Why are acoustic fretboards so flat?

[J.acoustic]

I've always been under the assumption that a more round fretboard was better for chords. The flatter fretboard was better for bending so you wouldn't fret out. So, you get people people comparing the vintage 7.5" Fender Stratocaster fretboards with more modern 9.5" or 10.5" fretboards. I know that for me this definitely the case. My hand just wraps around the round radius more comfortably.

However, for acoustic, the fretboard radius rarely seems to be discussed. Acoustic players generally play chords and aren't dealing with the fretting out... so why aren't they making any rounder fretboards? For instance, I'd love if my Martin had a 9.5" fretboard like my Stratocaster.

Is there a reason why acoustics have (relatively) flat fretboards?

Anyone have an acoustic with a round fretboard (10" or less)? Is this something you'd have to get custom (though even Martin custom shop I read somewhere only gives 12" or 16" fretboard options?

[Howard Emerson]

Originally Posted by J.acoustic

I've always been under the assumption that a more round fretboard was better for chords. The flatter fretboard was better for bending so you wouldn't fret out. So, you get people people comparing the vintage 7.5" Fender Stratocaster fretboards with more modern 9.5" or 10.5" fretboards. I know that for me this definitely the case. My hand just wraps around the round radius more comfortably.

However, for acoustic, the fretboard radius rarely seems to be discussed. Acoustic players generally play chords and aren't dealing with the fretting out... so why aren't they making any rounder fretboards? For instance, I'd love if my Martin had a 9.5" fretboard like my Stratocaster.

Is there a reason why acoustics have flat fretboards?

Anyone have an acoustic with a round fretboard (10" or less)? Is this something you'd have to get custom (though even Martin custom shop I read somewhere only gives 12" or 16" fretboard options?

Flat top and archtop guitar almost NEVER have flat fingerboards. There were a few back in the 1920's & 1930's, plus Guild made several early '60's 12 strings like that, but they are the exception.

Just because they're not as tight a radius as you would like, doesn't mean they're even close to being flat.

HE

[J.acoustic]

I didn't meant to imply they were actually flat, I have edited a sentence to make that clear. I meant that they are (relatively) flat, especially when compared to the tighter radius of electric guitars.

And, if the wisdom that it's more comfortable and easier to chord a rounder fretboard, then why not move that we on acoustics?

[DCannon]

Interesting question to which I have no answer. But regarding the feel/comfort, as with anything else regarding guitars, it's all personal. My Gibson has a 'rounder' fretboard than my Martins and I prefer the flatter feel of the Martin fretboards than the Gibson. When I replaced the fretboard on my '72 Guild F-30R, I left it flat without any radius because I like the feel, much like a classical guitar. Why the differences among types and makes of guitars? Who knows. It would be interesting to discuss this with the various makers as to why they choose a particular fretboard radius.

DC

[Rosewood99]

Originally Posted by DCannon

Interesting question to which I have no answer. But regarding the feel/comfort, as with anything else regarding guitars, it's all personal. My Gibson has a 'rounder' fretboard than my Martins and I prefer the flatter feel of the Martin fretboards than the Gibson. When I replaced the fretboard on my '72 Guild F-30R, I left it flat without any radius because I like the feel, much like a classical guitar. Why the differences among types and makes of guitars? Who knows. It would be interesting to discuss this with the various makers as to why they choose a particular fretboard radius.

DC

That's interesting. I've had my Gibson for a little more than a week and when I go back to play either my Breedlove or Martin--I thought it was my imagination that they were flatter. Might also explain why doing chords is easier on the Gibson and bends, etc. are easier on the Breedlove and Marting.

[44Runner]

You can bet they put a lot of thought into it. I would imagine like any business decision these companies make they went with what they thought their customers wanted. I am very happy with a 15" radius board. I don't care for flat classical boards.

[scottishrogue]

Classical style guitars, with wider nuts, have a flat fretboard. As the width of the neck is reduced, the radius of the fretboard is reduced accordingly. My violin has a very narrow neck, and an even shorter radius. The saddle should be radiused to match the radius of the fretboard. Don't really know why, but that's the way it is...so just deal with it!

Glen

[El Conquistador]

[QUOTE=J.acoustic;4185803
Anyone have an acoustic with a round fretboard (10" or less)? Is this something you'd have to get custom [/QUOTE]

A really good luthier will build with a "compound radius" fretboard. This means it is (your term) rounder nearer the nut and flatter up in the higher frets. The theory being that the first 5 frets are where most of the chords are played and the upper frets are where most of the strings are being bent. This kind of planning goes way beyond what factories want to do.

Luthier Mike Barnik builds all his quitars this way. I suspect most really good luthiers do as well.

Steve

[Hierophant]

My guess is: wider fretboard = bigger radius.
I prefer a compound radius 12" to 14" on steelstring acoustics.

[J.acoustic]

Thanks for replies!

It seems one thing is pretty clear. The wider the fretboard, the flatter the radius. And vice versa. This makes sense considering as the fretboard gets more narrow, you would decrease the radius to give potentially wider perceived fretboard. What I mean by this is that the width of the fretboard along the radius would actually be greater than the width straight across would be.

However, it seems like acoustics with anything from 1 11/16" to 1 7/8" nut widths still have similarly flat fretboards. I guess ease of production.

It seems like, especially since I don't really bend much on my acoustic, there is no reason not to go with a rounder (tighter radius) fretboard if you like the playability. It's definitely something I'll have to keep note of when/if I go custom some time.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by J.acoustic

Thanks for replies!

It seems one thing is pretty clear. The wider the fretboard, the flatter the radius. And vice versa. This makes sense considering as the fretboard gets more narrow, you would decrease the radius to give potentially wider perceived fretboard. What I mean by this is that the width of the fretboard along the radius would actually be greater than the width straight across would be.

However, it seems like acoustics with anything from 1 11/16" to 1 7/8" nut widths still have similarly flat fretboards. I guess ease of production.

It seems like, especially since I don't really bend much on my acoustic, there is no reason not to go with a rounder (tighter radius) fretboard if you like the playability. It's definitely something I'll have to keep note of when/if I go custom some time.

Bear in mind they've been making those necks with that radius long before electric necks were around. So the question might well be "Why so much curve on electric necks?"



P.S. Looks like Fender over the years has gone through 7.25", 9.5" and 12", so nothing is set in stone.

The past couple of weekends, playing gigs with my "new" Strat (9.5") I didn't even notice a difference when switching to a D-28. Go figure...

[J.acoustic]

Originally Posted by kydave

Bear in mind they've been making those necks with that radius long before electric necks were around. So the question might well be "Why so much curve on electric necks?"



P.S. Looks like Fender over the years has gone through 7.25", 9.5" and 12", so nothing is set in stone.

The past couple of weekends, playing gigs with my "new" Strat (9.5") I didn't even notice a difference when switching to a D-28. Go figure...

Ha, very true... the curve is definitely more comfortable (for me) though and I suppose it just never transitioned over to acoustic.

[Pheof]

To me Gibson are good, I think they're about 12" radius? Martins are much flatter and I don't prefer it. Why are classical guitar fret boards as flat as a 2x4? I liked Fender's 7.5" radius, but I've played some that fret out and some that don't. I think the best compromise is 9.5".

I had an Eastman dread that had a big neck and a rounder radius board, which felt a lot like a Martin with a Gibson neck. It was really nice. I'd guess that to be a 12" radius or less. I got rid of it for another guitar.

[kevets]

Originally Posted by scottishrogue

Classical style guitars, with wider nuts, have a flat fretboard. As the width of the neck is reduced, the radius of the fretboard is reduced accordingly. My violin has a very narrow neck, and an even shorter radius. The saddle should be radiused to match the radius of the fretboard. Don't really know why, but that's the way it is...so just deal with it!

Glen

Yeah, thank goodness for the lower tension on nylon strings. But even still, full barres on a classical down in position 1 or 2 are a bear.

[Earwitness]

My Guild has a flat fretboard and is 1 3/4". Personally, I don't even notice the difference when I go back and forth. I don't notice barre chords being any harder. Whenever (on any guitar) I have difficulty with barres it's not with the 3 and 4 strings so I don't see how the radius helps--although I accept the common experience that it does.