When it comes to an SG plan I think one based on the 62 sg or les paul as it was known before the name switch Like below. A classic
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Stu/mack ’59 Les paul plans http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=14935 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | bob J [ Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How do you rate, for quality and accuracy? Do you think there are better plans available? How is Les Paul Neck attached? |
|
| Author: | JJ Donohue [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 1:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm using the SM plans...they are OK but not great. I am not aware of other plans. The neck is attached at a 4.5* angle to the body using a mortise and tenon joint and is glued in place. So far, it was the most difficult part of the build for me but it worked out perfectly. It requires that the upper bout be planed at 4.5* as well. The carving operation will undoubtedly present new challenges. Our OLF friend, Anthony Zhlatic, an accomplished Archtop builder and friend of mine from Toronto has been advising me on the project. He recently sent me the following link of someone who recorded his building method. Check here Thanks to AZ as well as John Watkins who inspired me with his impeccably completed LP...but he cheated...he CNC'd his guitar in an instant! |
|
| Author: | DaveTaylor [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for the link. |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have had the Stew mac plans for years but I never got around to building one. I belive the luthiers mercantile plan is the same plan by don macrostie. It looks good in my opionion. I have seen plans on ebay but i tthink they might be the same ones. |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have a flametop les paul already but what i always wanted was another SG. I had one years ago and sold it to some guy in a band and I always regreted it. I have searched for plans and never been able to find them. someone on ebay has a stencil set but I prefer plans. Anyone know anyone who has a detailed plan for a SG? |
|
| Author: | Howard Klepper [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I believe the MacRostie plan is a 24-1/2" scale neck, which is an unusually short one. Otherwise, it is a pretty good plan; some things are a bit hard to find on it. |
|
| Author: | JJ Donohue [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Howard...did the scale length change in later years? If so, to what length? |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I believe a gibson scale lenght is trully 24 5/8 and not the 24 3/4 that is normally quoted. |
|
| Author: | bob J [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
In your opinion, which are the best plans for the '59 LP? |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think the stew mac plan is a good one. I would go with that. I think its best to buy plans from a company that has been in the business for years like stew mac and luthiers mercantile then some uknown source. |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=JJ Donohue] Howard...did the scale length change in later years? If so, to what length?[/QUOTE] The Gibson scale length moved around throughout the years. IIRC Stewmac has a very good write up about the history of it somewhere on thier site. |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=bob J] In your opinion, which are the best plans for the '59 LP?[/QUOTE] I got a great set of plans from a guy in England who was selling them on ebay (tele too). The arch wasn't great. but the rest of the plans were really outstanding. between these and the SM plans you really have a good picture of what you need. |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here is one of the documents, but I remember a 3 pager they had in the past. It was very interesting. http://www.stewmac.com/fretscales I will keep digging. |
|
| Author: | James Orr [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I remember reading a discussion on LP plans on the LP forum a year or so ago. Someone from Stew Mac was participating, asking for advice on how best to document the arches of the top. Everyone wanted depth stop type holes to drill the profile ala Benedetto's book, but Stew Mac went with profile gauges. At any rate, the entire plan had been created around a real '59 that they'd digitally traced and imaged. Based on that, I would go with the Stew Mac though I haven't actually looked at them. |
|
| Author: | Anthony Z [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I gather from speaking with JJ that the neck joint isn't all that well described in the StewMac plans and maybe something they could easily improve upon. I put together a tutorial that I posted a number of years ago on how to carve archtop plates that would apply to carving a Les Paul top that I could repost if anyone is interested. If the StewMac plans provide arching templates (like the Benedetto book), my tutorial will work. Having said that, the only thing that I gather that is critical on carving a LP top is: 1) getting the 4.5 degree taper so the fretboard extension fits snug to the top; 2) location and height of the APEX of the arch which I believe is at the bridge location. The rest as JJ says is purely aesthetic. The thing I wonder about in constructing a LP is why does Gibson use a long tenon joint for the neck as opposed to a dovetail joint? Any thoughts? I can hardly wait to see JJ's LP! |
|
| Author: | Jim Kirby [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=FishtownMike] I have a flametop les paul already but what i always wanted was another SG. I had one years ago and sold it to some guy in a band and I always regreted it. I have searched for plans and never been able to find them. someone on ebay has a stencil set but I prefer plans. Anyone know anyone who has a detailed plan for a SG?[/QUOTE] Mike - MIMF has an SG plan. I have that, and I also bought a set of SG templates from an ebay vendor a couple of years ago, and, surprise, they aren't even close. I have no idea which one is more correct, or whether the SG plan changed as much as the difference between the plans and the templates over the years. I don't have a real one (of my own or available to measure), so I can't shed light on whether the MIMF plan is worth going with. When left to it's own devices, my mind often drifts to the SG tone evinced on Live/Dead (especially Dark Star). Certainly an SG through Fender Twins, but I've never known exactly what pickups. Does anyone know? |
|
| Author: | Brock Poling [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=jtkirby] [QUOTE=FishtownMike] I have a flametop les paul already but what i always wanted was another SG. I had one years ago and sold it to some guy in a band and I always regreted it. I have searched for plans and never been able to find them. someone on ebay has a stencil set but I prefer plans. Anyone know anyone who has a detailed plan for a SG?[/QUOTE] Mike - MIMF has an SG plan. I have that, and I also bought a set of SG templates from an ebay vendor a couple of years ago, and, surprise, they aren't even close. I have no idea which one is more correct, or whether the SG plan changed as much as the difference between the plans and the templates over the years. I don't have a real one (of my own or available to measure), so I can't shed light on whether the MIMF plan is worth going with. When left to it's own devices, my mind often drifts to the SG tone evinced on Live/Dead (especially Dark Star). Certainly an SG through Fender Twins, but I've never known exactly what pickups. Does anyone know?[/QUOTE] The one thing about Gibsons (I guess Fender's too... but not as radically so) is that they change often. I have done side by side comparisons of guitars from the same model year and everything and there are noticible differences. I wouldn't worry if the templates or plans are a little different. One thing you shoudl consider on an SG though. Some of the tenons are very short in these and it does not provide a great neck body connection. I think it is better to use a long tenon. Some of it gets routed away when you cut for the pick ups. But this seems to create a stronger neck joint. |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jim i have seen the SG plans on MIMF and from their looks they don't seem to be a high quality drawing. They even state that their plans might not be made by profesional drafts person or something of the likes. They remind me of old computerized drawings from years ago that where not capable of drawing proper curves like some early cad programs. I know that the sg did change somewhat over the years. Longer and shorter neck joints and various pickup and electronic setups. |
|
| Author: | MikeP [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
another Les Paul building link: http://home.asparagine.net/ant/blog/?page_id=6 |
|
| Author: | Bob Garrish [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So, just out of curiosity, what would be the wishlist of things included in both a Les Paul and SG plan if by chance one might be of a mind to make some? |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
When it comes to an SG plan I think one based on the 62 sg or les paul as it was known before the name switch Like below. A classic
|
|
| Author: | bob J [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Anthony, would you please be kind enough to post your tutorial? Thanks |
|
| Author: | Steve Walden [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=bob J]Anthony, would you please be kind enough to post your tutorial? I second the motion! Thanks Anthony! OK - I have been an acoustic player for almost 40 years. I wish I had that much talent... Thanks, |
|
| Author: | Bob Garrish [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
An SG is an SG. It stood for Solidbody Guitar. It's Gibson's slightly less popular model. Les Paul used to have his name on that one, too, but he wasn't fond of some of the construction details (like the worst neck joint in the biz...). |
|
| Author: | FishtownMike [ Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=WaldenWorx] [QUOTE=bob J]Anthony, would you please be kind enough to post your tutorial? Thanks[/QUOTE] I second the motion! Thanks Anthony! OK - I have been an acoustic player for almost 40 years. I wish I had that much talent... Thanks, [/QUOTE]Walden the pic is above. Thats an SG. As played By angus young of ac/dc, Tony iommi of Black sabbath and pete townsend of the who at live at leads, Frank Zappa, Duane Allman and many others. Its one of their most affordable models making it cheap enough for most starting guitarist to get their first gibson. I just love the shap and look. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
I lnow what a Les Paul, Strat and Tele are but I don't know what an SG is. Can someone enlighten me?