#31
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As to dovetails, I much prefer them. Besides the fact that they are traditional, they are a very solid joint when properly done. For resets, once the bull nose portion of the fingerboard is loosened from the top, they will come apart very nicely, assuming that steam soluble glue was used by the builder. I built nine guitars with dovetails and hot hide glue in the 1970's and all were successful from the standpoint of the joint. I still have two of them and they are still intact nearly 40 years later. I understand that companies will experiment and use bolt on necks and mortise and tenon joints. That's fine, but I'll take a dovetail any time. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Some companies will experiment with production methods and also with what the customer will buy. But I think as far as the word experimenting goes I know of no builder that thinks a dove tail is required to make a superior machine. Is a dove tail stronger? probably. Is that superior strength important? probably not. Bolt on necks are far from being new or experimental and as far as I know most builders feel pretty much the same even if most players or new builders haven't yet realised it. Jeff. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Bolt necks are superior for the builder but do not demonstrate skill. Any hobby builder can screw on a neck. Claims to their superiority fail to take into account that only Gibson and Martin necks will be reset. There really is no long term market for any of the other makers. In 40 years do you think anyone will want to reset the neck on their Totem etc brand/made guitar? Heck I change guitars every 5 years just cause I want to. Its fun having a different guitar. When it comes to customs I like my guitars light. A dovetail doesnt reduce much weight but a little here and there added to that can be a pound or more. Besides we guitar players are traditionalists. Even the most out there players still play the design developed by and before Martin etc. Part of that ethos is the dovetail joint. Chatter about the greatness of the MT neck is just that.
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Guys, the bottom of the neck is the 'heel'. 'Heal' is a verb. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The question of strength has been covered except to say that it is not unheard of for a poorly fitted dovetail to become a major problem. Talk of the elegance or lack of elegance of a joint that cannot be seen and that has no relevance on tone seems to me to be rather pointless. For the vast majority any meaningful debate about any effect on tone was put to rest a long time ago. Build what works for you or buy what you like the sound and feel of. Don't worry about the joint. Jeff. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
John Arnold,
Were these Santa Cruz, Wayne Henderson, etc 40 years old? |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I used M&T neck joints on my first few guitars. The glued ones had no bolt, while I did some unglued ones with a single bolt. The 1/4" bolt with a threaded insert or a barrel bolt (as used by Taylor and Martin) is extreme overkill, IMHO. A 1/4" bolt is many, many times stronger than the wood, and simply adds unnecessary weight. My favorite attachment, which turns out to be very similar to Collings, is to insert a maple dowel in the heel vertically, then put a 5/32" or 3/16" lag screw (like a banjo) into the neck heel, into the dowel. This is very strong, and the dowel spreads the load so that it reduces the tendency to crack the heel at the screw. These type of screws are also fine thread (32 per inch), which are much better about staying tight than the 1/4-20 bolts that are typically used. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Mike "The business ain't nothin' but the blues!" - Rahsaan Roland Kirk" mike-wilhelm.com |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|