Intentional Neck angle overset to get action lower

[chasapple]

So I know the basics about guitar setup and the 4 factors that contribute to string action (truss rod, nut slot height, saddle height and neck angle).

If the other 3 factors are proper and unchanged, does intentionally oversetting
The neck angle independently allow for lower action without buzzing--just because of the changed geometry of the neck?

In other words, does an intentionally overset neck angle permit lower action
Which would otherwise be impossible without sanding the saddle too low?

Have any of you overset the neck angle to get 12th fret action of 1 mm or less for every string?

[redir]

I'm perhaps not understanding what you are trying to convey here but if you have to sand a saddle down too low then your neck angle is wrong and therefore resetting the neck angle will not be 'oversetting' it, rather it will be setting it to the correct angle.

There is no reason why a neck should ever be over set. I do like to make my saddles about 3/16th high to get action of 3/32nd inch on the low E down to 2/32nd at the high E. I think Martin specifies 1/8th inch of saddle. The other important setup variable, when considering neck angle and resets, is string height over the soundboard at the bridge which should be no less then and about 1/2in.

Action of 1mm is almost impossible unless you don't mind buzzing.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by chasapple

So I know the basics about guitar setup and the 4 factors that contribute to string action (truss rod, nut slot height, saddle height and neck angle).

If the other 3 factors are proper and unchanged, does intentionally oversetting
The neck angle independently allow for lower action without buzzing--just because of the changed geometry of the neck?

No.
The question suggests that you need to review those basics.

[Truckjohn]

Anything can be done... It's the consequences that hang us up.

[raggedymike]

I have wondered about this as well, not for getting lower action (you can get low action with a properly set neck), but in terms of lengthening the time before the next reset (you would start out with a higher bridge). I suspect that if you did this you would also need to cantilever the part of the fingerboard that goes over the body (like Batson does).

I have no real experience in these matters, but it is something that has crossed my mind.

[redir]

Originally Posted by raggedymike

I have wondered about this as well, not for getting lower action (you can get low action with a properly set neck), but in terms of lengthening the time before the next reset (you would start out with a higher bridge). I suspect that if you did this you would also need to cantilever the part of the fingerboard that goes over the body (like Batson does).

I have no real experience in these matters, but it is something that has crossed my mind.

You don't necessarily need to float the FB or use a wedge if you design for it. I use an arched UTB and a canted sound board from the sound hole to the head block to get the right angle. I like to go on the high side when building a guitar just so that the first thing that can be done to reset the action in the future is to lower the saddle by 1/16th inch and still have plenty of break angle.

[chasapple]

Thanks for the replies.
I do think I'm fairly knowlegable about the factors determining string action, my question was more of an intellectual query
about the effect of neck angle geometry independent of the nut slot height, truss rod relief, bridge/saddle height.

Based on the replies, it sounds like for each guitar there is in fact one proper neck angle--and it serves as a fundamental starting point for creating desired action.

My initial post was wondering if oversetting the neck angle would permit a higher saddle height for those of us who want super low action....and already have the truss rod flat....and already have the nut slots at proper height...and already have a "standard" or "correct" neck angle
yet still want a decent saddle break angle.

I guess that would have been a simpler question to ask here in this forum.

On my current Taylors, I can get the 12th fret action
down to 1.5mm on 6th string and 0.75mm on the 1st string, but it sacrifices much saddle height to get there....and my neck angles by the straight edge method are in line with Taylor's specs......and still many days my aching fingers still yearn for lower action if possible....especially on the 3rd and 4th strings.

best,
Charles

[Truckjohn]

It's not the specifics of the guitar assuming the fretwork is well done... It's that you need power to move the top so you can hear it.

See - on an electric - You have the pickups and amp to make loud... There are many touch style electric players out there.... In fact - I knew a guy who would play 2 electric guitars at the same time... One with each hand. He just touched the frets and made music.

But those styles don't work on an acoustic if you want to hear it without an amp.... You need the strings up above the fretboard so they can move without hitting the fretboard... When the action is high - they buzz, but when the action is really low, the strings just seem to damp and not sound out....

Perhaps you could lower the action more with heavy, stiff strings... Like move up to 14/70's.... But that won't get you volume at 0.040" at the 12th fret...

Thanks

[Frank Ford]

Indeed, some do "overset" an acoustic guitar neck in order to have a higher bridge/saddle combination, or to simply have a higher saddle. I think the intention is to forestall future resetting by having more saddle to cut lower as the guitar ages, or to follow a notion that having a higher saddle & bridge somehow will improve tone or volume.

Martin necks are set farther back these days than in earlier decades, so some luthiers think it's appropriate to use modern setup specs for 50-year old instruments.


With any "hotrodding" there are downsides, detractors and arguments aplenty.

As vintage instruments gain $$$ value, I think the wiser choice is to stay with original style as much as possible.

[mirwa]

Originally Posted by chasapple

On my current Taylors, I can get the 12th fret action
down to 1.5mm on 6th string and 0.75mm on the 1st string, but it sacrifices much saddle height to get there....and my neck angles by the straight edge method are in line with Taylor's specs......and still many days my aching fingers still yearn for lower action if possible....especially on the 3rd and 4th strings.

Charles, you can take it as low as you want.

Neck angle is relative to the guitar, we manufacture a body, place a bridge and saddle combo on that we like and then set the neck to this relationship.

Taylors have a removeable neck, so you can take your action lower if you want with neck shims, I think your action is rather low at the momment especially Treb E, but its what suits you.

Have taken a Taylor down to 1.2 bass and .9mm Treb, and they still play pretty good. IMO if it's still hard on the hands, maybe just take the Bass side down a little and leave the Treb alone

Steve

[John Arnold]

The only part of your question that gives me pause is when you add 'without buzzing'.
I suppose that theoretically a higher saddle will produce more volume at the same attack, meaning you can use a lower action without buzzing....if you lighten up on your attack. But in practical terms, there will be little or no difference.
The only caveat is that if the lower neck angle results in a fingerboard extension that rises on the end, necessitating a higher action to avoid buzzes. But absent that, there won't be a noticeable difference in buzzing tendency on most guitars with similar action and a properly adjusted truss rod (optimum relief).

Based on the replies, it sounds like for each guitar there is in fact one proper neck angle--and it serves as a fundamental starting point for creating desired action.

I will say that rather than an optimum neck angle for each guitar, I believe there is an optimum string height above the top at the bridge. Above a certain height, you actually start to lose volume because the excess torque tends to inhibit vibration. Therefore, the best neck angle will vary slightly depending on the desired action. With that in mind, a neck angle that is optimized for low fingerstyle action action will be overset for someone who prefers high bluegrass action.

Instead of changing the neck angle first, I would experiment with saddle height to see where the 'sweet spot' lies. On some guitars, there will be a wide range, while others will be more sensitive. Once you determine the best saddle height for that particular guitar and string gauge, then you can re-angle the neck to achieve the action you want. This is the most desired approach for doing conventional dovetail neck resets.....the only difference with a Taylor NT neck is the ease of changing the angle.

[chasapple]

thank you all for the helpful responses!

For my personal circumstance here, i like John's suggestion of trying a few different saddle heights and listening for any significant sound differences. I'm a 'tweaker' by nature, so this is right up my alley!

Best,
Charles

[redir]

1mm is about 1/32 of an inch, a tad bit more. I measure things in inches. I guess I must suck at fret jobs because I would never ever ever be able to get action down to 1/32in without buzzing.

I'm having a hard time believing anyone can get action that low and be satisfied with it.

[mirwa]

When I set up an electric guitar, my desired heights are 60 thou bass and 40 thou treb.

When I set up an acoustic guitar, I set em up 90 thou bass 70 thou treb

Subject to the player these measurements get raised or lowered.

Steve