kent04 Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Full thread for this build can be found here: http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/129730-new-build-es-225-semi-hollow/ 2 Questions: Is this body Too Thin? its measures just north of 1.6 inches with the carve. i wanted the carve to be really pronounced which took away from its overall thickness, and being that its nearly 16 inches wide makes it look really thin. although it was so much fun to shape this body out, i really like the grain patterns and want to avoid starting over etc.. if it is too thin ill have to either start over, or add more layers of cedar to the back. neck will be glued, don't think the pocket will be too small what is everybody's opinion? What do you think of this headstock? i wanted to merge Gibson and PRS headstocks, it came out looking like something from the Jetson's or Startrek. I really like it, but wanted consensus from everyone on here What is everybody's opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Hello, Well that's about 40mm right? If so then that's fine... the two things you have to worry about when it comes to thickness... Will the pickups fit in and will the controls fit in the back... I can tell you, I made one guitar that was 28mm thick and that seems to be the limit.. I just managed to fit the pickups in.... As for the headstock looks fine to me, cool design .. What counts again here, do the tuners fit.... So it will be down to where you drill the holes... This is the thing about building it yourself.. there isn't much right and wrong, you decide :) You want to see how thin you can get a guitar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparquelito Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Kent04 I believe the thickness of the guitar body is just right. It's precisely the same thickness as my Telecaster, about the same as my Ibanez Jet King, and is actually quite a bit thicker than my Austin Strat-copy. My Les Paul is 1 and 3/4 inches thick, and there are times I wish it were a bit thinner and lighter. The weight should be perfect, and Lord knows there's no point in crafting an ultra-heavy guitar, unless you are building for John Cena. And I do like that headstock shape. It's really cool, and should be quite a head-turner. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent04 Posted June 21, 2016 Author Share Posted June 21, 2016 Love having this forum for support and criticism Thanks for the reply everybody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Love having this forum for support and criticism Thanks for the reply everybody Always a pleasure sir... Indeed when I started building this forum was amazing to me.... So supportive... Feel free to ask anything you want.. PM me if you like.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 I agree with those above...make sure the stuff fits. And also, thin is a GOOD thing. Unless you are building an absolute copy (you aren't), it's good to do something a little different to set it apart. I personally think thinner is an IMPROVEMENT. One thing it reminds me of is the Ibanez AS-100's and 200's, which are essentially a 335 style, but the body is thinner. I like that about those. And, I really like the headstock shape. It's like the same size as a Gibson one, (which I think is a good size), but has an obvious difference to the top to make it not pretending to be a Gibson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 I like the headstock shape, too. Looks classy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.