What are the pros and cons of different finger board radiuses?

[Rosewood99]

Why would you choose one over the other? Is one better for finger style or strumming? Is there a common one?

[devellis]

I think you really have to play them to be sure. Different neck profiles, nut widths, fret heights, and other factors will change how the same radius feels. On the other hand, once you establish a preference for a given radius on a particular brand, then you can specifically look for that radius. But I've been surprised at how little useful information some dimensions can provide sometimes. It's really the neck as a whole, I think, that gives a guitar its feel.

[rockawayrocks]

As someone who started playing very late in life and who is just trying to get to the level of 'doesn't suck too bad', I came to the realization that no matter how great a deal, no matter how wonderful it sounds, and regardless of the beauty, "if it doesn't fit you must aquit".

I fell in love with a J-35 and owned one for about 3 weeks recently. But I couldn't adapt to the neck. I'm sure the combination of nut width, radius, short scale, and chunky neck profile all conspired against me.

I swapped it for a Martin D-15M...narrower nut, flatter radius, long scale and lower profile neck did the trick. It was instant understanding.

Interestingly my SWOMGT has the same neck specs, but with a 1-3/4" nut, and except for a struggle with barre chords on it, it's not hard to go back and forth between it and the 15.

[Rosewood99]

I realize it depends on many variables but aren't there some broad generalalities as it relates to radius?

[devellis]

One generality, I think, is that many people find barre chords to be easier on a tighter radius. It allows the finger to be in a more natural curved position while fretting across all 6 strings. I'm sure there are exceptions but I think that probably holds up as a generalization.

[Judson]

How does one even know what the fingerboard radius is on a specific guitar?

Looking at spec sheets on various Taylor guitars, I don't see any mention of it.

Martin specs mention a radius of the saddle ... but not the fingerboard.

[MikeRGR]

Not to hijack the thread but I would like to know why?? the fretboard has a radius.

If Im not mistaken classical (nylon strings ) guitars dont have a radius. I could be wrong about this.

Also on my guitar the saddle has a radius, so the strings over the soundhole follow the same radius. What is the reason for that.

Thanks in advance for the answers

mike

[random works]

Originally Posted by devellis

One generality, I think, is that many people find barre chords to be easier on a tighter radius. It allows the finger to be in a more natural curved position while fretting across all 6 strings. I'm sure there are exceptions but I think that probably holds up as a generalization.

#1 on this

[random works]

Originally Posted by MikeRGR

Not to hijack the thread but I would like to know why?? the fretboard has a radius.

If Im not mistaken classical (nylon strings ) guitars dont have a radius. I could be wrong about this.

Also on my guitar the saddle has a radius, so the strings over the soundhole follow the same radius. What is the reason for that.

Thanks in advance for the answers

mike

Classicals are easier to fret than steel strings. Barres on a classical do not offer the same resistance IMO- Perhaps the flat fingerboard is also part of the classical tradition?

The curve of the saddle follows the radius of the fingerboard and keeps the strings shaped the same way for playing down the fingerboard.

[Dru Edwards]

Originally Posted by devellis

One generality, I think, is that many people find barre chords to be easier on a tighter radius. It allows the finger to be in a more natural curved position while fretting across all 6 strings. I'm sure there are exceptions but I think that probably holds up as a generalization.

That's my understanding as well.

Paul, in the electric world, a lot of shredders like a flatter fretboard for soloing. Many of those guitars have a compound radius so that the first few frets have a lower radius.

Larrivees have a compound radius that goes from 16" to 20/21". Some people don't like it because the fretboard is a little too flat for them.

[Rosewood99]

Originally Posted by devellis

One generality, I think, is that many people find barre chords to be easier on a tighter radius. It allows the finger to be in a more natural curved position while fretting across all 6 strings. I'm sure there are exceptions but I think that probably holds up as a generalization.

So what is the advantage of a flatter radius?

[ncognito1]

In terms of numbers, what is meant by a tighter radius? I recall something to the effect that the radius can impair or facilitate bending notes. I would guess that this relates to one's playing style.

DAVE

[devellis]

Originally Posted by paulzoom

So what is the advantage of a flatter radius?

Well, at the extreme, the strings are in a single plane, which could make strumming them all with equal force easier. I think that was the reasoning behind flat mandolin fingerboards, even though Gibson, who really invented the modern mandolin, was constantly comparing their design features to violins (which have radiused boards). On violins, more curve facilitates playing one sring without accidentally hitting the adjacent ones with the bow. A flatter bridge makes double-stops easier. I guess this concept (hit 'em all versus hit just one) might translate to playing a guitar with a plectrum. But a lot of this radius variation is really giving people what they're accustomed to.

On a classical guitar, the fingerboard is wide and flat, at least partially because that seems to be how they evolved historically. The playing position benefits from the wideness, giving plenty of room for fingers to fret one string while not interfering with the adjacent strings. It may be that as the board gets wider, its being flat makes it easier to apply equal left-hand pressure across the 6 strings (I'm just guessing there). Personally, I don't see any advantage to a dead-flat fingerboard. Maybe if I were a strummer I'd feel differently.

As a used-to-be mandolin player, once I got used to a slightly radiused fingerboard on that instrument, a flat one actually felt and looked slightly concave to me. I thought it was just me until I had a conversation with Stefan Sobell and he described the exact same perception (his mandolins have radiused boards).

I think to some extent, the radius preferences people have are largely a matter of what they've become used to. I'm not that sensitive to it, myself, although I would notice a dead-flat board, and not in a good way. Beyond that, I can't remember ever picking up a guitar and thinking I would prefer a different radius. But I have picked up guitars and not liked the way the neck felt, with the board radius possibly being part of that judgment.

A rough analogy might be bound or unbound fingerboards. Each has its advocates and if you really are accustomed to one, you may not like the opposite as much when you encounter it.

[rick-slo]

Why most classical guitars have flat fretboards probably is mostly due to tradition. Perhaps because in the old days it was easier for the luthier to make a flat fretboard (and have more consistent results). Flat fretboards are harder on the fretting hand when it comes to barre chords and some classical guitar luthiers are now adding a curve to the fretboard. Best in my opinion is a compound radius, more curved towards the nut and flatter up the neck as the fretboard widens (flatter up the neck also helps out string benders not to buzz out).

[brucefulton]

Conventional wisdom is summarized here: http://www.ratcliffe.co.za/articles/radius.shtml

Chords, especially barre chords are supposed to be easier with tighter radii. Bending is supposed to be easier with flatter fingerboards. Bending wasn't much the style when Fender came out with the 7.5 inch radius. I'm not sure I agree that tight radius = easier barres as classical guitars have flat boards and are easy enough to bar, but that's probably due to lower tension.

I'm guessing, but do not know for sure, that classical guitars derive flat fingerboards from their multi-course lute, vihuela and theorbo predecessors on which curved fingerboards wouldn't make much sense, especially with gut-tied movable stops.