The Open 'Burst Project

[P 59]

File for John Catto.

I have an upgraded file of your 59 revision 8, with the top carve added.

Please let me know if you would like to have a copy.

 

[John Catto]

File for John Catto.

I have an upgraded file of your 59 revision 8, with the top carve added.

Please let me know if you would like to have a copy.

My email link is working (click on my name), send it on to me, I'm curious to see it. Mostly I just eyeball topcarves on guitars, if all the other stuff is working together then it should mostly fall into place.

 

[Tonefiend]

Snmeone needs to take one into a CNC shop and have it digitized. I'd use a pantograph and a body with the neck pulled out as the master if I were to build one. Thats really the best way to do it.

 

[WineRedCustom]

e=mc^2

 

[P 59]

Tonefiend :

Snmeone needs to take one into a CNC shop and have it digitized. I'd use a pantograph and a body with the neck pulled out as the master if I were to build one. Thats really the best way to do it.


why do you have one???????

theres plenty of them there cnc shops in the usa.

 

[ReValveiT]

I have a CNC machine and Mastercam. + I also have access to a digitiser but no 50's Lester to digitise...

If someone can provide me with a top-carve CAD drawing, I could cut it on the machine.

 

[P 59]

ReValveiT

I am shure somebody should be along with a 50's lp of some sort, I know theres a few in the uk??????

 

[darkwave]

A better option might be to do a white-light scan. You could get a very dense data point cloud with high percision, all without any contact with the guitar top.

-Douglas C.

I have a CNC machine and Mastercam. + I also have access to a digitiser but no 50's Lester to digitise...

If someone can provide me with a top-carve CAD drawing, I could cut it on the machine.

 

[holygrail]

I'd love to see us all get together on some plans and
design the perfect Burst ,then have them built. I'm sure there are
enough of us that would buy one.
I can be counted in on one

 

[ReValveiT]

A better option might be to do a white-light scan. You could get a very dense data point cloud with high percision, all without any contact with the guitar top.

-Douglas C.

Nothing touches the Guitar with digitising, either...

I'm having an historically correct neck made by a luthier and I will cut the body myself...I just need the top-carve data and the correct neck angle.

Anyone have the data??? Or is there anyone in the UK with a 50's / historic Lester willing to participate and help with digitising? There's a fully cut body in it for you.

 

[P 59]

Nothing touches the Guitar with digitising, either...

I'm having an historically correct neck made by a luthier and I will cut the body myself...I just need the top-carve data and the correct neck angle.

Anyone have the data??? Or is there anyone in the UK with a 50's / historic Lester willing to participate and help with digitising? There's a fully cut body in it for you.

What type of digitizer, more details about it if possible??????????

 

[gordyh]

Just posting to keep this old thread alive - and be involved.

 

[Sebastien]

I took the following information on a thread on this board. It may even come from this very thread:

neck to body: 4 degree or more
headstock: vintage 17
typically: between 14-17

Neck ang;e makes a difference. The guitar's playable anywhere from 2 and a half to 5 and a half degrees. 3 and a ha;f seems to be it for 'play'- great action, nice feel, nice sustain. It does seem to add a bit of tartiness to the top end, though- almost like you're playing through a squashed wah, only obviously not as apparent. 4 and a half degrees removes this but it also affects the playability.
It's a tweak, I use 3 and a half degrees on the neck angle, plane the 'second cut' by eye after the top preimiter has been carved, and mil the frets on top of the body a tiny bit lower than the rest.

 

[Rafael]

OK, here is the Stupidiest question ever. I know that there are no 2 exactly alike Les Pauls. But please, did the guitar change that much from the 1960's? I mean, when I think of a 2004 Les Paul Standard, I assume it should be equal (measurement, format, etc... except neck profile) as the one in 1960.

Can someone throw me a bone here?

thanks

Fuganti

 

[Sebastien]

The top carve is radically different. The headstock angle is different (to save wood and possibly to make it more robust. Most likely to save wood alone). And all that historic vs gibson USA long tenon, frets, blah blah blah... In fact, besides the general shape and name, they don't really have much in common. We might even argue that wood selection (although still mahog + maple) is quite different. :tm

 

[Rafael]

is there a document/post/web site describing these changes?

thanks

 

[PixelBurst]

I mean, when I think of a 2004 Les Paul Standard, I assume it should be equal (measurement, format, etc... except neck profile) as the one in 1960.

Nope, they have a lot of differences. From neck tenon to top carve. Even the Historic Reissues aren't the same as the originals.

 

[Sebastien]

The best I have is a historic vs real burst.

http://www.kenguitars.com/historiccomp59burst/Historic Comp59.html

 

[Rafael]

funny. subtle differences, but the overall "look" of the guitar always seemed to be the same. Of course, I am by all means an expert.

 

[P 59]

ReValveiT :

Does mastercam support splines / bezier curves???

I am just asking as I haven't used mastercam before and I know that some programs don't like splines, especally if nurbs are used.