[daemon barbeque]

Well as some of you know ,i am willing to let Sebastian build a 8 string for me...
I am going with a modified Kelly style...

So i wanted to know/discuss this points...

How important is the upper horn ,and what kind of effect has it on the tone...

How much "wood" is too much around the neck joint (upper part)

How much wood is too much allaround..If i go with a "larger" Kelly to fit the 8 string and 27 frets ,will it be negative for the tone?

Where should i put the Truss-rod adjustement hole? Teh body or the headstock?

How much wood on headstock is "too much"?..How important is headstock mass anyways?



Thanx alot fellas ,

43 people looked at it and noone has an opinion?
C'mon guys.Tell me what you know or think you know or just think!!!

[Papa Shank]

I'm thinking...whomever it is that's going to build this should be able to advise you. If it were a case of blank canvas design with no thoughts to what woods or hardware then I can see the point in asking opinions but when you more or less know what you want it should be the luthier than you use to bounce ideas to.

Lots of questions about tone, kind of difficult to say when there's no mention of woods, size, construction style and hardware. Probably best to ask your luthier about all this tbh.

[daemon barbeque]

Originally Posted by Papa Shank

I'm thinking...whomever it is that's going to build this should be able to advise you. If it were a case of blank canvas design with no thoughts to what woods or hardware then I can see the point in asking opinions but when you more or less know what you want it should be the luthier than you use to bounce ideas to.

Lots of questions about tone, kind of difficult to say when there's no mention of woods, size, construction style and hardware. Probably best to ask your luthier about all this tbh.

Haha!Thanx for the reply...
It's not the mather of Luthier ,it's the matter of knowledge.I wanted to "listen"§ to your ideas..I have my ideas and Sebastian (Apophis) told me his meaning too.But what do you guys think?

The key questions are mass ,neck-joint and size...Nothing else!!!

[MF_Kitten]

mass = more wood for the tone to develop in, and more sustain, but whether the tone is BETTER or not, is subjective...

the upper horn doesen´t do that much for tone, but it has alot to say about stability, because it´s where your strap is held in place, and if you´ve got a long or huge (or both) neck, then a long horn is recommended. this is the problem with X-shaped guitars and SG-type guitars. they don´t have alot of upper horn, so the guitar neck-dives.

so if you want a guitar that stays in place, then upper horn=good.

i can´t say that much about neck-joints, but apparently it has something to do with how the tone and sustain etc spreads over into the guitar body. if the neck joint is bad, then very little tone and sustain will make it through, and it´ll be a "dead" guitar. if the neck joint is good, and the connection between body and neck is tight, then it should have a nice resonance...

body woods are important too, but it´s a personal taste issue :P

[zimbloth]

That's definitely a myth and not true IMO. Mass does not = tone/sustain.

Parker Fly guitars which are paper thin and weigh 4 pounds prove this. It's about how the guitar is designed and constructed that really counts. I'm guessing Blackmachine fans may have something to say about this as well.

Light-weight mahogany guitars like Parkers sound absolutely HUGE and resonant. With really bulky heavy guitars, the majority of the sound you're hearing is the pickups and the girth from the mass, but not the wood's tonal character per say. If you notice high quality light weight guitars often sound a lot louder and more resonant played acoustically than say a Les Paul which has more of a dull sound acoustically. Both are mahogany and can sound great, but the added mass of the Gibson definitely does not equate to a more authentic mahogany tone.

[MF_Kitten]

ah, but you are absolutely correct... my stratocaster made from poplar weighs like nothing, and is the most acoustically loud and resonant guitar i own... so yeah, that´s true :P

and it would make sense that more mass=more sustain though, in my head, but it might just be density and hardness that has anything to do with that... maybe mass DOES have alot to say when it comes to sustain, but there is a clear limit where it stops having positive effects?

[zimbloth]

Originally Posted by MF_Kitten

ah, but you are absolutely correct... my stratocaster made from poplar weighs like nothing, and is the most acoustically loud and resonant guitar i own... so yeah, that´s true :P

and it would make sense that more mass=more sustain though, in my head, but it might just be density and hardness that has anything to do with that... maybe mass DOES have alot to say when it comes to sustain, but there is a clear limit where it stops having positive effects?

You're partially right yeah, but again it's more about the design and implementation of the guitar and it's components that yields to greater sustain and tone.

Like I said, if you ever get a chance to A/B a Parker Fly Classic or Parker Fly Mojo to a Gibson Les Paul Standard, it'll be apparent very quickly which one has more sustain, resonance and a bigger tone. The extreme weight of a Gibson will lend itself to more bass response, but mahogany isn't really bass but rather warm low-mids and soft highs. The genuine mahogany tone is allowed to come through more in light-weight, resonant guitars like Parkers or Blackmachines IMO.

[MF_Kitten]

Originally Posted by zimbloth

You're partially right yeah, but again it's more about the design and implementation of the guitar and it's components that yields to greater sustain and tone.

Like I said, if you ever get a chance to A/B a Parker Fly Classic or Parker Fly Mojo to a Gibson Les Paul Standard, it'll be apparent very quickly which one has more sustain, resonance and a bigger tone. The extreme weight of a Gibson will lend itself to more bass response, but mahogany isn't really bass but rather warm low-mids and soft highs. The genuine mahogany tone is allowed to come through more in light-weight, resonant guitars like Parkers or Blackmachines IMO.

sounds nice... makes sense though, seeing as the ibanez S-series is getting far with that...

[daemon barbeque]

Cheers guys!!!This discussion was what i was aiming for!!!

Well ,yess..My project guitar is a Kelly now...And alltough i love the original Kelly design ,it lacks stability for a 8 string ,27 fret 27" design.

So i redisign some parts of it....

Some say ,that V's are the best sounding guitars for metal ,since the neck joint is the most important part of "attack ,and behind the bridge is the most important part for sustain and low-end...

In that perspective ,the Kelly should be a powerfull guitar ,but i know that a soloist is more bassy ,and fuller sounding than a Kelly!!!.And Kellys tend to have more wood and weight!!!

So ,i try to optimize my design ,and save time and money ,and reach my target...I know that Apophis has his own mind ,his own ways and he will "refine" my design as well ,but i want to be %100 happy.Not less!!!

So what do you guys think of Vs?Why do they sound good?There is no upper or lower horn...

[MF_Kitten]

i don´t think there´s any reason why a V should sound better, there really isn´t a reason as far as i´m conserned :P