Metal Guitarist Forums banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Reverend Secret Flower
Joined
·
11,837 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Hey guys. I dont own a 6'er and i'v been jonsing for one. So I'm going to make one.

I'v hammered out the designs. Its kind of a hybrid of a few designs and I finally get to try out a headstock design i'v been wanting to do for a while.

Heres a little photoshop mockup.


Obviously its a strandberg body. I was wanting something ergonomic, but elegant looking. I would have tryed to design something, but honostly this shape is so comfy to play in so many positions, theres no way i could top it.
Its one thing to design for asthetics, its another to design for functionality, and even harder to blend the 2. Strandberg did it well, so thats why i'm going with that body design.

The headstock is a parker/blackmachine amalagam i had come up with quite a while ago. I'v been dying to use it, but A. i didnt want to do it on a 7, but i'l risk it on a 6 and B. it has a modern look to it, and i thought it was the perfect oppurtunity to use it with a modern body design.

For the bridge i'm shooting for a schaller-hannes. I'v been interested in this bridge for a bit, but i havnt made a 6er since they came out and i'm going for it. Once again, its a modern styled bridge that will match the rest of the choices.

I'm thinking set neck. Set necks have always been tonally superior in my experiences and they just feel the best to me.

Anyway, my prospective spec are:
Flame top, mahogany back
mahogany or walnut neck with a rosewood board
straight headstock
Schaller-Hannes bridge obviously
Sperzel tuners
24 monster jumbo frets, stainless steel
25.5''
not sure on pups yet. looking for something versital
CGCFAD tuning
Red for the color, (my fav) but i'm thinking of doing a dark to bright red stain job, or a burst of some sort.

heres a pic of my woods,



One of the things i'm on the fence about are the pickups. I'm wanting this guitar to be able to play metal, but also beable to play great cleans(which i normally dont worry as much about).

Also, i'm leaning toward mahogany for the neck, but i want some snap to the guitar, so thats why i'm considering walnut. So once again, the pickups and neck woods will alter each other when i finally decide.

Anyway, i thought i would throw this up here and see if you guys have any suggestions or what you think about it.
 

·
Mr. Negative Pants, ,
Joined
·
14,796 Posts
I would suggest maybe filling in the notch in the butt end of the body which is there in Strandberg's design for the headless tuning access. This is just a hunch, but by adding a headstock and tuners at the end of the neck, the balance may be shifted more towards neck-heaviness. Putting a bit more mass back behind the bridge may help with the balance.
 

·
I don't like it.
Joined
·
11,071 Posts
I would suggest maybe filling in the notch in the butt end of the body which is there in Strandberg's design for the headless tuning access. This is just a hunch, but by adding a headstock and tuners at the end of the neck, the balance may be shifted more towards neck-heaviness. Putting a bit more mass back behind the bridge may help with the balance.
I think it'd look weirder that way, IMO. Also, it's only a 6er, he's going to be using Sperzels, so I'm doubting it's going to significantly hurt the balance...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,657 Posts
I don't know about the headstock. Maybe it's because I'm used to seeing that type of body without one, but it just looks off to me. It also creates some odd clashes with the body angles for me. For example, this is what my eye does with the current headstock (excuse my ms paint skills):


I thought maybe reversing it would help, but the same problem happens.


Of course, I could be making something out of nothing.
 

·
Reverend Secret Flower
Joined
·
11,837 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I would suggest maybe filling in the notch in the butt end of the body which is there in Strandberg's design for the headless tuning access. This is just a hunch, but by adding a headstock and tuners at the end of the neck, the balance may be shifted more towards neck-heaviness. Putting a bit more mass back behind the bridge may help with the balance.
Like adam said, i would assume a tiny headstock and and sperzels would be ok. Also i might beable to finagle the strap button placement.
If you look, the majority of the body is centered and the neck is so deep on the body that i really dont think balance will be an issue.

:lol:

Seriously though, I think if you are going for something more classy, I'd tame the design down a touch. Try to make it a bit more "classic." Notice how those two words have the same root? My, but I love etymology.
I'm going for a modern look though. so a classic design wouldnt float my boat. Besides, modern can be classy too:D

I don't know about the headstock. Maybe it's because I'm used to seeing that type of body without one, but it just looks off to me. It also creates some odd clashes with the body angles for me. For example, this is what my eye does with the current headstock (excuse my ms paint skills):


I thought maybe reversing it would help, but the same problem happens.


Of course, I could be making something out of nothing.
I figured it probably wouldnt look good to everyone, but the reverse headstock looks ugly to me. but i never really like reverse headstocks.
 

·
Reverend Secret Flower
Joined
·
11,837 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Just made an order at soulmate guitars for my neck.
Specs are:
Maple with walnut laminates
Zebrawood fretboard!! looking forward to this
24 jumbo frets
0 Radius board
set neck
no inlays

I threw caution to the wind and got a zebrawood board because i love the look, the color scheme has been twisting in my head, and it will match my other zebra guitar:lol:
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top