Whoa! So many responses. It's all good everyone, no need for anyone to be upset, this is a new thing, we are just spitballing here. If we were all in the same room, I'm sure it'd be beers and glasses clinking all around.
Alright, so we definitely have enough suggestions for our first challenge, and I think maybe even a challenge or two to come after. The comment isn't here anymore, but FightingPlankton got the right idea, and it looks like plenty of you also understand the concept. We can do this!
KeithJ wrote:I think original body/headstock/fretboard markers would be good. Original tailpiece is a good way to prevent every entry from having a Mastery on it. Personally, I don't think we should specify pickups. If someone wants to do a single p90 or 3 PAFs, or their own weird free-form designed pickups, so be it. I feel the same about the tuner configuration as well. 4x2, 3x3, 6 in line, do what suits you. That's my vote.
I think the thing to keep in mind is that we are not limited to just one challenge. So while one challenge might specify "must have original tailpiece" another challenge can say "must have Mastery vibrato." And "this challenge must have a 4+2 headstock" but another challenge can say "headstock is designer's choice." The basic concept is that we impose specific limits on the designers forcing them to work within those parameters, but it then becomes the designer's prerogative to show us what they can do. Think of it like exercising a muscle.
countertext wrote:Oooh, how about more or less than six strings?
No reason why we can't have challenges with string count specifics, fanned frets, etc.
Grey wrote:Maybe i've got this wrong but it seems like Stereordinary wanted a set of general guidelines for people to follow, and then they'd submit their own designs. So things like fret markers would be up to the individual builder. I don't think this is a "throw out ideas and Stereordinary builds the popular ones" type of deal.
That's correct. I'm inspired to do this because I genuinely enjoy designing new guitars, and sometimes I need inspiration. I want to get myself out of my comfort zone and do things that I might not have thought of myself. My hope is that there are others out there who also find joy in the process itself.
vandahm wrote:I propose that it should be possible to actually build the design without owning a guitar factory. So, if your design calls for a custom tremolo system or really weird electronics, you'd need to consider how to source the parts or build them from scratch with equipment and materials that small builders typically have in their shops.
Not a bad suggestion for a challenge, but I would say this is one of those things that dougk's $400 challenge largely addressed already. With no commitment to actually build anything my hope is that people will let their imaginations run wild and not worry so much about whether or not the design is actually a feasible product. If a designer wants to personally impose those limits on themselves, that's totally fine. But for the most part I want to see designers eschewing financial limitations.
)
