Shortscale Snakehead

After a few weeks home maintenance at the insistence of she who must be obeyed, i have started collecting parts for my next project, a 24.75" scale Snakehead Telecaster. I have acquired a square edged Tele body and paddle headstock neck plus have an array of parts purchased in bulk from a pal who has given up building stuff.
This is in some ways the antithesis of the SGT built recently as I am using an angled back headstock on a Tele body. I really like Telecasters and the simple wiring and layout. Making subtle changes is interesting and makes for unique instruments. Obviously the bridge assembly will be moving toward the neck which kind of messes up the pre routed pickup holes but that is where the fun of creating :rolleyes: (bodging) comes in. I intend to replicate my 6mm brass, bolted through "resoplate" as string anchor for the through body strings as it gives the lightweight bodies that I seem to buy, some serious density and weight. Together with a brass nut I am hoping for good sustain and open tuned flexibility. I have some hot rail knock-off pickups and will go with those initially, but all things may change, that is what I really enjoy about this guitar building thing.
I will mock up soon and post some pics

I've roughly shaped the headstock now and mocked up for pictures. I have just about all the hardware, although I may get an alternative bridge plate to avoid some cutting. I realise that the original Snakehead was a single pick up instrument and that may be a project for the future as have another two necks left, one in 24.75 and one in 25.5 scale, perhaps a scratch build body for that in the future. This one, however, is for a friend who wants a compact, lightweight, flexible guitar. Looking at it in mock up, I think I have the compact and lightweight sorted, I hope as it progresses, the flexible will work out too. I also have a P90 which is another possibility. Plan at this time is for an oiled neck and satin black body, maybe a red scratchplate, but all that may change over time. (still making it up as I go!)
snakehead1 (1).JPG (130.0 KB)
snakehead1 (2).JPG (74.0 KB)
snakehead1 (4).JPG (167.1 KB)
snakehead1 (6).JPG (143.7 KB)

That will look pretty cool. Look forward to seeing it progress.

Have you checked the bridge position is OK ? With a 24.75" scale neck, you're missing 0.75" of overall scale length. The distance from the bridge to the neck pocket end is roughly 1/3 of the overall scale, so the bridge will need to move towards the neck pocket by approx. 0.25"/6.3mm compared to normal. One option is to use longer adjustment screws, though this makes the bridge pickup that much closer to the saddles, making it brighter and loosing some bass.

Or you could enlarge the bridge pickup rout and move the whole bridge nearer, and also enlarge the pickguard cut-out to suit. If the body is already drilled for string-through holes, then those would need to be plugged and re-drilled.

Out of sheer curiosity I roughly tried to work out where the bridge goes...
At the yellow line?

Attachment 36721

cheers, Mark.

About there, I reckon, though camera lens distortion may not mean it's that accurate. But certainly more forward of where they currently are.

Yes sorry guys when I mocked up I put the bridge plate roughly in it’s normal position, it will move toward the neck and I will cut into the scratchplate and re-rout for the bridge pick up. Alternatively, I have a shorter strat type bridge which may work as long as it can be mounted partially over the original pickup rout. I am also thinking that as it will be painted. I can fill the original rout so as to get a solid mount.

You can indeed. Just wanted to make sure you were aware of the issue. Better safe than sorry.

Appreciate your input, I am still learning and the old adage measure twice and cut once really is appropriate. For what it’s worth, I have marked a line at 12 3/8” from the centre of the 12th fret wire (equidistant from the nut) and this will be my datum position for the high E saddle point with about 1/8” of forward movement left, that should give me enough rearward movement on the other saddles for intonation adjustments
All advice always gratefully received

I've been out of the picture for a while due to some storage requirements completely filling my garage/workshop and due to a complete redecorate, have been forbidden from making mess in the house.
Anyway, I have now fitted in mock up the shortscale for testing prior to paint and additionally have started a 25.5 scale snakehead to complete in parallel. The shortscale has had my 6mm brass block string retainer fitted, the longer is yet to be made but will be similar (its sort of become my trademark feature and definitely helps with sustain) The pictures show the respective scale lengths and different bridge positions. With the 25.5 I have opted for a single Wilkinson M series pick-up, the 24.75 has Chinese humbuckers.
The observant among you will notice that the tuners on the longer neck are the wrong way round, this is because if fitted the right way the the tuning knobs would be completely proportionally out of place on this headstock, which is overall very long and longer from the nut to the nearest tuner than I wanted. This was a 'paddle' neck and probably not really suited to the snakehead shape but I think I have got it looking about balanced and I will either wind the strings on backwards or simply turn the other way to tune. Probably upset the purists though!
The shortscale is, at the moment going to be a glossy light grey and the longscale will be black, I have been practising my rattle can technique by spraying bits of the wife's car.
I am still working with stuff that I have accumulated or had donated so keeping the costs down and still making it up as I go
snakeheads (1).JPG (283.7 KB)
snakeheads (4).JPG (170.4 KB)
snakeheads (5).JPG (78.8 KB)snakeheads (6).JPG (81.9 KB) snakeheads (8).JPG (81.2 KB)

The reason that tuners go on with the tuning key away from the nut is because the string tension then pulls the gear at the end of the tuning post against the gear on the tuning key spindle and keeps everything as tight as it can be. Fitting the tuners in the reverse manner and the tension pulls the gears apart.

New tuners will feel and work fine, but as they age and wear, the tuners will become sloppier and far less precise, with more backlash. And the fact that the gears are loose will allow more vibration, which in turn will provoke more wear.

So you might want to think about turning them round if you think the guitar’s a keeper.

Nice work on the two guitars though.

Well I've just strung the shortscale mock up with some 10-46 Ernie Balls and it took me all of 10 minutes to set up the action and intonation, it was so easy! Maybe one of you could tell me why? Perhaps its the 24.75 scale? Maybe I just got lucky!
I wish now that I had put all the electrics together as it is really a sweet player and that's before any attention to the frets or fret board, its rough on the back, as dry as a bone with sharp edges and still feels good.
I shall do my usual regime of leaving it strung for a week or so before taking it down to finish it.
That will give me a little time to get the 25.5 scale moved along a bit
snakeheads(9).JPG (116.0 KB)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simon Barden

The reason that tuners go on with the tuning key away from the nut is because the string tension then pulls the gear at the end of the tuning post against the gear on the tuning key spindle and keeps everything as tight as it can be. Fitting the tuners in the reverse manner and the tension pulls the gears apart.

New tuners will feel and work fine, but as they age and wear, the tuners will become sloppier and far less precise, with more backlash. And the fact that the gears are loose will allow more vibration, which in turn will provoke more wear.

So you might want to think about turning them round if you think the guitar’s a keeper.

Nice work on the two guitars though.

---

Thanks Simon
I guess a rethink is needed based upon your reply. Still a way to go on that one so I will give it some serious thought, Always a learning experience on this site I now understand why there are left and right handed tuners, it all makes sense really!!

I only sussed this out fully a couple of days ago after reading a book, though I knew it wasn't a good idea before then.

So, following Simons advice (for all the right reasons) I have now reversed to normal the tuners.
Oddly, what looked right before now looks wrong and although the distance from the nut to the two E tuners is long, the head stock itself looks proportionally OK, I think!?!
before and after snakeheads (8).JPG (81.2 KB) snakehead (2).JPG (80.2 KB)
The distance from the nut to the axle of the tuner is a half inch longer on this guitar than the shortscale. Not much in the great scheme of things but maybe seeing them together it just looks so much more. Perhaps if I had searched for a neck that splayed for the headstock earlier, I would have been happier. But needs must and I can live with it! There's always next time!

The headstock looks better to me already. It is a bit of a distance to the nut from the first tuners. Any plans to fit string trees or even a full string bar?

A string bar may be the best option and also it will fill the gap cosmetically. When I get the string anchor block and the neck plate fitted I will mock up, string up and check the angles. Measuring against a standard telecaster headstock, the E strings are level with a standard A and the D and G level with a standard B, with the A and B between the standard D and G.
So I may get away without trees or bar.
Thanks again for the advice and your interest

Edit. I understand the 'scale length', but cannot quite grasp the 'musical length' which includes nut to peg and bridge to anchor (I believe) Do these extra lengths of string (which can be variable dependant on the type and size of the instrument) have any bearing on the sound, tone, playability or accuracy of tuning?

So, I made the rest of the brass hardware for the 25.5 scale Snakehead and have now test strung ( with Fender 9 - 42's) as has become my protocol prior to any finishing/wiring. The set-up took a little longer on this one after I found that the pre routed bridge pick up hole was about an eighth of an inch or so too far from the neck. For some inexplicable reason I ignored my own masking tape datum line (too much haste I guess) and now, although it is set up and has a nice action, I will, on final assembly, put some longer/stronger springs on the saddles to keep everything in check(the high E and B have no spring tension at all at this moment). The ongoing plan is for a brass nut but even with the plastic one it has a nice ring to it and I think it will be very playable when the neck has had a little attention ( it has the tiniest bit of spoon to it but I will let it settle before winding up the truss rod). Following on from the discussion with Simon and looking at the string angles, although there does not seem to be a problem, I believe that a string bar will probably benefit this build for practical and cosmetic reasons.
snakehead 25 (2).JPG (162.1 KB)snakehead 25 (3).JPG (137.4 KB)snakehead 25 (4).JPG (73.2 KB)

There's a lot to like about this/these builds

Quote:

---

I believe that a string bar will probably benefit this build for practical and cosmetic reasons.

---

That's certainly your choice, but with a strat/tele type of nut, and presuming it's cut properly, the E A D strings shouldn't require a tree or bar even with that distance to the post.

And not to be critical, but your string winding technique (particularly the low E string) could use some improvement.
If you wind the strings so they are a series of single loops going from top to bottom (if that makes sense) it will provide enough break angle right off the nut.

On the low E, I only put 3 wraps on the post. One above the post hole and 2 below. I tend to go 4-5 wraps on my unwound strings, but same over/under method.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by McCreed

That's certainly your choice, but with a strat/tele type of nut, and presuming it's cut properly, the E A D strings shouldn't require a tree or bar even with that distance to the post.

---

Which is normally true as a blanket statement for a standard 6-in-line headstock but this is a 3+3, so the D and G strings have the lowest break angle and they will be the ones most likely to need a string tree or equivalent.

And you also need to remember that the tuner positions start further away from the nut than on a normal Tele or Strat, so you need to consider the actual distances involved. Going by relative lengths on the photos and comparing to a Tele neck, the two Es are about as far from the nut as the A tuner normally is, the A and B tuners are roughly just beyond the normal D tuner position and the D and G tuners about halfway in-between the normal G and B tuner positions.

So whilst the headstock looks very long, tuner-wise, it ends up about 4cm more compact than a normal Tele headstock. The nut to top of headstock depth also looks a few mm deeper than normal (it's typical for the tops of the tuners to be level with the top of a well-cut nut and these are certainly lower than that, though post heights can vary), so that will help with break angle, so you may well get away without needing any string trees. See how it plays and then decide. As a bar-type string retainer isn't inherently adjustable, you may find a standard one pulls the strings down too low, as you can have too great a string break angle, given that extra headstock to nut depth. Positioning one so it doesn't interfere with the truss rod access could also move a bar-type a long way back, which itself will look a bit odd.

I agree with McCreed on the E tuner windings. A standard string wind will also give better tuning stability. It doesn't matter if the two E break angles are a bit greater than the other strings. The extra distance to the nut will stop the break angle from being excessive.

Maybe consider adding a decal to fill in the gap visually?

Wrist slapping deserved and accepted guys! I must admit to not being too attentive on this test string up, I promise to do better!
It seems to hold tune ok at the moment and I think perhaps it is aesthetic more than necessary to look toward a string bar. I will hold on that for the moment. I agree that the step from the nut does seem somewhat deeper than usual, also the amount of wood beneath the nut and into the headstock seems thicker or maybe it’s an illusion created by the distance between the nut and nearest pegs. I suppose this neck could be aimed at a heavier string set up?

Some necks are just like that. I once had a 'bitza' Strat with that deep headstock profile. No particular requirement for heavier gauge string set-ups to have that sort of deeper headstock. Don't forget that when Teles and then Strats came out, there were no light gauge string sets, so the norm was probably 0.012"s. So designed for 'heavy' gauge strings from the start!

I wonder if anyone uses the heavier gauges? Certainly everyone I know seems to use 10-42 or lighter. Maybe worth an experiment as I often use open tuning DADGCD or EADGCE. The heavier strings may enhance the “ring” that appeals to me

I've been tempted to use 11s at times, especially when I've been playing regularly and my fingers then find bending the strings very easy. I do have one guitar set up in open G with 11s on, but it's really for rhythm playing. And of course, quite a few people tune down a whole semitone and use 11s to counter the lower string tension. Useful for doing Thin Lizzy tracks. SRV used to downtune a lot as well.

I use 11's on the Deluxster and also just strung up the ES build with them. They take a bit of getting used to, but I quite like them now. Much brighter and they don't clash on the frets nearly as much during enthusiastic strumming. I used to run 9's on everything, but in building and fiddling with a multitude of guitars I generally found better overall results from 10's. It depends a lot on playing style really but I can see advantages to using all those sizes, depending on that and the particular guitar.

I did a bit of finishing on the 25.5 scale snakehead. After priming, I covered with snakeskin vinyl wrap. It is unfortunately one of those good from far, far from good jobs. The vinyl, being textured, seems to have varying degrees of stickyness so i will get some vinyl adhesive and re-attach where it seems not to have stuck too well. It also does not seem too hardy and I wonder how it will stand up to normal use. If the worse happens I will strip it off and paint it black. Having said that, I quite like the look although I will probably change the tuners for black or at least black buttons. Wired up, the Wilkinson M series single coil is certainly potent enough (through the Pignose)

edit...
I would appreciate if you guys could peruse my single pick-up wiring, it works fine but just doing a bit of reading it looks very different to what is apparently recommended

The wiring will certainly work.

It is more normal to have the input and output wires on the volume pot the other way round, so the output is on the central (wiper) tab. Having it your way around alters the way the taper works slightly, so volume reduction may not be quite as smooth. It's the way you'd wire up the volume pot if you had two volume controls for two pickups, but no selector switch (e.g. on a lot of Jazz bases), so that you can turn one volume all the way down without also grounding the sound from the other pickup.

The tone pot is connected to the output, but with this wiring arrangement I don't know if this creates the same effect as on 'vintage' Gibson wiring, giving a more interactive tone pot so that it also alters the volume a bit when used, as well as keeping the signal treble level up when the volume control is turned down.

No right or wrong with this, just user preference.

Guitar looks great. I don't normally like that sort of finish but on this it looks good. I quite like the white buttons. Certainly easier to see against the black headstock if tuning up on a dark stage.

Thanks Simon, you just about nailed it with your description, with the tone midway it is a very Gibson like sound and 2 finger power chords sound pretty epic (I may have upset the neighbours a touch earlier as I cranked up the old AC30) who needs pedals? With the tone at full treble it screams, though at the other end at high volumes it is a touch muddy. At more sensible levels it is a usable round, warm tone. I am quite pleased overall as the wire up was more by luck than judgement! I would be interested if you have a diagram of what you would consider an optimum single pick-up loom as I hope to finish a couple of others for friends shortly

I've been laid up for a while, (not C19 thankfully, but a foot problem) so no building etc. Been sitting at home playing and practising scales etc. As a way back to this obsessive pastime, I decided to finish the shortscale in walnut wax, after some success with the tenor and wax. The wood is a bit uneven in shade and I may apply another coat in the future to darken and level the shades. The wiring fell together without problems and the only hiccup was the bridge humbucker was very low volume. After cursing the maker, supplier and myself, I realised that it was at its lowest possible position about half an inch away from the strings! Homer Simpson moment Doh! Pulling it up many turns on the set screws revealed a real screamer. Of all my builds, this Tele has always been the nicest to play when it was initially put together and rested, virtually no set up issues were encountered. I took the brass nut down a few thou and it is even better. So, happy with this one!