Printable View
I agree with Marcel. That poly will have soaked in to a reasonable depth.
If you use a poly lacquer dark tinted spray, (or another paint type suitable for spraying on poly), you could do a sunburst so that the lighter areas are mainly covered up and are a lot darker. In the photos, the main areas you can see the lighter colours are the upper horn and upper rear bout, so good locations for hiding/disguising with a burst.
fair enough Marcel/Simon, I didn't think about how much the poly would have soaked in the veneer.
Simon's suggestion of a burst could work.
Hmmm...
Might have to get the tin of Black out and practice with my spray technique first..
Doesn't need to be black, but it does depend on what dark but transparent lacquer is available to you.
The Black would be a tin of automotive gloss that I found in my shed while I was looking for something else (my old vacuum tube data books)... Black is purely for practice.
Dark lacquer I would have to buy or mix up. Stocks on hand are all clear nil tint types with the majority also being rattle cans...
Hey Marcel, if you did Wok's idea of wet sanding you will get to a point where there may be enough of the flame poking through to re-stain and there will be other parts where the poly has soaked in much deeper. It could end up like a reverse grain pop where the 2nd stain coat would come up darker and also help tie it all together.
Had a thought, but I'm unsure...
I know the ratios of the primary dyes I used in the original water based stain mix. If I make up another stain mix but use the water based Poly instead of straight water then I should have a Purple Poly that I can use to rebuild my burst. The centre of the body is about the right colour so that would only need clear Poly, however the tinted stuff should/could/might darken the edges without loosing much of the flame. Keep doing coats until it is/was dark enough..
Comments anyone ??
Proof test it on some scrap and see what happens Marcel, it is an interesting thought and it may work the way you think. Or, it might not.
It may work as per FW scrap wood test advisable
https://www.hunker.com/12544172/how-...o-polyurethane
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for the link Andrew, but all I got was a few images and nil text.
I got the text and images on my PC.
Me too by using Chrome as my browser not IE.
Firefox on Ubuntu is only okay with the photos. Nup. Nil text...
That is strange indeed?
Maybe if you google it yourself from within preferred browser that may produce a different outcome?
Did the suggested Google search and it came back with the same link, and a host of others.
http://www.joewoodworker.com/transtints.htm was very interesting. I'm not using Transtints but a lot of the info seems relevant.
http://www.charlesriverrc.org/articl...or_tinting.htm is also probably worth a shot...
Also found this USA site if the whole show goes totaly sideways...
http://www.veneersupplies.com/catego...__%26__Stains/
The 2nd link didn't say much but gives hope for trying the water based stain in some water based poly to see if you can brew up a tint of the right colour.
So true Waz.
If food dye can be okay then my water based colours from U-Beaut will probably also be okay... And I know the ratios I used with them so I should be able to get a good colour match.... Have to go to that Green shed and get some fresh unfinished test material so I can try it all out. Looks like the AC15 clone will be back on the main bench for a little while until I get this all sorted.
BTW - that veneer place I linked earlier has 631 products in their Maple veneer range alone. Not sure if they send to AU .... just sayin...
Yeah, I tripped over some veneers stuff on eBay in the past few days whilst looking for something else. Plenty of temptation screaming out for your money from everywhere.
Still reckon you could rescue it by pretending its on purpose.... :) Very quick 'shop for inspirations...
http://i.imgur.com/AJhNiU1.jpg
Can easily see what you are suggesting Sonic but I'm not seeking that look for this build. I have a Tele build (pictured) on the re-works bench with that look in mind but with real denim and Pearl binding and guard.
On this RCM-4F I'm happy with the central fade between the PU's. What annoys me is the blotchy look of the horn and beside the bridge.
When I applied the polly I started in the light area in the centre and worked outwards. Things started going wrong when I noticed what streaks had happened on the horn, which distracted me from the bigger disaster happening beside the bridge... Less than a minute later in the 28C warmth and 40% RH it was all too late and the Polly had begun to set with all the colour in the new displaced locations....
Yeah fair enough - just did it for fun. Tele looks interesting, definitely more in line with the denim theme.
That Tele !!!!! Ughhhhh!
It was supposed to be a stained deep Blue. Sanding sealer on the Alder body put an end to that. Friends suggested it had a denim look so I went with that as the photo's show, but I wasn't happy... looks half arsed cheap and shoddy. Going with a real (soft to touch) light coloured denim veneer front and back with double Pearl binding and guard, reversed control plate, a rails bridge PU and a slim skunk stripe Kmise neck with Rosewood fretboard.
Had a quick play with my dyes and some Minwax Polly... Even though I didn't use the right wood as a base the result looks promising...
Right side is the water based dye with a coating of clear Minwax polly over the top as is usual practice.
Centre is some Minwax polly with the dye mixed in. Basicaly is one application of the coloured Minwax, plus a little rubbing around the sides to see what happens.
Ignore the Left side as it is an different test for a different project.
The rag better represents the real colour of the coloured Minwax.
good one Marcel, so are you going to try this method on the veneer ?
I'll do some more experimenting first, but that is the intention Wokka.
What drying time have you allowed for the dye before applying the water-based MinWax? I've only ever used the old-based MinWax Poly, so I'm interested. I've got a bottle of the water-based stashed somewhere.
Plenty WB...
On the test piece the Right hand side was done almost a week ago, and upon close inspection you can see that the water based Minwax re-animated the dye and took some of it off. The Right side test piece was wiped even by going Left to Right, and it can be seen that it goes from lighter to darker on that test.
I deliberately did a little extra over the clean wood just to show the Minwax alone...
The middle test was done this morning.
On a couple of builds where water based inks were used I actually brushed on the 1st & 2nd coats of finish (Tru Oil) as I was afraid a wipe on rag method would drag the stain all over the place which is what may have occurred in this instance.
The colour on test sample rag looked pretty close to what you have on the body and in theory it should help to cover over some of the lighter patches.
That's more like it.!!!
80% of the way there.... a little more sanding to go to even things up a little better ....
Looks like you have sanded off a lot of colour or is that just how the photos came out?
That's correct Waz...
Sanded until the Maple is just starting to break the surface. It is losing the burst effect but the contrast of rawish Maple against the dyed Maple is really making the flame pop and I like it.
The Poly in the Maple is making it very slow going so I have little fear of sanding right through to the Mahogany underneath...
Looking now at the photos on the computer screen I'm starting to have thoughts of dying the exposed Maple a different colour such as Yellow or Red.... Maybe I should have a few more beers to quell my excitement...lol
The photo doesn't do it justice...
I hit it with some Red stain knowing full well I'd get a Pink..... but Pink and Purple do go well together...
Just hoping the guard and hardware hide, disguise or distract from most of the blemishes...
Interesting effect. Would tend to think a diluted wash of the original stain would help pull it all together.
As I said earlier Waz, the photo is misleading...
In full daylight it doesn't look so dark. And with a wash of the original colour, even a light one, the flame of the Maple would disappear into a deepest of Purpleness. The Pink at least gives the flame something to contrast against. It is just sad that the flame isn't more even across the entire body. Before I had patches of nil flame with patches of Purple dye, now I just have patches of nil flame (which the photo does highlight).... No it isn't sand through...
There are a few spots of what looks like Blue/Purple which is where the original dye soaked into the Maple really well and were impossible to sand out without high risk of sanding through, so I decided I'd live with them. Most will be covered by the guard or the bridge, but some of the smaller ones will be visible which I suspect will bring a little dynamic character to the overall look. In some ways the nil flame patches could be mistaken for some kind of wear marks ...
That veneer issue is really annoying. I went for Basswood but that isn't brilliant. A few QC problems and areas I wasn't able to sand out due to depth and binding
Nail on the head Stuzl...
Where I have flame it is a real nice flame ... Sad that 1/. the veneer joint is not on the centre line, and 2/. the flame isn't bookmatched very well...
Such is the life of kit guitars.
I suppose if I wanted I could replace the veneer with one of my own from http://www.veneersupplies.com/catego...neer__H__-__M/
While I was waiting for one of the coats of Poly to dry enough to apply another coat I thought I'd have a crack at wiring up the guard.... and was met with almost instant confusion....
The PBG wiring diagram specifies four 500k pots and two unspecified supplied caps.... What I have out of the supplied blister pack is three 250k pots, one 500k pot and two caps marked 683 (which is 68nF, or 0.068uF).
I can sorta make sense of it all, and can wire it up with what I have and have something that works no problem... but I see this as a chance to make some effective useful changes... so for all you Ricci owners that know their electronics, what are the values in your Ricci?
I'm presuming 500k on the humbucker volume and 250k on the JB volume and tone with a 0.022uF or 0.047uF cap, but what cap and pot should there be on the RC humbucker tone? 500k with 0.068uF cap?
Rickenbacker kindly provide their wiring schematics for you. http://www.rickenbacker.com/service_g_schematics.asp
As you don't have two output jacks, the one marked as 'For models 4001S, 4001C64, 4001C64S' is most appropriate. Note that on later 4003s, capacitor C3 can be bypassed by a switch, so it's up to you whether you fit it or not. http://www.rickenbacker.com/pdfs/19507.pdf
Note that Rick use 330k pots throughout, which explains their generally bright tone.
It's certainly a different way of wiring up the pickups to 'standard', and you'd need a Switchcraft style 3-way switch to do it. It's derived from the stereo models, which is why the treble and bass circuits are kept separate until the last minute.
If you want to do something similar with your kit, I'd be tempted to use higher value than normal pots, 330k on volume and tone for the J-bass pup and maybe 1M for the neck humbucker on volume and tone, though 500k would probably be sufficient if you don't want too bright a neck pickup (though it can be tamed with the tone control. Also note how the tone controls are wired as potential dividers, not as variable resistors as on a standard tone circuit.
Best to ignore traditional Riccy setup as the kits come with HB in neck position and single coil at bridge which would suggest 500k pot is for neck PUP volume control. Try one of each cap and swap them around until you get a sound you like. It only makes a difference if you actually use a tone control. I mostly have mine flat out on 10 or rolled off slightly and prefer to select between PUP's for different tone selection. Not a fan of muddy bass tones and prefer a bit of bright clarity so that individual notes played can be heard rather than felt as a rumble.