El Gringo
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2015
- Messages
- 5,666
Exactly , as they are not meant to be disassembled like a 4 bolt Fender neck .I think the neck makes a huge difference.
If anyone disagrees try taking it off...
Exactly , as they are not meant to be disassembled like a 4 bolt Fender neck .I think the neck makes a huge difference.
If anyone disagrees try taking it off...
I can't believe you would really say that the neck has nothing to do with the guitar's tone.. Boy, Gibson should just make the neck out of plastic if that is the case... maybe just a metal pole would do?Indeed, a good set-up, correctly adjusted truss rod, are critical for the guitar and the tone.
The size of the neck has nothing to do with the guitar's tone.
If the size of the neck did have some bearing on the tone then there would be threads about adding/removing wood to/from the neck to enhance the tone of the guitar. We'd be swapping out necks on our Les Pauls (and other Gibsons) to improve the sound of the guitar. Maybe someone has sent an R9 to Historic makeovers to swap-out necks or re-shape the neck with the single goal of improving the tone of the guitar...maybe? It would be pretty extreme...
We swap pickups, caps, tuners, nuts, bridges, tailpieces and more - and we sometimes re-fret our Gibsons to improve the tone.
I wonder what Paul Reed Smith would say about the size of the neck and its influence on the sound of a guitar...
I can't believe you would really say that the neck has nothing to do with the guitar's tone.. Boy, Gibson should just make the neck out of plastic if that is the case... maybe just a metal pole would do?
of course the size affects the tone. everything affects the tone.The *size/thickness* of the neck doesn't affect the sound of the guitar. Wood species, scale length, truss-rod adjustment, frets, - yessir - but size? No.
*size* (Re-read my post.)
+1 on 'everything'of course the size affects the tone. everything affects the tone.
I'm not saying in what way it affects the tone, that's hit and miss, who knows how it's going to affect the tone, but it is indeed a component in the tone... I've played many bursts and they are all different... I wouldn't say "a big neck sounds this way and a thin neck sounds this way", but it does affect the tone.+1 on 'everything'
Everything affect the tone - but can we point to several recordings of Gibson electric guitar tone and say "it must be the skinny/geek // fat/baseball bat size of the neck" as THE critical component of the tone? Is it even a minor component of the tone? I've never ever heard any evidence to support the size of the neck as the prominent (or tertiary) component of the sound. I've never heard anyone say "that guitar would sound better if it had a skinny neck, 'cause that's where the tone is." I've never heard anyone say "I swapped the thin neck for a baseball bat because I didn't like the sound of the thin neck."
The only way I know if Duane Allman is playing his 'Burst (big neck?) or his SG (skinny neck?) is if someone tells me. - Also true for Dickey.
I can't tell the sonic difference between a full-necked 1964 ES335 when compared to a wafer-thin-necked 1961 ES335. For sure, they'll sound subtly different, but is it the neck? Maybe it's the Grovers, or the pickups, or the nylon saddles...
The size/thickness of the neck does not affect the tone of the guitar.
DutchRay described his experience with 1960 vs 1959 'Bursts in an earlier post which is very interesting, but my experience is the opposite. Others might use different words to describe any perceived difference.
exactlyDuane Allman's 57 gold top has an unusually slim neck for that period, according to the testimony of some that have played it in person.
No one is saying 'big neck good, small neck bad', that's ridiculous and not what anyone is saying.
I think you’ve got it.brandtkronholm,
It's hard maintaining a view and defending that conviction when the majority disagree with your position. Respect..
So., reading through your posts, I'm trying to encapsulate your primary point. This appears to be that with two necks, one slim, one fat,( IF) both share equal properties of weight, mass and density, et al.. Thay will sound the same despite the difference between them mentioned above.
Have I got where your coming from, or have I missed it completely?
I don't play guitars with necks I don't like...nothing affects tone like silence.
I had a Kubiki Express (mini?) LP style for a brief period...it was the business! It is long gone now...alas. It was signed too... I actually gigged it for one song once - it didn't really work.Except I have actually played guitars with necks made from the same board and the big necks sound different from the thin ones. No hypotheticals. In the late 70's I was involved with several batches of custom guitars built by Phil Kubiki for Manny's. All the necks were from same board stock and then shaped vintage 57 soft v with little taper, almost a full inch thick, or vintage 62 thin c, with taper getting much fuller past 10th fret but not as deep as the 57 profile.
Solid rosewood, birdseye maple and solid pauduk all with slab rosewood boards.