(and I got the 59 LP as well whilst I was at it)

Does that mean that you can recreate the carved top of a 59 LP?

Does that mean that you can recreate the carved top of a 59 LP?

@tv101 That sounds exciting @darrenking 

@boo Yup!

Fascinating! So, what implications does this have for neck width, heel width and neck joint?

I’ve been trying to work out the best way of building a 3D model that would allow for flexibility in how your (Bailey) neck might fit.

Hi James,

I haven't been through everything yet and I need to spend a bit of time sitting looking at the 3D models with the paper plans in front of me to fully understand what I can do with them. There are files for the neck, headstock, fretboard, front and the core. They look very detailed and it was pretty easy to extract the surface plane that I needed to machine the mould.

What are your thoughts on the neck width etc?

Hi Darren,

I’m probably completely overthinking the issues here, but I’m trying to work out how to fit a 335 style laminated guitar body into a Bailey style workflow. For the avoidance of doubt, I don’t want to make a 335, but I do want to exploit some of the construction techniques if I can.

Unlike a traditional archtop, which uses a dovetail in the heel to lock into a neck block, the 335 has a solid core with the neck glued in using an extended tenon. That is kinda similar to the Bailey set neck construction.

The laminated top, sides and bottom need to line up perfectly with the heel where the neck meets the body, and the width of the neck at that point would be determined by the Bailey fingerboard taper. Can the sides bend a little to snug into the heel rebate if they’re oversized? Can the top and bottom be shaved in the cutaways to snug into the neck rebate (after binding) if they’re oversized?

I did wonder whether the mould for the arch (top and bottom) might be better in two pieces divided down the centerline. Then you could mould the laminate to suit your pre-shaped neck by adjusting the gap between the two sides.

And do we need a Bailey neck taper template in the Shop?

The other issue is binding. You need to run a router round the edge to make the binding slot, a task made easier if the top is flat. So in a perfect world, your arch would start to rise around 20-30mm in from the edge. That clashes with the 335 arch as indicated in the drawings I’ve seen.

Here’s my 335 contour lines drawing with a green 20mm overlay around the edge. Is it worth modifying the arch to make the binding easier?

Or am I just overthinking (I haven’t had a drink for 4 days, help me)!

Bugger, png with a transparent background isn’t a lot of use, and I can’t edit the post so I’ll add this addendum:

Hi James,

I’ll keep this brief. Shit! I don’t know!

Regards

Darren

Hi James,
In all seriousness, some of this is above my pay grade but I’ll have a go!. Whilst I may have 32 years of Adobe Illustrator experience, 20+ years of vacuum laminating and 15 years of CNC routing behind me, my guitar making proper started in January 2018 so there is definitely a degree of thought process for me to go through before I can feel comfortable offering advice. What I love about our group is being able to use my experience in certain areas to help solve someone else’s problems in others, and visa versa. Maybe Mark can chip in on this one. I do get the question about routing for the binding and yes, it would be easier if the back and front were flat over a 20-30mm border. Unfortunately they aren’t, so it isn’t, hence all the various spring loaded/ counter balanced binding router set ups you can find on Pinterest that run on a guide 5-10mm from the edge. Fitting the neck shouldn’t be too bad. On the acoustics I’ve made I have sanded the sound board flat where the fretboard is bonded to it and the curvature means there is actually very little material to remove. I did this after/at the same time as fitting the neck but prior to bonding the fret board so that I could check the neck/soundboard alignment and it actually ended up being considerably easier than I had expected/feared. I am not sure what advantage there would be to having a width adjustable mould for the front/back plate. The shape as it stands easily allows for a 1-2mm adjustment on the neck width without altering the lamination mould or the pressed components. More important would be altering the external mould for the rim and the neck block to create the correct width for the neck to mate with but you should know this before you start assembly. I’d suggest picking the width you prefer for the neck where it meets the body and then sticking with it, otherwise you are going to be making lots of moulds!

In short, yes, you probably are over thinking it, but I do exactly the same, all of the time, about everything, so don’t worry, it’s natural and I find that alcohol does help, but only a little and only for a brief period of time.

Please feel free to disregard all of the above, the value of investments can go down as well as up and COVID-19/Brexit weren’t my idea!

Cheers

Darren

Simples! We just need a guitarmaking.co.uk template set!

YES! @darrenking Looks like you cracked it 😀 !!?

Good morning 335 fans!

Just a quick question. I have a drawing that shows the thickness of the laminated front and back as being almost 6mm thick (1/16" maple + 1/10" poplar + 1/16" maple). This sounds very thick to me. Does anybody have other references that specify this thickness as my feeling is that anything over about 4-4.5mm is unnecessary from a strength point of view and is just going to be adding weight. I'm open to persuasion though, so all thoughts happily received.

Darren

Would it be relevant, or help, @darrenking, if I tried to manoeuvre my digital callipers into the f-holes of my Yam SA-700 335 alike, and measured the thickness of the top?

Hi Darren,

My Yamaha AES1500 has an almost 5mm thick top (I try not to do inches). And unlike the 335, it has a neck block and bridge block with a couple of top braces supporting the pickups, rather than a solid block running the length of the guitar.

Sorry about the poor positioning of the ruler, but you get the idea.

Hi James,

Thanks for taking the time to do this.

My gut reaction is that this is thicker than it needs to be but who am I to question the likes of Mr Gibson or Mr Yamaha!

I will try a pressing at 5mm but I have a feeling that vacuum pressure alone isn't going to be sufficient to form a lay up this thick. It might be time to build a 'positive pressure' press capable of exerting a greater force.

Cheers

Darren

@tv101 Hi TV, yes, that would be great as ti will be interesting to have a couple of dimensions to compare.

PS I think I must have emailed a reply to the notification that you had posted a message as it doesn't seem to be in the message chain. Maybe I'm not as C19 'unconfused' as I thought!

Cheers

Darren

Hi TV, yes, that would be great as ti will be interesting to have a couple of dimensions to compare.

I shall do it tomorrow.

I'd do it now, but my digital calipers are out in my workshop, and it's wet and windy and dark outside now, and I'm pretty sure that the monsters come out when it gets dark, so I'm not going out there now.

(They're pretty big monsters, so best to be safe).

 

I'd do it now, but my digital calipers are out in my workshop, and it's wet and windy and dark outside now, and I'm pretty sure that the monsters come out when it gets dark, so I'm not going out there now.

@tv101 What kind of guitar builder are you? Come on man! My monsters are in my head but that doesn’t stop me! If I can do it, you can. 🤣

What kind of guitar builder are you? Come on man! My monsters are in my head but that doesn’t stop me! If I can do it, you can.

I'm an alive guitar builder @boo - and I've stayed that way because I know *NOT* to mess with monsters.