Creating the Headstock

[Max Taylor]

I have been playing with a slightly different headstock concept that I have not seen anyone do before, hence this thread. I have the “Books” and have built Classicals before but always thought that trying to deal with cutting the headstock shape and slots and tuner holes after the 15° angle has been cut and glued up to the neck was a pain.

That said, is there any reason why the traditional method of cutting the neck blank at a 15° angle to create the headstock then rotating it 180° and fitting it to the bottom of the neck blank is the only valid way to do this.

Instead of gluing the headstock to the bottom of the neck blank place it on the top of the neck instead where it will end up sandwiched between the neck and the fretboard to create a very strong joint.

The advantage, in my tinkering with this idea, is that the headstock can be shaped, drilled and any cutouts can be made before the headstock is actually glued to the neck itself. This has allowed me to work with one short ~250mm +/- piece that is perfectly flat instead of having to deal with a neck and headstock glued to a 15° angle, an awkward piece at best.

I had to work out the exact placement for the nut in so doing this experiment (using some scrap pine for testing the concept) and so far really like the ease of being able to do all headstock hole drilling, cutouts and shaping while working with a much smaller straight and more manageable piece of stock. Once the drilling, slotting and shaping is done and the headstock is glued to the neck then the rest of the neck to body pieces can be exactly located (12th or 14th fret neck) and glued to the neck and construction continues as usual.

I see the actual joint as being much stronger because it is sandwiched between the neck and fretboard and one could easily add a couple of short dowels inside of the glue line to strengthen the joint of the order of using “biscuits” to join flat boards.

I will see if I can post an image of the design concept if the above description is insufficient.

Can anyone see any negatives to this approach that I might be overlooking? If so please let me know.

—Max

[jeffhigh]

I'm sorry to tell you Max, but this is a fairly common variation.
I have a 1963 Framus here ATM awaiting collection after I repaired a broken joint in this location.
Its not a hard repair in this case because I was able to use hot hide glue as per original.
You also see it in a lot of Asian factory guitars.
I don't think it is stronger, but it is acceptable, and not really improved with dowels etc

[demonx]

I've been doing it like that for years.

I have built well over a hundred guitars this way since I swapped from doing a different style scarf and before that I was doing only one piece neck/headstocks.

Never had an issue.

2:17 mark you'll see a pic and a 2:25 the join

http://youtu.be/nCFoT68IdJs

[demonx]

You also see it in a lot of Asian factory guitars.
I don't think it is stronger, but it is acceptable, and not really improved with dowels etc

The style on a Asian guitars is a bit different to how I do this, you can tell by where the join meets the fingerboard.

I personally believe it has to be stronger as the headstock is wedged between a angular cut on the neck and the fingerboard with two different directions of glue surface, as opposed to a traditional scarf where both glue surfaces are pulled in the same direction and no wedge.

So my style is basically wedge/glued in there as opposed to just glued onto a surface

[demonx]

Whoops

[demonx]

Whoops

[jeffhigh]

Well this one broke, but who knows why.
I think every joint has the potential for failure if it is abused enough or poorly glued.
Can't say that I see many failures in headstock location scarfs

[demonx]

Every headstock I've ever had to repair was one piece as the grain is at a very weak point like that without a scarf.

Not failing to mention the bulk of them have been those stupid reverse bolt locking nuts that take the weakest point of a guitar and make it even weaker!

[jeffhigh]

Yep them or Gibsons with the huge truss rod nut pocket and 17 degree angle.

[kiwigeo]

My tale on this one....with the traditional scarf joint the headstock top veneers cover the joint and serve as reinforcement for same. A back strap veneer provides even more support for the joint.

I've never had major issues shaping the headstock after doing the traditional scarf joint..I use a pattern following router cutter with a bottom bearing that follows template on top of the headstock. I also think the joint is easier hidden by veneers and tuners (on a classical) with the traditional method.

Some say there is slightly more gluing surface area with the traditional method but I haven't yet sat down and done the trig to verify this one.

[simso]

http://youtu.be/nCFoT68IdJs

Your acoustic building is a nice blend of cnc and looferie, looking good mate

Steve

[kiwigeo]

I had to work out the exact placement for the nut in so doing this experiment (using some scrap pine for testing the concept) and so far really like the ease of being able to do all headstock hole drilling, cutouts and shaping while working with a much smaller straight and more manageable piece of stock. Once the drilling, slotting and shaping is done and the headstock is glued to the neck then the rest of the neck to body pieces can be exactly located (12th or 14th fret neck) and glued to the neck and construction continues as usual.

I glue up the headstock and then thin the headstock to target thickness...this establishes the exact location of the nut. I then measure back from the nut position to the heel block end of the neck shaft and mark out the tenon etc. I really don't have any difficulty shaping and cutting the headstock with the neck shaft attached....the neck shaft in fact provides a handy "handle" when working the headstock over the router table.

[demonx]

My tale on this one....with the traditional scarf joint the headstock top veneers cover the joint and serve as reinforcement for same. A back strap veneer provides even more support for the joint.

The majority of electric guitars have neither top or bottom plates.

[demonx]

http://youtu.be/nCFoT68IdJs

Your acoustic building is a nice blend of cnc and looferie, looking good mate

Steve

Thanks, I've got another acoustic I started at the old workshop that I really should get stuck back into, but my priority at this stage is getting my current 2016 orders knocked on the head this side of Xmas. Eleven of them I only started two weeks ago, so it's a mad rush!

[simso]

Yep, this time of the year is just nuts.

Steve

[kiwigeo]

My tale on this one....with the traditional scarf joint the headstock top veneers cover the joint and serve as reinforcement for same. A back strap veneer provides even more support for the joint.

The majority of electric guitars have neither top or bottom plates.

Max mentions cutting slots so I assume he's talking about classical headstocks. Max's main driver for wanting to do a "non traditional" neck/headstock joint is the difficulty of shaping and cutting slots in the headstock once it's attached to the neck shaft. As already posted Ive never had any big issues with this.

[Max Taylor]

Many thanks to all who took the time to chime in here with their thoughts and suggestions. Being on the other side of the planet I posted and went to bed so was surprised to find all the replies today. I did watch the video link posted by Searls. Great builds and great examples.

Thanks to “Martin” for his example too.

And yes, this is in regards to a “Classical” guitar design.

It fully appears that there is really no “Right Way” or “Wrong Way” to mount the headstock and no, I had not actually seen any prior evidence of mounting the headstock on top of the neck blank, hence my original question, but it appears that this is not an uncommon practice overall.

My headstock design requires the use of a scroll saw as it has an intricate pattern design and would be almost impossible to cut out with the neck portion attached. That is why I was looking for feedback and again thanks to all who posted replies as they answered any questions I might have had. Thanks again to all.

—Max