Les Paul Prototype Build

WezV

Yeah, apparently Marc has a load of these blank covers and had been wondering if he could sand off the horrible ridge on the top edge.   I had asked if he could supply a spare bobbin I could use as a template to drill it myself, but he is going to have a go at doing the covers.

i have asked for both to have the corner mounting holes holes drilled the same way I did it above( this gives the ability to drop into any p-90 LP)

WezV

PhilKing said:

Those pickups sound like they will be a great combo.  A bit like a high power Jazzmaster in the bridge, maybe. 

I am assuming they will be ready long before this guitar is built, but they may go straight in the blacktop when they arrive

Danielsguitars

Cant wait to hear those pickups 

I've also been tempted by the thorn, i hope Marc gets round to making a staple 

WezV

I asked gibsons QC department for a bit of help before continuing. Apparently she had just passed a Les Paul in Oxford grey they were all really proud of so i thought i would give her a shot.


All good to continue

the tops glued together and roughly cut out. - wet with spirits here


the sycamore always shows more medullary rays than maple and its even more pronounced here as the top is perfectly quartersawn and quite tightly grained - definitely not the Gibson recipe.  

a bit of colour variation which won't be a problem for this build.  if it was getting a primary colour stain it would need some wood bleach first.  

WezV

the back is done - ready for the top


That is coming in at 4lb 1 1/2 oz.   I could squeeze a couple of extra holes in there, but u think that will do - I won;t bother  with full chambers

BigMonka

@WezV is there any difference in tone between that cheese-hole method and a single chamber (assuming that the same amount of wood is taken out of both)?

WezV

I believe so, but how important it is up for debate. I think the Swiss cheese method maintains the stiffness of the body better than full chambers so you keep the solid body tone intact.  Gibson 9-hole weight relief will be pretty much indistinguishable from a solid body, but it will likely still be a heavy guitar.


Things start to change with full chambers, and it's a much more effective way of reducing weight.

i have nothing against either and I think variation in mahogany can make just as much difference as most of the simpler weight relief techniques.

WezV

i started on the neck too - first job was to select a plank of reclaimed mahogany and slice into 3 strips. ... must keep an eye on that hole...


then they get flipped over to give us our 3-piece blank

Rabs

WezV said:

I believe so, but how important it is up for debate. I think the Swiss cheese method maintains the stiffness of the body better than full chambers so you keep the solid body tone intact.  Gibson 9-hole weight relief will be pretty much indistinguishable from a solid body, but it will likely still be a heavy guitar.


Things start to change with full chambers, and it's a much more effective way of reducing weight.

i have nothing against either and I think variation in mahogany can make just as much difference as most of the simpler weight relief techniques.

I have LPs with both... A Classic which has that holy weight relief and a chambered Standard...  There is a sound difference but like with most things when it comes to this its fairly small but is noticeable..  The chambered one is just that much brighter but nothing that cant be fixed with an EQ tweak..  (IMO of course).  But one is 11lbs and the other 9..  So quite a difference there

All looking really good by the way man..  I like the funky hole you have for the selector switch 

photek

*cough - fat neck - cough*

WezV

photek said:

*cough - fat neck - cough*

I have been known to take that a bit too far.  I love big necks.

This one will be appropriately 50's

PhilKing

WezV said:

I have been known to take that a bit too far.  I love big necks.

Could that be on the Less Pull junior 

WezV

PhilKing said:

WezV said:

I have been known to take that a bit too far.  I love big necks.

Could that be on the Less Pull junior 

It's not actually the one I was thinking of.  There must have been a few.   I can't remember how big I left that.   

underdog

photek said:

*cough - fat neck - cough*

That's harsh on wez, he posts cool photos and you insult him.

WezV

I had a few tasks to do this morning before carving the top.

first i had glued it to the body at 18mm but it actually needs to be just under 16 so i skimmed a couple  of mm off the top with my router thicknesser.  Its important to note that this could ruin a perfect bookmatch on flat sawn figured maple... usually its best to remove wood from underneath the show face.... not an issue here

I then routed the binding channel, except in the cutaway - I find its easiest to do this when the body is flat on top.  I will do inside the cutaway with a different tool later on.

I carve using the templates and method shown here
http://mountainwhimsy.com/2012/03/les-paul-top-carve/

it works really well for me.  And because i already had the templates made from the last LP build I managed to do a full carve and the jobs above in about 2 1/2 hours.... including lots of thorough checking of angles as i went along


Stage 1 - a contour map is routed into the top


Stage 2 - out comes the router thicknesser again and i route the neck and pickup planes



Stage 3 - sand.  The important bit here is good paper.  I started with a 60g belt sander belt chopped open and used with the random orbit sander.  I then moved up to 120 g once all the ridges had gone

Which gives us this

WezV

I was aiming for a 4.3 degree neck angle plane and 1.8 degree pickup plane - but  its not as crucial on this as a proper les paul as I am using a full width neck.  The top carve won't dictate my neck angle like it would on the real thing.

I managed to route the correct angles, but things can drift slightly during the sanding process... If you are doing a proper les paul neck join its worth leaving the neck area alone at this stage

anyway - here i am checking the final angles

The reference surface is tilted 1.4 degrees up towards the neck


without moving the body,  the neck shows -2.7 degrees the opposite way. so 4.1 degrees neck plane.  



The pickup plane read at -0.2 degrees.  That gives us 1.6 degrees pickup plane


and finally, a heck of the bridge area - which matches the reference surface
 


That will do nicely!


just a note on using a smart phone.  They are great but its important not to trust the measurement until you have shown its repeatable.   Also, not all phones are perfectly flat on the back so its important you keep it in the same position on the different surfaces.   Its a measure thrice, cut once situation

PhilKing

It's looking really nice Wez

paulnb57

Bloody hell thats nice!

WezV

a quick mockup with some parts.  



I probably won;t be using the tailpiece although i do quite like the look.    Its actually okay but has 2 issues for this build.  Firstly its chrome...bleargh.   Secondly, i don't like the way it holds the strings.  It just has slots in the back with no way to actually hold the ball end other than string pressure.   The original version its based on has a slight lip to hold the ball end - 

I am sure some of you will be happy with that decision


anyway, i will probably pick up a more common raised diamond tailpiece in nickel or potentially swap it with the tailpiece on my old and much modded archtop - its already nicely worn

underdog

That's a really nice top