably see few if any similarities. I might build it as a bolt-on with the neck pictured. I've been wanting to experiment with jazzmaster pickups, and this would be a good platform.
A chambered neck-through seems a bit odd to me, but I guess it works on Rickenbackers.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
chambered ............
T
theD1CKENS
*insert clever title here
what are the pros and cons of a chambered body? it almost seems counter-productive to have a neck-thru and chambered body. may be just me. I'm gonna see what info I can find on chambered guitars
muttley600
Banned
Weight, different tone.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
IF we stipulate that one of the benefits of neck-thru is increased sustain because of having everything including the p'ups and bridge mounted on the same piece of wood, then whether the wings are chambered or not wouldn't make a lotta difference.
Note: I said IF we stipulate that often claimed benefit to be true. I realize that it's not accepted by everyone that that is the case.
muttley600
Banned
TelePaul
J to the R O C
muttley600
Banned
Why? .
TelePaul
J to the R O C
Well, the ones who suggest a thru-body guitar gives more sustain.
muttley600
Banned
Well, if they did say that it gave more sustain they would be wrong rather than liars. There is no evidence to suggest it does.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
well .... my neck thru has more sustain than most of the other gits I've owned. That is some evidence.
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
Are you saying this because of Gibson makes so many neck through guitars, or because set-necked Les Pauls have such lousy sustain?Gibson players are such liars!
muttley600
Banned
well .... my neck thru has more sustain than most of the other gits I've owned. That is some evidence.
Maybe thats because your neck thru guitar reflects more energy back down the string at the bridge and the nut/fret? Because thats what dictates the attack/decay of the standing wave in a string. It has little to do with the energy that "may" find it's way to the neck body join as long as it is rigid. A set neck is actually more rigid if done well.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
true ,,,,,,, all of that.
and maybe it refelcts that energy because it's neck thru. All of this is conjecture without actually putting my guitar on a bench and testing it.
muttley600
Banned
Why would it reflect that energy because it id neck thru?
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
This statement is counter-intuitive for me. I've never read it before. I understand how a set neck can be equal to a neck through. But more rigid? Can you help?
muttley600
Banned
In terms of it's ability to transmit sound waves certain glue lines will increase the mass/stiffness ratio in that region. The glue lines are also stronger than the bonds between the wood cells. Theoretically that results in a more rigid and efficient model. In practice it is negligible if detectable at all. As I said the key factors of sustain or attack/decay of a sound wave in a fixed string is the ability to maintain the energy in the string. To do that it must be reflected back down the string at the fixed points. The manner in which the neck joins the body is largely unimportant as long as a secure and rigid fixed point is maintained.
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
Using adhesives that would be typical in the construction, isn't it true that a wood joint glued end grain to end grain will tend to separate at the joint rather than somewhere else on one of the boards when subjected to sufficient stress? The neck through design using a one piece neck blank has two of the glue lines of the set neck approach without the less robust joint at the end grain. Add to that the added glue lines of the laminated construction typical of blanks for neck through guitars and it still seems the neck through would tend to be more rigid if the strength on the glue line is the determining factor. What am I missing?
muttley600
Banned
That the neck body join only has to support the fixed points. The vibration in the string needs to stay in the string for there to be a benefit in terms of sustain. It simply isn't the case that a neck thru will keep that string energy in the string. It is the rate at which energy is lost at the fixed points that matters. How do you suppose that a thru neck would improve that over any other system?
Seriously you lot can believe it all you want but that won't make it true.