R9 Neck Size - they’re too big

[E.M.]

Elephant in the room: Current ‘59 historics have neck sizes that are more like a ‘58. ~.9-1.0” for ‘58 vs. ~.85-95” for ‘59 (dimensions are for example only). Understanding that originals were across the board. Which dimensions best represent a ‘59 profile? For those of you who have played original ‘59 bursts, your emperical experience is appreciated.

 

[sws1]

Elephant in the room: Current ‘59 historics have neck sizes that are more like a ‘58. ~.9-1.0” for ‘58 vs. ~.85-95” for ‘59 (dimensions are for example only). Understanding that originals were across the board. Which dimensions best represent a ‘59 profile? For those of you who have played original ‘59 bursts, your emperical experience is appreciated.

I have a brand new '59 historic with a neck that's smaller than my burst.

What best represents a '59 profile? There isn't a best. But I think you answered your own question.

 

[El Gringo]

Sounds like to me that a "slim taper "profile is in order for you which is found on 60 necks and a lot of the Gibson USA lines .

 

[E.M.]

Sounds like to me that a "slim taper "profile is in order for you which is found on 60 necks and a lot of the Gibson USA lines .

Sure, I like skinny necks, but I also like the neck on my ‘58 historic. My question had to do with R9 neck accuracy, less to do with preference.

 

[El Gringo]

Sure, I like skinny necks, but I also like the neck on my ‘58 historic. My question had to do with R9 neck accuracy, less to do with preference.

It was tweaked this year on the R9 to more accurately reflect a vintage 59 profile .Myself , the bigger the profile and more beefier is my personal preference .Nothing feels better to me than a D size neck . Most of them are a C shape.

 

[renderit]

This is going to sound like heresy. My 2013 R9 neck is fabulous. The best feeling 59 necks though I think are found on Collings guitars. Sorry. I still love my Gibbys which I have many more of but I think Collings nails 'what I imagine the perfect 59 neck feels like'. VERY similar to my 59 Junior. Just a tad more in the hand and rounded than most of the R's.

 

[AA00475Bassman]

As I say my profiles are all over the map , I do favor the larger necks IMO I yet to play a guitar with to large of neck .

 

[Tom Wittrock]

Real 59 Les Paul neck shapes can vary enough that there is no "norm".

Maybe someone would like to do all the "heavy lifting" to measure dozens [if not hundreds] of 59 necks? :ganz

 

[fernieite]

As many here know, the Beaty of the burst book has a good list of vintage burst neck thickness measurements. It's a start, at least. Although, if you're like me, you might want to convert the measurements to fractions of an inch...

I'd bet there's someone here who has made their own, and perhaps even longer list of measurements... (?)

 

[Big Al]

Certainly not too big and comparable to many 1959 dimensions. I find the shaping of the profile more critical than mere depth measurements, which can be misleading.

 

[Uncle Gary]

Certainly not too big and comparable to many 1959 dimensions. I find the shaping of the profile more critical than mere depth measurements, which can be misleading.

This. I find I'm more sensitive to total cross sectional area than I am to the depth measurement. The greater the depth, the less shoulder I want to see, and vice versa. My '09 "59" ES335 reissue has the deepest neck I've ever played, has to be over 1" at the first fret, but because of its nearly "soft V" shape it works for me. Likewise, my '14 USA Firebird V works because of its prominent shoulders despite its shallow depth.

 

[Wambemando]

My '59 CC neck is .88 - .99
Here are some more numbers...

 

[Fried okra]

[h=2]R9 Neck Size - they’re too big[/h]
That's what she said.