Von Herndon Custom Gibson Scale Stratocasters:

Robert Herndon said:
No Rosewood bodies available at present, but I can get a rosewood laminate top, but I think the mahogany on the back would look odd??? Thoughts???
Click to expand...

If you have a mahogany body with a rosewood top and binding between the two, I don't think the different woods would look bad, at all. It may actually be a pretty interesting look.

Robert Herndon said:
SUCCESS!!!!

One company here in California has enough rosewood on hand to create a custom body.... :)
Click to expand...

That's cool, but the mahogany/rosewood combo still seems interesting.
 
smitty_p said:
If you have a mahogany body with a rosewood top and binding between the two, I don't think the different woods would look bad, at all. It may actually be a pretty interesting look.



That's cool, but the mahogany/rosewood combo still seems interesting.
Click to expand...

I'm still debating this, but you may be onto something.

Like this????

Strat with Binding.jpg

Right now, I am waiting for word back from Warmoth regarding possible rosewood headstock veneer...
 
Last edited:
Robert Herndon said:
Smitty,

You got me excited about this....there goes another $150.00... :)

But what about binding with a natural wood finish....????

View attachment 3655
Click to expand...

Yeah! Either that, or a black binding.

But, in the end, it is going to be your guitar. So, you have to be happy with it. If some the ideas from those of us here appeal to you, then we're happy to help. But, if you don't like some of our ideas, then that's cool, too.

You're the most important person that has to like the end result.
 
smitty_p said:
Yeah! Either that, or a black binding.

But, in the end, it is going to be your guitar. So, you have to be happy with it. If some the ideas from those of us here appeal to you, then we're happy to help. But, if you don't like some of our ideas, then that's cool, too.

You're the most important person that has to like the end result.
Click to expand...

I like it....my only concern is my original concept for an unfinished wood guitar. Wouldn't a bound body and neck almost require a finish????
 
Robert Herndon said:
I like it....my only concern is my original concept for an unfinished wood guitar. Wouldn't a bound body and neck almost require a finish????
Click to expand...

Personally, I think every guitar should have some sort of finish, even if just tung oil, to protect the wood.

As for a finish being necessary with a bound body, I'll let the experienced luthiers comment on that more definitively. But, I would think some sort of clear finish...even a thin one...would probably be preferable to nothing. That's just my guess, though.

But, I will admit, even though I like the look, you will have a sharper edge than a normal Strat body profile where your forearm rests on the guitar. That alone may be a show-stopper for you.
 
smitty_p said:
Personally, I think every guitar should have some sort of finish, even if just tung oil, to protect the wood.

As for a finish being necessary with a bound body, I'll let the experienced luthiers comment on that more definitively. But, I would think some sort of clear finish...even a thin one...would probably be preferable to nothing. That's just my guess, though.

But, I will admit, even though I like the look, you will have a sharper edge than a normal Strat body profile where your forearm rests on the guitar. That alone may be a show-stopper for you.
Click to expand...

I agree. I agree that tung oil, to my mind, is a type of finish....
 
smitty_p said:
Personally, I think every guitar should have some sort of finish, even if just tung oil, to protect the wood.

As for a finish being necessary with a bound body, I'll let the experienced luthiers comment on that more definitively. But, I would think some sort of clear finish...even a thin one...would probably be preferable to nothing. That's just my guess, though.

But, I will admit, even though I like the look, you will have a sharper edge than a normal Strat body profile where your forearm rests on the guitar. That alone may be a show-stopper for you.
Click to expand...

Smitty,

Scroll down to the bottom to see the laminate accent....

Warmoth Custom Guitar Parts - Guitar Body Laminate Top Option

The "Drop Top" binding option eliminates the edge you referred to...

Warmoth Custom Guitar Parts - Guitar Binding Options
 
smitty_p said:
Now, that is cool!
Click to expand...

Yes!

I'm leaning toward the drop-top binding option...cream...mahogany with rosewood laminate top, oil finish, swimming pool rout, vintage wide bridge, but maybe a satin clear would actually look better???

I'm thinking unbound neck...ebony board with a rosewood shaft...stainless 6230 frets...10" x 16" radius...Earvana compensated nut...cream dots, dual acting truss rod.

Vintage harness, 250k pots, bridge tone treble with 220k high frequency cut, middle tone with 220k high frequency cut, neck pickup wide open through a 270k resistor to mimic a tone control...

Pickups...big toss up...really love the Carvin H22T-1....but also love the DiMarzio Stacked Single Coils.

Another GREAT humbucker is the GFS Professional Series PAF with vintage cloth, 2 conductor wiring and full wax potting. It's around 10.5k.

If I stick with DiMarzio, I would use something close to the long discontinued 1992 DP404 Virtual Vintage Solo I have in my Squirecaster - 10.86k and 200Mv.

The closest I can find to the DP404 is the new DP420 Virtual Solo Bridge...Alnico 5 with 205mv and 11.17 k.

For the neck, I'm interested in the new "40% less magnetic pull" DiMarzio DP422 Injector Neck Pickup..Alnico 2, 160 Mv, 8.56k...

And in the middle, the DiMarzio DP409 Virtual Heavy Blues 2, Alnico 2, 170mv,
8.60k

This would round things out pretty nice either way...
 
smitty_p said:
That sounds cool.

Just be careful not to call it a Strat or Stratocaster. Both of those names are trademarked by Fender.

Court cases have tended to not allow a manufacturer to sue another company for a similar shape, such as when Gibson tried to sue PRS over their single cut guitar.

But, using the same name anywhere in your description of the guitar would be an open door for a trademark violation suit.
Click to expand...


tossed up on the mahogany body with drop-top binding or solid, three piece rosewood...what you think Smitty????
 
Robert Herndon said:
tossed up on the mahogany body with drop-top binding or solid, three piece rosewood...what you think Smitty????
Click to expand...

Personally, I think if you want to make a real custom guitar, go all out. I lean toward the drop-top binding. But, that definitely takes it away from the traditional Stratocaster aesthetic and makes it a little more blingy.

The three-piece rosewood will preserve more of the traditional Strat look.
 
smitty_p said:
Personally, I think if you want to make a real custom guitar, go all out. I lean toward the drop-top binding. But, that definitely takes it away from the traditional Stratocaster aesthetic and makes it a little more blingy.

The three-piece rosewood will preserve more of the traditional Strat look.
Click to expand...

I do kind of dig that drop top binding man....just trying to picture it with an oil finish...for some reason, I like open Rosewood.
 
smitty_p said:
Then, go with that. You're the one who has to like it. Either way looks good.
Click to expand...

Last night, I spent 3 hours just jamming and switching between guitars. I really critiqued each instrument to see what it was about them that I liked. I wrote my thoughts down, because I did not want to embark on this project if it was something I couldn't pull off...like a simply unreasonable combination.

So, basically, it came down to things i can realistically combine in one guitar.

I prefer the Strat body shape, but want it to weigh less than my 1987 Squirecaster's 9.7 lbs. Definitely top rout, "swimming pool" style, definitely early style (wide) hardtail bridge.

Here, the mahogany body would certainly fit the bill.

I like the 24-3/4" scale length and the "war club" neck on my Gibson, which is basically 1.00" all the way down.

I like the tiny frets on the 1987 Squire, so I'm leaning toward 6230 stainless steel wire.

I like all the tuning keys in a row and the big headstock...but I prefer the dual radius fretboard of the Schecter.

I like the "slow" ratio Gibson Green Keys too.

I found that Warmoth offers a solid Rosewood neck option. I'm thinking perhaps I would use a dark ebony fretboard...maybe Rosewood...not sure just yet.

Pickups are still a toss up. I like the warmth and character of the 7.93k GFS Alinco II I have in the bridge of my SG.

At the same time, I like the DiMarzio Stacked Single Coils.

So, I'm thinking maybe going back to Carvin for bridgr pickups...either the H22T-1 or the C22T, which have very close tonal signatures to the original PAF's, but the 22 poles give more string-to-string sonic adjustability. These are in the 8.2/8.6k range.

Middle pickup would likely be as DiMarzio Virtual Heavy Blues with an Injector Neck Pickup. Both are in the 8k range and both feature 40% reduced magnetic pull to help eliminate Wolftones.

Of course, a vintage harness would be made...a 500k master volume, 500k bridge tone, a .033uf K40Y tone capacitor, 220k bridge treble cut, 250k middle tone pot, 220k treble cut and a wide-open neck pickup with a 270k treble cut.

That's what's on paper anyways....
 
Ok,

So my thoughts now are changing to a dark walnut body with dark rosewood laminate top with light maple accent and a solid rosewood neck with black ebony board....

Should have nice tone I would think....

Thoughts on this wood combination????
 
So, as I am always messing with things, I'm toying with the idea of throwing a Gibson Scale neck on my 1987 Squirecaster and then proceed with a custom body if I like the results...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top