ANZLF Adjustable Neck Joint Group Discussion

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 1:30 pm

Thanks for that info Rick . If there is no wedged shape shim under the fretboard , how is the hieght of the neck above the guitar body decided ?

Looking at your previous posted pic ( below ) there looks to be a shim there , which lead me to think that's how you went about it. i.e. Doesn't look like a 1/4 " gap between fingerboard and body, although it's a dark picture .

Cheers ,Craig

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 1:43 pm

It looks to me more like the angle the guitar is at relative to the camera. Getting a bit of an optical illusion Craig.

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 1:47 pm

Thanks Allen, You may be right . That might explain the nice VERY low action

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:11 pm

Also what you're seeing is the carbon fiber under the board which is releived for the neck. I think the low action is a combination of camera angle and...low action. But of course it takes but five seconds to raise the action.

BTW, I showed my personal tilt neck guitar to Jackson Browne this evening...he's a long time client of mine, though since I left LA I haven't done much with him. He loved my 16" non-cutaway jumbo, and he wants a baritone version. His most telling comment upon playing the guitar for quite some time was, "This guitar changes the rules..." He said that he usually likes more traditional instruments, but that this one just changed the game on him. That's the kind of test I like to put a guitar to.

Dave Higham · Post by **Dave Higham** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:21 pm

Hello all, I hope you don't mind another Pom invading your forum. I've been reading this thread with interest as I'm starting on my own version.

Craig, what you're seeing under the fingerboard extension are the 1/2" x 1/8" CF rods which, as Rick said, are dadoed into the underside of the f'board and the surface of the neck. I think perhaps they are tapered off towards the end of the f'board.

Edit, sorry Rick, we were typing simultaneously.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:42 pm

Let me be the first to welcome you to the forum Dave. Hope that you find something of use to take away and work with.

Kim · Post by **Kim** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:52 pm

Hi Dave,

Good to have you with us and I look forward to your input. This thread has developed into one of the most progressive I have come across on any guitar building forum and has really benefited from the input of some clever minds working together. We really like images here cause most of us can't read

, but it also helps remove some of the mystery. Do you have any of your current project? eg; a close up of the CF rods etc would be cool.

Cheers

Kim

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:14 pm

BTW, two of the things (other than the tilt neck) that Jackson noticed quite immediately were how much the upper bout of the top is contributing to the sound of the guitar...thanks to the flying buttresses vastly reducing the amount of bracing needed and the lack of contact between fingerboard and the top...and the side sound port which on the guitar he played is below the waist in the lower bout side. He's played other side port guitars that he didn't like so much which had the ports in the usual upper bout side position...which aims the sound at the player's nose rather than an ear...

To kind of harp on one of my constant themes here...showing guitars to real working musicians and paying close attention to what they like, don't like, accept, don't accept, etc. is far more important than trying to score points with other luthiers. Jackson, for instance, could not have cared less that the hardware for the neck adjustments are totally visible. In fact, he liked it and made a point of showing it off to several of his friends and show production workers. So I consider the visible hardware to actually be a selling point with those whom I want as customers. Jackson also zeroed right in on what I consider to be the sonic strong points of the guitar, a further confirmation that I am achieving my tonal objectives with this particular design. For me, it was also great to hear someone who can play as strongly as he can put the guitar through it's dynamic range paces. He noted that the guitar was responsive to a light touch, but also just wouldn't quit no matter how hard he laid in, and I got to hear just how loud this guitar is played by a strong pro in a fairly large room with a tall ceiling (the production office). This whole thing left me quite satisfied with the basic design, and I don't see making any major changes to it at this point...a nice place to be with a certain model of guitar. It's not the only valid way to build, and I'll certainly try other things, but this model is about 95% there. BTW, that process took about 15 guitars of this particular design to refine; none of them were bad, but some are better than others with a general trend in the right direction. They all have a particular sound...a signature sound if you will...and I think that's one of the most important things a small shop luthier can achieve...a true voice.

Dave Higham · Post by **Dave Higham** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:21 pm

Thanks for the welcome chaps.
Kim, I'm afraid my project is only just leaving the drawing board (i.e. monitor screen) but when I have something worth showing I'll happily share. On the other hand, having reached the age at which one becomes 'technology-challenged', I'm not sure how to post images on this forum. Could anyone give me a short 'Posting Images for Dummies' tutorial?

Kim · Post by **Kim** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:40 pm

Sure Dave,

When you go to reply, you will see a button marked "Upload picture" in the upper right hand of the text entry field. Just click on that and a pop-up window will appear. Click on the "browse" button and find the image you want to upload on your PC. Double click the image icon and then the "send" button. You will see the image appear in the pop-up, scroll down within the pop-up and next to "insert picture" click on "standard" and your done. Like so.

By default, the code which displays your image will appear at the BOTTOM of the text insertion box. This can be selected, then cut and pasted to appear where ever you want within your text. Also, it is important to remember that if you want to display a number of images in one post, you will need to hit "Enter" after each image so they will stack vertically. If you do not, the images will appear as a single row horizontally across the page and this makes it a bastard to read any associated texts as the lines will wrap to the width of the images.

Cheers Kim

Dave Higham · Post by **Dave Higham** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:40 pm

OK Let's try it. I hope Rick doesn't mind.

Kim · Post by **Kim** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:42 pm

On the money Dave

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:59 pm

G'day Dave and welcome to our forum.

Many thanks for providing a clearer image of Rick's joint . The string hieght looks a bit more believable also

.

Congratulations Rick on receiving such good feedback from Jackson Brown. You must be wrapped,and must add that I'm very pleased for you too !

I think Matt makes a good point when it comes to cutaways taking a good part of the available upper bout area. I favour cutaways myself . So much so, that I can't understand a 6 string steel string guitar not having one . Before anyone brings this up ,, I realise the violin family don't have cutaways , but they do have a fingerboard that is very much raised , making for easier access to higher registers.What is the sense of having frets right up to No 20 ( and beyond ), if you can't use them ( with ease at least ). I believe all frets should be easily usable regardless if the guitarist uses them or not . Makes the guitar fully functional and not have those higher frets for ornamentation only. My deepest apologies to anyone that takes offence to that comment . It's my view only, and not meant as some sort of smart arse comment on others. I'm here to offer my views as I see them in an honest manner and not piss around 'being nice'. Being 'nice ' won't achieve much ,when it comes to design , so please forgive my bluntness.

Having a cutaway kind of thwarts that design element of a free upper bout , so my thinking is elsewhere when it comes to maximising the soundboard area. I've always felt that soundholes ( and their associated braces ) placed in their conventional position ,rob the guitar of more usable soundboard , than neckblocks and transverse braces. Particularly considering those soundholes are placed in a very active part of the soundboard ( right near the bridge ).

This is sounding like we are moving off our topic of adjustable necks , but as we are now considering the fretboard extention and soundboard , I believe it all relevant.

Cheers all , Craig

Dennis Leahy · Post by **Dennis Leahy** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:31 pm

Craig L wrote:...

Having a cutaway kind of thwarts that design element of a free upper bout , so my thinking is elsewhere when it comes to maximising the soundboard area. I've always felt that soundholes ( and their associated braces ) placed in their conventional position ,rob the guitar of more usable soundboard ...

This is sounding like we are moving off our topic of adjustable necks , but as we are now considering the fretboard extention and soundboard , I believe it all relevant.

Cheers all , Craig

I'm with you Craig. It is related, but may I suggest that you break out "offset soundholes" as a separate topic anyway. I think it will be better for visitors searching, as well as more focused discussion (in both threads.) Some folks interested in adjustable necks are not going to be interested in offset soundholes, and vice-versa.

Take care,

Dennis

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:26 am

Good suggestion Dennis. I'll do just that !

Cheers Craig

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:46 am

BTW, note that one other huge advantage of not gluing the fingerboard to the top is quite evident in that photo...no hump or ski jump effect at the neck to body juncture. It doesn't really matter what humidity changes the guitar goes through...the playability of the fingerboard remains uncompromised by movement in the top. It can rise and fall and if the bridge does indeed rise, a fast tweak of the tilt brings the action back right with no change in neck relief from the nut to the very last fret.

BTW, note also that the latest offering from SCGC has no frets at all on the fingerboard extension on the upper bout! That's one way to deal with the inevitable...

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:18 am

Yes, thanks Rick. That is a huge advantage , and one that not all consider. Of course all the adjustable designs we have come up with so far share that same advantage .

I must take a look at SCGC latest offering . It must look a little odd with no frets in that area. Could you expand on what you term as ' inevitable 'please Rick ? One wonders of consumer acceptance ?

Cheers , Craig

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:51 am

"The inevitible" is that destruction of playability that you see in practically every traditionally build steel string...I mean those with no carbon fiber or real neck extension under the 'board over the body. With any design that allows the top to move with humidity changes, you get the fingerboard extension moving up and down too as though there were a hinge there at the 12th or 14th fret (or 13th on some...). Jackson had me remove the frets above the 12th on one of his Roy Smeck Stage DeLuxe guitars...he has or had nine of them...because the fingerboard extension would not stop moving up and down. So that's kind of a predecessor to this SCGC offering.

BMS · Post by **BMS** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:05 am

Hello all:
I'm a guitar maker from Belgium. I have been using a very simple neck bolt in my last guitars:
The neck has a 1cm deep neck pocket with the size of the neck to hide the gape between the neck heel and the body. The neck wood rest against a 1mm thick ebony veneer at the top (to prevent to break the spruce) but no screws used here. And just one simple bolt 4mm stainless steel who hold the neck in position and adjust the neck angle. If you remove the bolt the neck falls apart

if you remove the strings it's gets loose... But anyway guitar makers have been using that since 1820... It's simple, even I can do it

.
To prevent dead notes on the fingerboard over the neck joint, I use 2 rods of graphite and the wood under the fingerboard is: 1cm at the neck join and 5mm at the fingerboards end. I use a body who is 1cm shallower at the neck block than the tail block... Its works great!
So here is my 2c help. "The lazy neck join" as I call it

Cheers
Benoit

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:20 am

Welcome to the forum Benoit.

So in your system the string pull is used to pull the neck up into the desired plane, while the adjusting / attaching bolt is used to adjust the amount of pitch that the neck is allowed to move?

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:34 am

That's your basic Stauffer approach, though he didn't have carbon fiber to work with...

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:15 pm

G'day and welcome to our forum Benoit. I'll bet there aren't many instrument builders forums that have a member hailing from Belgium !

What's the instrument builders scene like in Belgium ?

Your simple system will probably have others concerned of the Whammy bar affect. In other words ,does a backwards tug of the neck sharpen the strings ?

Again welcome Benoit , and fantastic to have you with us !

Cheers and kind regards , Craig

BMS · Post by **BMS** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:14 pm

Hello again:
"So in your system the string pull is used to pull the neck up into the desired plane, while the adjusting / attaching bolt is used to adjust the amount of pitch that the neck is allowed to move?"

Dear Allen: Yes the string pull keeps the neck from moving. Even on a classical guitar you have to pull a LOT to move the neck... So the wammy bar effect is minimal.

"That's your basic Stauffer approach, though he didn't have carbon fiber to work with..."

Dear Rick, long time no see... Yes indeed, but I use titanium truss rods as well, somthing I'm shure Stauffer would have loved

!

"G'day and welcome to our forum Benoit. I'll bet there aren't many instrument builders forums that have a member hailing from Belgium !

What's the instrument builders scene like in Belgium ?

Your simple system will probably have others concerned of the Whammy bar affect. In other words ,does a backwards tug of the neck sharpen the strings ?

Again welcome Benoit , and fantastic to have you with us !

Cheers and kind regards , Craig"

Dear Craig: Belgium is quite slow and conservative: people asked me or Stratocasters and Martins 000 copies

. But I have some great friends and builders around like Dave Evans...

I just finished an 8 strings guitar tuned: A'DEAdgbe' with the A' and D been fretless... A single 4mm bolt holds everything on place with no preblem... I will put photos on my site soon and put a link here. I love the Turnerâ€™s and Doolinâ€™s approaches but I prefer to keep it simple. I mechanics there is a notion of "levels of freedom" with my systhem the neck rest against an ebony bar on top of the pocket , that makes 2 levels and the third is the bolt. I love to keep it simpleâ€¦
Cheers
Benoit

Dominic · Post by **Dominic** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:18 pm

Rick Turner wrote:BTW, I showed my personal tilt neck guitar to Jackson Browne this evening...he's a long time client of mine, .

Looks like Rick's buying.

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:16 pm

Just finished showing D-TAR products...and my Cambodian rosewood/Russian spruce tilt neck jumbo at MerleFest for three days, and once again, the players who came by instantly "got it", and it was luthiers who were, if not exactly resistant, skeptical until they spent ten or fifteen minutes with the whole thing. So who is more conservative, guitar players or luthiers? Well, I know that the big problem is that luthiers already have an investment, both financial and emotionally in doing things their way and not wanting to copy another luthier...unless those copied luthiers are dead. Guitar players want something that sounds good, plays great, and is totally adjustable to their way of playing...forever.

This all makes me very wary of asking other luthiers what they think about my ideas and work; there's too much ego involved, but then I build guitars for guitar players...

Australian/New Zealand Luthiers Forum

ANZLF Adjustable Neck Joint Group Discussion

Who is online