#61
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
1. The neck of my Gurian guitar has always been too narrow for me. 2. The nut width is halfway between his infamous 1-5/8" and a typical 1-11/16" 3. Both E strings maintain equal spacing along the full length of the fretboard. So maybe I should try a new nut with slightly wider string spacing (and equal spaces between all strings). The result would appear more like what's depicted in this thread's illustrations (less set-in at the nut, more set-in at the neck joint) but I wonder if both E strings will then be too close to the fretboard edges near the nut. I hammer-on and pull-off that unwound e string quite a bit in first position, and that could be a bugger. On the other hand, I go thumb-over-top a lot for the Low E string, and that could be a delight. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Look at how the ends of the frets are finished. The smaller the bevel, the wider the effective playing width of the fingerboard. If the bevel is minimized, you might squeeze a bit more effective width, but not much. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
The fret ends aren't too rounded over, but you're right - I was just applying John's concept and hopin' against hope... There are as many reasons NOT TO replace the Gurian neck as there are TO replace it, but frankly, only a wider neck is going to satisfy me. I'm just trying to avoid a decision that I fear will backfire on me, whichever way I turn.
Thanks to you all, I'm now in a much better position to specify a new neck that really will suit me. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Well, now that all the reasonable options have been discussed -
Since you are only adding a 1/16 or so to each side, couldn't you pull the neck, pull the frets, square (or lightly back-bevel) both sides of the neck to give you a flat glue surface, then glue on a rip of ebony on each side. True the fretboard, shape the edges of the neck, coat of finish, extend the fret slots (or notch?) and refret, then reattach. New nut, and voila! It seems like it might be easier, you reuse the original neck - and even if it fails completely, you can still make a completely new neck - So is that a completely crazy idea?
__________________
More than a few Santa Cruz’s, a few Sexauers, a Patterson, a Larrivee, a Cumpiano, and a Klepper!! |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
My original plan, as shown to Michael Gurian
Quote:
Is it CRAZY? Clearly I'm the WRONG guy to ask. There are three possible explanations for this coincidence, as I see it: 1) "Great Minds Think Alike, or 2) "You and I are both crazy" or 3) Michael G sent you a LINK to the page I set up for him, wherein I explained "The Method to My Madness". I'm betting you saw that page...'cuz there aren't many "crazy like me". I set up a private webpage just for Michael Gurian to see, and sent him an email containing a link to that page. I'm pretty sure he saw it, but we didn't discuss the idea of modifying/widening the neck; he short-circuited the notion by saying right off the bat, "Well, you need to replace the neck." I didn't pursue the modification because I figured if he thought it was a good idea, he'd have said so. After all, this was THE MICHAEL GURIAN I was talking with(!) and clearly he had other things to do. Of course, now that I've been rubbin' virtual elbows with the likes of John Arnold, Trevor Gore, Frank Ford, Charles Tauber, Howard Klepper, Alan Carruth and other luminaries whose names I don't even recognize yet (YIKES!) I just might be able to carry on a normal conversation with Michael G (or maybe not...I guess I think about the guy obliquely every time I play that guitar, spanning 37 years). 'Hard to talk with people who are "larger than life"... Anyway, here's the image and the text that appeared in the webpage I set up for Micheal Gurian's perusal:
I would LOVE to hear what you "Extreme Luthiers" here at AGF think of the idea. Last edited by BothHands; 10-14-2014 at 09:24 PM. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
No, hadn't seen any of that - but thats the general idea. Rather than a straight bit, you might consider a dovetail or tapered bit so you cut back on the rear of the neck a bit more so you have more material to round into the new neck shape. I wouldn't worry about the very ends of the cuts - those can be chiseled -
I have thought about this only because I greatly prefer a wider neck - 1-13/16 is about perfect - and I've seen so many really wonderful guitars that have too narrow a neck going for really good prices. But I've learned that if you just keep your eyes open and wait long enough, you're bound to find just what you want - In your shoes, I'd be looking for a different guitar -
__________________
More than a few Santa Cruz’s, a few Sexauers, a Patterson, a Larrivee, a Cumpiano, and a Klepper!! |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
I have done exactly that on several occasions. Generally, the practical limit is widening the neck about 0.09" (0.045" on each side).
Not only was it done to the 1935 D-28 of Clarence White and Tony Rice fame (not by me), but I also did it to the Roy Noble guitar that used to belong to Clarence. Quote:
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
The primary issue with your proposal is geometry.
To add material to the sides of the neck, to have a smooth transition from the old material to the new material, in the finished contour of the neck, the entire neck profile would need to be different. There needs to be tangency between the curvature of the old neck and the curvature of the added material, else there will be a discontinuity in the contour of the back of the neck. To see if it is viable, I'd suggest you draw, to scale, the cross section of the neck (and fingerboard) at several locations along the neck - say, the first, 5th and 9th frets. To those cross sections, draw in the material you are going to add. Then you'll see how much material would need to removed from the old neck to create a smooth curve/transition to the new material. I'm fairly certain, it isn't going to work well unless the original neck is very flat across the back and has large, square "shoulders" as it approaches the fingerboard. I appreciate your thinking through the steps involved in its alteration. Just don't forget that much of the work would be done with hand tools, particularly at the transition at the head. As an aside, anything touching the shaft of the router bit will burn. Instead, commercially available "template" bits are used that include a ball bearing against which the template rides. There is also the issue of adding the "wings" to widen the fingerboard - it is not just the neck, obviously, that requires additional material be added. The "wings" would also have to be slotted to accept the frets. Not much of an issue if the fingerboard is not bound: more work if it is. The woodworking, itself, is do-able, but I think what would probably be its downfall is the geometry. By the time one had done all that work, as well as the refinishing work, it'd be a toss-up between replacing and modifying. If you replace, you always have the original to reinstall: if you modify, there's no going back. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
"To add material to the sides of the neck, to have a smooth transition from the old material to the new material in the finished contour of the neck, the entire neck profile would need to be different. There needs to be tangency between the curvature of the old neck and the curvature of the added material, else there will be a discontinuity in the contour of the back of the neck. " Frankly, I think I could live with less-than-perfect regarding those cut ends just shy of the headstock. For example, I wouldn't care if there were an obvious mismatch, gap, ridge, whatever - as long as my hand doesn't encounter it when playing. |
#71
|
||||
|
||||
The story of my life!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As for geometry: Physics & Geometry are ALWAYS COMPLICATIN' MY GRAND PLANS! If adding the extensions did not result in an absolutely perfect transition for the new neck contour, I wonder if I would mind it. Per my comments above, the "boxy" neck feels perfectly natural to me, and I find that my hand adjusts (reasonably well) to whatever guitar or bass I play for a half hour. If I played the revised Gurian neck for a month or two it might feel just fine... Another potential complication that occurs to me only now pertains to the unsupported portion of the ebony fretboard - the part that extends over the guitar's top and is glued to it. The extensions/wings at that point would reduce down to very thin, narrow strips glued to a very thin, narrow fretboard edge. Hmmm Good points, and I appreciate all the points you and others make here. I've thought about this a lot, and now with the benefit of additional discussion (at this level of discussion), I think maybe it isn't the best choice, as you suggest. I'm not tossing off the idea entirely, but it no longer looks as promising as it once did. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I want to go from neck width 1-21/32" (1.656") to 1-13/16" (1.813"), a difference of .157" - considerably wider than .090". And then there's the issue of the fretboard trapezoid widening at a greater rate (moving toward the saddle) than does the string footprint trapezoid. In other words, the existing Gurian fretboard maintains a constant string set-in from the edges, along its entire length. I would want to widen the fretboard gradually as it approaches the saddle (thanks to what I've learned in these AGF discussions). PLEADING MY CASE RIGHT TO THE END: I have two basses that have 5-piece solid maple necks (as in no scarf joint, just continuous strips laminated together). The three major strips are maple and the two stabilizing interim strips are ebony, approximately 1/4" wide. I also have two acoustic guitars with the same arrangement, but the major strips are mahogany and the interim stabilizer ebony strips are maybe 3/16" wide. With those as my template, I don't see why there would be a problem gluing ebony strips as wide as 1/4" to the outer flattened edges of the Gurian neck. It seems to me the ebony "extensions" would actually serve to stabilize the mahogany neck (though it's already steady as a rock). And I think it would look KILLER! I have trouble seeing my side marker dots, so I'd request extra-large, extra-white dots against that new, nearly black side of the neck. TOO good, sez I! So how about it? That's amazing. And I wouldn't be surprised to see a YouTube video of you doing it standing on your head! HA! U DA MAN. |
#73
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
How well it works depends on the neck shape. An oval neck can be flared quite successfully, but a strong vee neck can already have too much angle below the fingerboard to make a smooth transition.
You will certainly end up with a more flared angle.....trending toward the vee shape. The result can be quite playable for some, but totally unworkable for others. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Which officially brings us back to the beginning of any discussion of the existing Gurian neck -
__________________
More than a few Santa Cruz’s, a few Sexauers, a Patterson, a Larrivee, a Cumpiano, and a Klepper!! |