Sheepdog1969

Murphy pure vegetable oil soap "safely cleans wood". I have used this product for decades on high end furnature, wood gun stocks, and a few filthy ebony/rosewood fret boards. The directions call for dilution with water, but I strongly recomend using only purified water, not tap or well, to eliminate "hard water staining" (mineral deposit issues like lime scale, iron oxide, etc.) and chemical treatments/contaminents (floride, chlorine. nitrates, etc.). I use the "less is more" approach, and choose to do light, conservative "cleanings", once a day, until my cleaning cloth remains clean after the "wipe down" step, per the directions. (the cleaner the surface, the more "lather" will be created during step one, fyi). This multi day process also allows grime embedded in the wood grain time to come to the surface and thus be removed during subsequent cleanings.

Thanks so much for this info. Using the detailed info in the video, I have adjusted the pickups in all my guitars, and was able to create output characteristics for each of them that definitely improved their tonal characteristics, (based on what and how I play). I was shocked by how much tone difference there was with only a few millimeters of adjustment. Learning how to fine tune, per string, the height adjustment with the slotted/screw in poles on humbuckers, was the coup de gras. My '98 G&L hb/hss Legacy, with Seymour Duncan's at the bridge, had always been pretty hot and crisp (particularly in the bridge pickup only setting in double coil mode), producing great "chunk" and solid harmonics when paired with distortion/OD thru my Marshall. Yet, it never came close to my '87 Gibson SG Special with "dirty fingers". That has all changed now. After adjusting the G&L pickup heights, it is now on par with my SG, in bridge pickup distorted/OD "metal mode". Such a simple and fun process, that delivers near instant tonal/output characteristic mods, should really be talked about more in guitar circles. IMO. Despite there not being an "optimal"/specific string to pickup distance for all guitars, at least I learned how tone is generally effected by differing string to pickup distances. Thanks again!

Is there an optimal distance between strings and pick-ups that optimizes tone quality and/or acoustic output for electric guitars ? Do different pic-ups, on differing guitars, demand different string to pick-up spacing to achieve optimum audio clarity? (Assume the base line for said distance, on all guitar configurations, is simply based on optimum sound gathering capabilities of the pick-ups, which would result in the purest, non-distorted, accurate tonal output capable of the guitar and it's string set.) As an audio guy at heart, I have been trained to FIRST, collect sound in it's cleanest, purist form, as originally produced from it's source. Only then, can said pure "sound" be manipulated to create a desired variation, via electronic/digital manipulation, unique amplification characteristics, and/or other ambient differences specifically exploited to modify sound. Simply put, how close should I adjust my pick-ups to my strings? Thought?

PS - My Luthier friend is having trouble finding a "floating pick guard" and an associated pick-up that attaches to said, for a similar guitar. Apparently these pick-guards and pick-ups are hard to acquire. Anyone with some leads on these could help him!

Around 1990, while attending the University of Iowa, I met David Morrell (author of First Blood, Rambo, Fireflies, etc.), while shopping one day, and struck up a conversation with him, without even knowing who he was. We talked for quite awhile, and after he left, the store clerk told me who he was. Not long after that, I bumped into him again at a music store in Iowa City. He was with another author friend, Richard Preston, who was working on a piece for the New Yorker, (Crisis in the Hot Zone), which he later turned into a book called The Hot Zone. Surprisingly, David remembered me. As we waited for the shop owner to help us, Richard began talking about this virus called ebola, which he had encountered in Africa. Despite the horrific effects and lethality of the ebola virus, Richard plainly stated that what terrified him even more was the exponential increase in ease of international air travel combined with ever increasing travel in and out of formerly isolated/remote global civilizations. He detailed how these two factors would undoubtedly result in global pandemics, which would spread so quickly that the infections would be everywhere before anyone knew what was happening. He said highly infectious and lethal diseases have always popped up in places around the globe. However, because for thousands of years travel from place to place had been arduous and time consuming/slow, infected travelers typically succumbed to the infection before it could be transmitted to other neighboring populations. Thus, these pathogens would "burn out" in localized areas by either killing all available hosts or inoculating survivors via "acquired immunity" creating "herd immunity". As transportation technology grew, reducing travel times AND increasing the number of people travelling/moving from one place to another, disease incubation periods were longer than travel times. It became easier and easier and faster and faster for rural folks to travel to/move to large population centers, and vise versa. Yet, intercontinental travel and/or long distance travel still was slow enough, (think sailing across an ocean), that infected travelers would, at a minimum, present with symptoms prior to arriving at their destination, allowing for quarantines. Even when international air travel became available, costs limited the number of travelers, and the number of commercial airports globally was few. However, by the 1980's, an individual could travel from a remote village to a nearby airport, fly to the nearest international airport, board an international flight to another international airport anywhere in the world, board a flight to a regional airport, and arrive at their destination IN FEW DAYS. During said travel, they would have close contact with thousands of people, who were traveling to thousands of other destinations, each having close contact with thousands of other people, and so on and so on. A disease that only existed in one location on the planet Monday, could be in nearly every country on the planet by Friday, and even before any of the infected individuals presented with symptoms. Remember, that we were discussing this in 1990. Richard Preston's writings on this literally resulted in sweeping changes in how governments around the world designed national defense strategies. His ultimate conclusion was that the "shrinking planet", (the ever increasing ability for anyone to travel anywhere rapidly), would result in global pandemic after global pandemic, with increasing frequencies. This would then lead to either massive global population reduction from a highly transmissible and lethal disease, (or diseases), that would spread so fast that those who may have been capable of creating a cure/vaccination would be killed by it before they could stop it, or governments severely restricting international travel. Ironically, the mass population die off scenario would also result in minimal (if any) international travel simply because there would not be enough people left alive to support the vast technical needs of efficient long distance commercial travel. (think Maslow's hierarchy of Needs ). Richard was right!

https://guitar.com/news/gear-news/gibson-dave-mustaine-flying-v-exp-limited-edition/ https://blabbermouth.net/news/megadeths-dave-mustaine-adds-gibson-custom-shop-flying-v-exps-to-his-collection

Was just talking to my local music shop owner about tuners, and he said, "I'm an old telephone guy.". Confused as to what his former employment at the phone company had to do with our conversation, I gave him a puzzled look. He then said, "Yeah, I just would pick up my land line phone and tune to the dial tone, which is an A." The more you know! (insert rainbow graphic here)

For $6,900+, you too can have one of the 150 Mustaine Gibson Flying V's, (75 of each of the two color options available). Check out the V "string through" tail piece, the Mustaine "image" inked on the back of the headstock, and the hot Seymour Duncan covered Humbuckers. https://www.themusiczoo.com/blogs/news/gibson-custom-shop-announces-new-dave-mustaine-flying-v-exp-limited-edition

I have a 1950 something Harmony "F-hole" acoustic with a trapeze tail piece. (I haven't done any research on it) It was my Grandpa's, (who could pick up ANY instrument, and learn to play it almost immediately, and who played with his parents and siblings in bars growing up literally so they could eat.). It was left to my father, when he died, but it just sat and never got played. My Dad had told me that it was broken, because the bridge was not attached to the guitar. Decades ago, I cleaned it up with Murphy's wood oil soap and Old English wood oil, and strung it with the lightest acoustic strings I could find. I just set the bridge in the same spot it looked to have originally been in, but did not "attach it", (with glue or what ever), because it was obvious that it had never been "attached". I used the "lightest strings" I could find, because the bridge was so tall on the arched topped beast, that the resulting high "action" made it nearly impossible to play beyond the 5th fret. Some in my family claimed that, "it is a rhythm guitar, and Grandpa only played chords on it below the 5th fret.", (a "Three chords and the Truth" guitar). I would love to put a lower bridge on it, and somehow work out the intonation issues with said change, but I'm not sure if that is possible/practical. It is a beautiful instrument, but the light strings destroy it's tone, and it's hard to play even with light strings. Any thoughts?

Thanks so much for the detailed info. Not sure which I enjoyed more, the data or the guitar pics!

Honestly, I'm not sure which pic I liked more. Sure not all of them were "amp cover" related, but now I feel the need to eat baked goods while playing expensive guitars through expensive amps! (possibly while staring at my cool amp cover, LOL)

Merciful-evans asked for this discussion, so let's not disappoint. Assuming all other things being the same, (admittedly tough to do), how do you think tone is different on guitars with trapeze-tailpieces compared to guitars with stud-mounted ones? Does "edge tension" versus "middle tension" truly change the tonal quality of a guitar? Any thoughts?

Being left handed, like my grandmother and my daughter, I find myself gravitating to high quality items, (and people), that posses unique characteristics that differentiate them from the "cookie cutter", homogenized sameness of what is traditionally expected of said. When someone thinks a high quality item of mine is "weird" simply because it looks different than every other item like it, it tells me that they are jealous. And, yes, I think that Strat is beautiful, and I would never have noticed the "miss-matched" wood grain, other than to find it appealing!

I have heard that the approximately 48, 1983 Korina Custom Shop Edition Explorers that were "painted", (approximately 20 in Red, approximately 20 in Black, and <10 in "Ivory/White"), may have had wood grain patterns/appearances that were "lesser"/not as "stunning" as the approximately 50 "natural finish" '83 CSE Korina Explorers, and the 100 '83 "natural finish" Korina Heritage Explorers that were made. The fact that Explorer bodies are made of multiple pieces of wood may lend credence to this claim, since vastly different grain patterns on connected pieces would detract from a natural finish appearance, and would highlight the multi-piece construction. It is plausible that Gibson only made 150 or so natural finish '83 Korina Explorers, (CSE and Heritage combined), because that's how many of them were able to be "fitted together" with Korina "sections" that had complimentary grain appearances. One would assume that the 100 Heritage bodies were "cherry picked" first from the approximately 200 Korina bodies that had been assembled in '83, leaving just short of 100 to be used for the Custom Shop Editions. Since only 50 or so natural finish Korina CSE '83 Explorers were made, that number may have simply been the number of remaining Korina bodies that looked good enough for a natural finish. I would be interested to hear if anyone with a factory painted '83 CSE Explorer has tried to "strip it down" to expose the Korina, and then apply a "factory" natural finish. This would "expose", (pun intended), the accuracy of the assumptions made above. Obviously, the beauty of a guitar's wood grain/natural finish does not necessarily correlate to it's playability and/or tonal output. Conversely, a painted guitar of the same model, wood type, year, and series of it's natural finished siblings, does not necessarily denote a less "playable" guitar with lesser tonal output.

Wow, you stated in 4 words my EXACT feelings during this process; "...a very gratifying ordeal." I have learned volumes about my guitar, learned far more about guitars in general, and met more than a few knowledgeable, open, and kind individuals during this process. Thanks for letting me know that my experience, throughout this research, is not unique or overly obsessive.

Finally I was able to take some extremely hi-def pics of my '83 Gibson Custom Shop Edition Korina Explorer, (Ivory/White). It is one of <10 made in 1983 in this color, and one of 94-96 CSE Korina Explorers made that year.

UPDATE! Thanks to "Jaco", I am confident that my '83 Custom Shop Edition Explorer is indeed Korina, based on his assessment of some extremely hi-def pics of the "cavity" containing the "pots". It is becoming clear that all 94-96 of the 1983 Custom Shop Edition Explorers were/are "Korina". Thanks again, Jaco, for all your help!

Here are three types of fretboards. Finished Maple, Rosewood, and Ebony, (from left to right.)

You are correct. Anyone can pay the premiums to insure anything for any amount, but that doesn't mean the insurance company will pay out that amount if the insured item's value is less than the insured amount. And, yes, the insurance company need would proof of the insured item's authenticity and then a valuation from a reputable appraiser, thus determining the "payout/replacement cost" in the event of loss. My issues are; 1. Accurately identifying the exact specifications, model line, etc. of my Explorer. (hence my massive research due to the "information void" about said.) 2. Determining approximate market value based on the results derived from the preceding issue. 3. Insuring my guitar(s) for slightly more than they are currently worth. (Because I was unaware of what exact Explorer I have, I had previously far under insured it.) But, your point is understood and appreciated. BTW, rct, can I submit you as a profession Gibson value estimator? LOL JK

Thanks for the vid and the props! My original post is defiantly massive and geared toward a very small group of people. I posted it for a few reasons. First, I wanted to combine what I had learned into one location, rather than bits and pieces spread out everywhere. Second, I wanted to get more info from others who could add to, and/or correct the data I posted. Lastly, I will be using the info collected here to create a comprehensive, collaborative resource page that will contain all info available on the '83 Explorer models, which I have never been able to find anywhere else. Your help is much appreciated!

Yep, always keep your fingernails trimmed short! Thanks for the info.

Do you find and tonal/sustain differences between the two? (Obviously the frets, string type/gauge, bridge, etc., would seem to define this, not the board material, right?)

As a writer, the best advice I ever received was to, "Write what you know.". Initially, I assumed that this was to add realism to the story, and also would keep the author from losing the interest of their audience due to contrived story lines. However, the true meaning of this advice was intended to allow the author to accurately express the emotional aspects of the situations that they are writing about. If the song lyrics that you are writing are able to produce an emotional response strong enough to induce a physical reaction, (such as crying), you are doing something right! If you are also able to compose a melodic score that complements/enhances the emotions expressed in your lyrics, your audience will "feel" these emotions as well.