FIRST INSTALLMENT--1968 335 RESTORATION

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:49 pm

After the Forstner bits, templates were made and an Over Arm Pin Router was used to route all cavities, never saw a hand held jig saw in the wood shop except for cutting out some of the plastic marking templates for peg heads and such.

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:44 am

Lefty cavities on basses were still cut by Forstner bits into the early 70's at least....

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 7:23 am

Perhaps these extreme closeups of the control cavity hole's edges will illustrate my conclusion re: jigsaw vs. pin router. A couple of the photos could be of a routed edge, if the piece possibly "got away" from the operator. (Damned dangerous machine, as you know!) But they could just as well be jigsaw marks. Other areas of the edge (296, 297, 301) do not look like they ever saw a router bit--they are just too rough and in one area (296) even splintered cross-grain. Hence my conclusion.

Like you, Dale, I've used both tools for a long time. Perhaps you could review these photos and tell us what you think?

It's possible that somebody did this later, although why I can't imagine.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00295.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00296.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00297.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00298.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00299.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00300.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00301.jpg

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 5:49 pm

Well from the pictures it looks to me as if someone has modified the control cavity. Perhaps with an elec. hand drill and an 1/8 inch bit, then filed and sanded the blurps half way smooth. I know the templates we used for all routing steps were made from heavy guage steel. They were machined by Eddie(can't remember his last name) they were very precise and when the control cavities were routed they came out very clean. The only exception was the hand drilled(drill press) area for the wire from the neck pick up to the control cavity on the 4001 Bass. This was something I did along with drilling the jack holes
right before they went to Mike Allen for 100/150 grit stroke sanding. Paul I've seen alot of things done to Rickenbackers that are unusual and weird. I have a 1967 325 in my shop right now under going full restoration. It was originally a beautiful Fireglo, then someone got over zealous with a drill and a wood chisel and put Gibson HB's
on it and used a 1/4 inch drill to enlarge to control cavity. The guitar was stripped at one time (just the top) to bare wood and at least 10 coats of Black lacquer was sprayed on the bare wood and the rest of the guitar. A lot of work is being put into this to bring in back to life. It has to be refinished in Jetglo because of the black that has penetrated the grain of the Maple.
So I hope this has shed some light on this subject

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:12 am

This makes sense. My conclusion that this was factory work was probably hasty. Since David didn't send my the actual pickguards (they're on their way), I couldn't ascertain if somebody had been messing about. With regard to the body, black paint covered everything.

Re: paint in grain. There is substantial gray primer in the grain on David's guitar. But it is coming out with chemical remover fowwloed by an alcohol wash. Black would be a different story, as you describe!

Thanks again for your experience and insights! It's good to have somebody who was on the inside back in the days...

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:33 pm

Paul, have you tried Acetone as a wash? This is one of my faves except for the volatile fumes. Much care has to be taken when doing this. Acetone seems to dissolve everything from brain cells to road tar. As for those odd cutting marks on the tone cavity, it could have been a dull router bit. When they lose their sharpness they tend to tear and even burn their way thru the Maple. Just a thought.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:00 pm

This week's installment in the '68 335 saga brings us to the removal of the original frets. These had been trued up at least once before, but probably two or even three times would be a closer guess. The guitar apparently sounded OK (David said nothing about it playing badly) but I'd have to say that unplugged it probably buzzed quite a bit. Most of the frets below the 12th had been substantially flattened by someone previously truing them up with a file rather aggresively, leading to frets that were flat on the two ends but rounded in the center (G and D string area) of the fingerboard. In addition, the usual heavy wear that one sees in the first position open chord areas was present, with serious grooving on the first four frets and highest four strings.

The first photo shows me gingerly loosening a fret with a small pair of end nippers that are ground very carefully to an almost knife edge. These grab well, and, when carefully rocked, will bite easily and lift the fret from its nesting spot for the last 38 years. The first fret is the "gauge" of difficulty for me. I treat it very, very sensitively and if it feels like it will be a difficult separation, I'll often use a soldering iron which has a notch filed in the tip (so it sits evenly over the fret) to heat the fret. This will expand it just enough to break the age/sweat/corrosion bond between the fret tangs and the wood.

Rickenbackers are, for the most part, easier than many because of the varnished fingerboards, which usually prevents the corrosive elements of sweat and dirt from seeping under the frets into the tang slots. Still, easy does it.

The second photo shows the fretboard with a section of frets already pulled, ready for checking the radius and sanding. When we do sand the fretboard, the body will be clamped to a granite surface plate, the neck will be set up absolutely straight (no bow or relief), and the headstock clamped to the stone plate as well.

The next photo shows the position markers, which are not pearl but rather white celluloid, and which will be replaced with new ones and sanded flush, prior to applying the varnish.

Next is the guitar laid out showing the original frets and the new fretwire (in front, long lengths).

The joint between the bakelite nut and the neck/fretboard was scored with a razor knife to minimize chipping, and a gentle tap knocked it loose.

I then discovered that it had been raised by gluing it to a strip of card stock (white strip) sometime in the past. This bodge couldn't have been very good for sustain! A new nut will be made to bring the strings up to proper height again when I do the preliminary setup after the refinishing.

Last picture shows an extreme closeup of the 14-16th fret area, so it can be seen prior to any sanding operations. You will notice very minor chipping of the fretboard, which is normal when original frets are pulled and which will be covered when the new frets are pressed into place.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00307.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00326.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00325.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00328.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00323.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v693/jingle_jangle/DSC00305.jpg

jwilli · Post by **jwilli** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:12 pm

Paul, very cool. Keep em coming.

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:40 pm

Looking good Paul. Nice job. A trick that most luthiers use for pulling frets that works great especially on frets that have been glued down with epoxy or instant glue, place the tip of your soldering iron on the fret before using your end nippers to lift it out. This will let you lift it out without taking any of the fret board with the tang.

joepee · Post by **joepee** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 6:12 pm

Paul,

From an ignor-Ric person, I was curious how you got the dot inlays out of their holes????

I thought maybe it was the stripper(Kleen-stip?)which made them pop out. But then I kept thinking it could have also made other adhesive areas come lose. Thus, it would have also made the fretboard adhesive let loose.

What a learning environment. You guys never cease to amaze me. Now... teach me something.

Thanks

porge · Post by **porge** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 6:24 pm

Same experience here - particularly good on rosewood boards

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:05 pm

Thanks, Dale. I think I mentioned the soldering iron trick in the second paragraph above, although only in context of corrosion and dirt. I'll bet I wouldn't have to forgotten to mention it for glue-in frets if they HAD been glued in on this one!

Joe, as Dale has mentioned before in another thread, fretboards are glued to necks with Titebond (aliphatic resin) glue. This is a water-soluble glue that is yellow in color, and much stronger that white glue. Additionally, it can be softened by judicious application of heat. Luthiers use a rubberized heating "blanket" with a temperature control to locally apply just enough heat to soften the glue. Then the parts are carefully pressed, tapped, wedged or otherwise forced apart.

The only way the fretboard would have separated with application of chemical stripper would be if it had already been cracked away from the neck (by warpage or overtightening of the truss rod, for instance). This cracking would have possibly allowed the chemicals to seep in and widen the crack, but would not have caused total separation.

This type of fretboard separation would have shown up in the initial observation and evaluation of the guitar before work was started, as a crack in the finish at the joint. Any such cracks would have resulted in checking the neck for warpage, and if it was salvageable, by separating the neck and fretboard and regluing before proceeding with stripping or removing the frets.

The dot markers on these guitars are celluloid (plastic), not a natural shell material like MOP or abalone. Celluloid is very susceptible to all chemical strippers, softening and, when it dries out again, shrinking enough to separate from the fretboard. In this case, we knew we would be replacing the dots as part of the neck refin job, so no big deal.

Had these been crushed pearl triangles, a different strategy entirely would have been used, with no chemicals being permitted near the fretboard, and the varnish would have been removed after removing the frets, using abrasives only. Removing the frets in this case would have necessitated scoring the varnish with an X-Acto knife on either side of the fret first. The varnish on the fret sides then peels loose, which allows the fret-pulling pliers to grasp the fret itself.

Back to the topic of celluloid: In the case of celluloid binding, which is under tension and develops microscopic cracks when it is bent around the guitar to bind it, stripper could have caused it to soften, leading to it cracking and falling away. I tape off the binding on bound guitars with 3M blue masking tape, strip the majority of the guitar, then peel the tape and strip the area around the binding with abrasives only.

In the case of Gretsch guitars, peeling and missing binding is quite common if the guitar is 20 years old or more. It seems the combination of the celluloid and the nitrocellulose lacquer--which becomes quite unstable and porous with age--and environmental conditions like UV light and ozone in the atmosphere, expansion and contraction, will cause the binding to crack severely and fall away from the guitar.

It then becomes a real issue whether to rebind the whole guitar or piece it in. The current consensus (driven by collectors who prefer originality to superior appearance and restoring the integrity of the instrument) is to piece it in on the more valuable examples.

Rebinding the entire instrument is preferable IMO from both an appearance and longevity standpoint, but, hey, collectors rule the collectors' market, right?

porge · Post by **porge** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:37 pm

"In the case of Gretsch guitars, peeling and missing binding is quite common if the guitar is 20 years old or more."

As a side note, Gretsch and Guild must have used similar suppliers or "recipes" for their binding material. As a Guild fan, you see a lot of binding repairs having happened, and the "decay" to the binding is identical. With some models, it is the "norm" to have a neck binding job done.

bill_yantz · Post by **bill_yantz** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:01 am

Paul, I have a question that is slightly off the subject but seeing that you are on the fretboard right now it might be an appropriate time to ask. Is the fretboard radius on this guitar the same as on a modern version? I truly would like to know if the 60s fretboards had more radius than the modern versions. The modern ones seem flatter to me. Thanks much for your observation regarding this.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:18 am

Very nice work Paul. We are all grateful that you have decided to stick your neck out with these latest photos.