Official Luthiers Forum!
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Neck Thick(thin??)ness
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=14656		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  crazytooguy [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:44 am ]
Post subject: 

Hello all. I finished the neck carve on my latest and looking at it, I think I went too thin. Depth at the 1st fret is 0.760" and at the tenth fret it's 0.870". I was going for a V-shaped contour, but it just looks too thin to me. I'm hoping strength won't be an issue - the center strip is 1/4" wide cocobolo, but it's routed 3/8" deep for the truss rod, which is a two way from Allied. Fingerboard is Macassar ebony. Main neck wood is curly mahogany. Did I go too far?? Thanks!



 


Here's the back view:
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:49 am ]
Post subject: 
Does your measurement include the fretboard?

No truss rod peeking through the backside?

Author:  old man [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:56 am ]
Post subject: 
Looks perfect to me. I shoot for 3/4 at the first and 7/8 at the 12th. Pretty much the same.

Of course, I'm short on experience.

Ron
Author:  Blanchard [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 6:28 am ]
Post subject: 
That seems thin to me....

I usually go with .840 - .850  at the first fret and .920 - .940 at the 9th fret on a 14 frets to the body neck. The shape is somewhat parabolic in cross section.

The actual shape is more meaningful than the thickness. I have seem thin necks that feel chunky and thick necks that felt quite slim and comfortable. The shape in the area where the neck shaft meets the fingerboard is critical.

Mark

Author:  crazytooguy [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 6:33 am ]
Post subject: 
Bruce: Yes and no. Fingerboard is on the thick side, as is my preference. The
truss rod is at least 1/8" from the surface of the back of the neck, so I have
some leeway there.

Old guy: Thanks. I was wondering if the proportion of the neck was off
compared to the body, which is a small jumbo size (16" lower bout width).

I would hate to scrap this neck, as the fingerboard inlay is pretty extensive
(too extensive, really). I would probably wreck the inlay trying to remove the
fingerboard.

OK, time to whip up some epoxy and pore fill. Thanks guys!
Author:  Pwoolson [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 6:34 am ]
Post subject: 
I agree with Mark, it looks a little thin. I shoot for about .020 under the numbers Mark posted but those are still much thicker than your numbers.
As a heads up, have you dry-fit your tuners yet? I think your high e is going to run into the valute and cause you problems. (Maybe the low E too for that matter.)
Author:  crazytooguy [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 6:39 am ]
Post subject: 
Mark - our posts crossed. Quick question: you say the shape at the
fingerboard edge is crucial and I agree. What's your preference? I'm afraid I
ended up with a bit of a "sharp" edge there. I roll off the edge of my
fingerboards, but the neck is a pronounced V-shape and I think I may have
removed too much at the neck-fingerboard junction. Your thicknesses
sound more like typical ones - I just hope I don't discover that this neck is
too thin. It'll be my personal guitar, so at least no one is buying it and
might end up with a nasty surprise. I would remake the neck in that case.
Author:  crazytooguy [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 6:42 am ]
Post subject: 
Paul - Yep, I think I goofed with the tuner holes, too. Too much shaping on
the volute. And to add to it all, I shattered a bird's eye maple neck blank on
the shaper yesterday. Maybe I need to take a break from building for
awhile...
Author:  Rod True [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 6:43 am ]
Post subject: 
Paul, 0.020" under???? I'm guessing you meen 0.002" under otherwise you'd be on the very thin side of things.

I'm in the same camp as Paul and Mark, I like my necks to be 0.080"-0.083" at the nut and taper about 0.010 to the 7th fret.
Author:  GregG [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Seems that Paul's numbers are correct, I think he's stating that his neck thickness at the nut would be .820-.830 which is where I usually end up.

Greg
Author:  TommyC [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:56 am ]
Post subject: 
Hey Pat. Seems a little thin but should be ok. The next one will be better. I
made the same goof with tuner holes on an octave mandolin and had to
intall mini's upside down.
Author:  Blanchard [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 12:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
crazytooguy

The section of the neck just below the fingerboad is tricky. You want to get the wood off so that the neck doesn't feel chunky, but you also don't want to carve into the fingerboard so much that the edge ends up feeling sharp.

It is pretty hard to try to describe the shape in words....

Mark
Author:  crazytooguy [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 3:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
Tommy - I checked the tuner hole with the Gotoh 510 tuner I'll be installing,
and I just made it without overlap. Whew!

Mark - Thanks for that. The transition feels OK and once the fingerboard
edges are rolled some as is my habit, it should feel pretty good. It is a thin
neck, but it sinks into my hand very nicely, so if it doesn't distort too much
under string tension, it should be OK. Left hand feel is really important in
my book, and that feel is a big part of a guitar's playability to me. I just hope
the truss rod can keep the neck stable. I built this one for light gauge
strings, so it shouldn't be too bad. We'll see!
Author:  LuthierSupplier [ Sat Nov 24, 2007 3:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
Actually, Kevin Ryan's guitar is .76 under the 1st fret and .903 under the 10th fret. So I think you are okay. I also think my santa cruz was .76. It felt just fine.

Not sure you know this, but I do have this neck template of Kevin's for sale here
Good luck!
Tracy
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/