Transparent clear coated mahogany

[kruneh]

Re: Transparent clear coated mahogany

Thank´s, I remember it from before now. And I remeber surfing the jacksonmuseum with a slow modem-line...
[img]/images/graemlins/sleep.gif[/img]

Trans black and gold hardware looks fantastic.

[slash]

Re: Transparent clear coated mahogany

I'd like to see a pic too.. I think it would look fine with black sides and back. I have a natural quilted top on mahogany. The sides and back are a dark redish color.

[toejam]

Re: Transparent clear coated mahogany

BTW, what neck wood do you want? With a neck-thru, if you get a maple neck, more of the brightness would come through than if you got mahogany. I think a mahogany body and neck would be great and wouldn't sound too bright with a 3/4" or 3/8" maple top.

[neilli]

Re: Transparent clear coated mahogany

I was going to go for flame maple for the neck as I thought it would look good and it would also mean that the headstock wouldn't require a veneer to match the body....basically I'm starting to get bogged down here!

To recap:

I have always loved Dan's guitar (that Rob now has) but I've got an XTRR and to my ears it sounds a bit thin, and I figure solid maple (as Dan's is) would exacerbate this sonic characteristic which I believe comes in part from the reduced body mass of an XTRR.

To combat this, I thought mahogany for the body (with a 3/4 maple top), as I can live with the guitar looking different from the back.

Then I thought about the idea of veneering the back as well, but this would mean a 'sandwich' appearance on the side (given a trans colour) so I'd want solid colour sides, but that would look stupid without a burst...etc, etc and here I am: Confused and trying to compromise between what I'd spec and what Dan Spitz did nearly 15 years ago!

Ultimately I know that it makes sense to spec to my own tastes, but that's going against my idea of getting 'one like his' (though I know that this means in truth I don't want one like his, I want one that looks like it)

Arrgghhh!