Leaderboard

Yes - I know. There's nothing wrong with the ranges of good quality but affordable acoustics starting to appear on the scene that are made affordable by dropping the binding. But as you say... Anyway, I chickened out of doing the binding for the back this afternoon and instead rock-hopped back to the neck heel. Still further shaping to do to make it look a little more elegant but I think it will work OK. This shot has also reminded me that the last job after the rest of the binding is finished, is clamping it somehow without crushing it and routing a flaming great big (and very accurate) slot to fit the neck tenon into. Oh joy...

Never tried binding and/or purfling myself but you can't overestimate what it does for the end result!

(read that as pretty good part time maker)

And in the meantime I made a bit of progress with the fretboard. Cut a couple of swifts for the 12th fret: Then used a precision router base on the Dremel with a 1.5mm bit: and installed with epoxy mixed with Macassar dust: Dots fixed either side and sanded smooth with the radius block: And that's all up to date as of this morning

Rather than bore everyone with the same tortuous detail on this thread, I'll just summarise the results. Some of the reasoning and issues are covered in the original thread started on Basschat. The progress end point is the same in both threads Binding - hate it! I use a stewmac Dremel adapter as the 'only affordable least worst option' for cutting the channels - but with a daft but surprisingly effective mod of adding a piece of binding to it to act as a vertical guide: Works like this and helps a lot in getting an even rout: First goes on the inner purfling - this is pretty straightforward: Then cleaned up the remaining channel ready for the binding itself. This needs pre-bending - I use the bending iron and the body mould to hold them in position while they dry: Then glued and held tight with glassfibre reinforced tape and bicycle inner tubes: Results -after a bit of tweaking - are OK but the process, in my view, is too hit-and-miss: So for the binding on the back, I'm going to try a completely different method that I successfully used a few years ago on this Peavey EVH re-body:

Hi, I thought I'd start a thread for discussion and sharing Cab IR's. Obviously I'm not suggesting we should share anything other than those which are freely available. So Cab IR's. The latest digital witchcraft in helping us chase the holy grail of tone or just another con? To my ears, there's no doubt at all that changing a Cab IR in a patch on my unit can makee a massive change to the tone and overall sound of the patch. But..... is it really a Marshall 1960x/Mesa/Fender/Ampeg can with an SM57/SM58 on/offcentre - well I have no idea as I've never had the ability to try all the millions of possibilities and options that now exist. To me, if it sounds good, sounds as you want it to, then it's the right thing to use. Accuracy of 'modelling' doesn't really matter to me. Much like the whole amp modelling debate. Oh, I use a Mooer GE200 which I think is extraordinarily good value for money. It's Amp Sims are as good as I need, it's small and really simple to programe and it takes Cab IRs. What's not to like? Anyway, here's a link to a load of Cab IR's I've collected over the years - fill your boots! https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Vyly3Doh4F3_x2xN4VnpvjnqlRrnR4ms