New Martins With Neck Angle Issues?

[North Bender]

Originally Posted by Earl49

OTOH none of my seven Taylor guitars have needed neck angle changes (all NT necks) or even action adjustments. So I'm batting 1000 on Taylor's. Ditto for Seagull and Rainsong (two each). Guess which brand I no longer buy??

But then you have a Taylor, not a Martin.

[Kip Carter]

Originally Posted by GraceGuitars

Huh?? Their business is dependent on them turning out a quality product. I can't even believe I just read that statement.

yeah that is pretty "out there!" business = poor quality hmmmm ???

[Earl49]

Originally Posted by North Bender

But then you have a Taylor, not a Martin.

And that's fine by me...... Plus I still have the one Martin that was worth keeping (after some major work, BTW)

[SOR]

Originally Posted by Rod Neep

I agree entirely. But that is how Martin do things. Martin have a, shall we say, "strange" way of approaching "problems". They find (or create) a problem, and then find a way of getting round that problem by changing something. That in turn can lead to another problem. Then that problem is solved by changing something else. The end result is that they chase problems around the block.

The bridge thickness thing is just a minor example. Bridge fitting is a better example. They used to finish a guitar, mark around the bridge outline and then scrape off the varnish down to wood and then glue on the bridge. That was the old fashioned way of doing it. It worked. But that was a slow operation.



So next, they tacked on a mask to the wood before finishing the guitar. Peel off the mask and the bare wood was there on which to glue on the bridge.



But that created a problem. The edges of the bridge all round (about 1/8") were glued onto the finish (not secure), and due to that being higher than the wood due to the thickness of the finish the glue didn't have a perfect close contact between the bridge and wood. The end result was that people delighted in posting photos on the forums of pieces of paper under the corners and edges of the bridge. So changing the system, chasing the problem, created another problem.

That wasn't good. So Martin changed the system of bridge fitting again. To overcome the problem that was caused by overcoming the problem.

This time, they CNC routed the nitro finish off the finished top. And then glued on the bridge. Unfortunately that caused another problem. The CNC routing takes off not only the finish, but a small amount of wood too, and therefore the "pocket" was actually deeper than before. Furthermore, the corners of the routing were done with a 1/16" router, which left a tiny radius on the four corners.... onto which the bridge was glued.




That resulted in stress on the lacquer at those points, which on some guitars created small whisker cracks in the finish emanating from the corners of the bridge. Those cracks could take a week to show up, or a couple of months. They were even spotted like that in the stores. But once the cracks started, they grew. Longer and longer. Now, it didn't happen to every guitar. Just some. I happened to have three different new Martins where that problem developed. Lots of other people posted photos of their "whisker cracks". Martin never acknowledged the problem, and it went on for years from 2008.





Typically, people started to "defend" Martin by saying "It never happened to mine", or trotted out the old usual "does it make a difference to the sound" statement. But it was a big deal to those who experienced it in their new guitars.

But the point is.... Martin find (or create) a problem, and then chase the problem, which then creates another problem.... and so on. The bridge fitting is just one example. It is the way that they approach things in guitar manufacture. Don't get me wrong, I really love my Martin guitars, and have done since I bought my first one in 1972. There's nothing like the sound of a good Martin. My best and most favourite guitar is a Martin, even though I had to be without it for nine months while it had a neck reset and have the top refinished due to those pesky cracks around the bridge.

But contrast this approach of problem chasing with Taylor's approach for example. Bob Taylor realised that in order to mass produce a guitar using CNC methods, that some "traditional" things in guitar construction were going to have to change. So the guitar was re-designed essentially from the bottom up so that it could be produced by CNC methods. Then he designed the CNC in house to do it. The superb neck joint for example. Genius in its simplicity. He wasn't chasing problems. He designed the guitar so that there would not be a problem. So that if a guitar needed a neck reset (as they do sooner or later) then the operation could be done in minutes. Brilliant.

Martin have tried to update traditional methods to produce guitars using CNC, but keep tradition. And are therefore chasing their own problems.

Rod

A very nice post, well done.

[phavriluk]

And the NT neck is why I bought a Taylor for my first storebought guitar. Unequalled and unique precision and maintainability.

[NEGuy]

Originally Posted by darylcrisp

one of the prerequisite things i do when i buy any guitar(online or in a shop), is check neckset.
from the getgo(yep, i carry a 24" steel ruler in the vehicle when i go guitar shopping-just in case the shop "doesn't have one handy".

likewise i have a picture taken and sent if i'm buying used-if someone doesn't want to do it or doesn't have the time, i pass on the purchase. to me its no different than showing a picture of the top/back and headstock.

So, Darylcrisp (or anyone) -- what would you think of the condition of the neck on that guitar if it were a potential purchase?

The straightedge is clearly not resting on the top of the bridge, but almost, right?

And the saddle doesn't seem too low?
.

[ewalling]

Another method of checking neck angle, which is suggested by frets.com, is simply to measure the distance of the bass E string from the top of the guitar just in front of the bridge. It should be 1/2" or more.

[NEGuy]

Originally Posted by ewalling

Another method of checking neck angle, which is suggested by frets.com, is simply to measure the distance of the bass E string from the top of the guitar just in front of the bridge. It should be 1/2" or more.

Checked Frank's site after posting saw that -- thanks.
.

[drplayer]

Originally Posted by NEGuy

So, Darylcrisp (or anyone) -- what would you think of the condition of the neck on that guitar if it were a potential purchase?

The straightedge is clearly not resting on the top of the bridge, but almost, right?

And the saddle doesn't seem too low?
.

I think you have the straight edge in the wrong place. As it's been explained to me, it should be checked in the middle of the fingerboard, between the D & G strings. Due to the fingerboard radius, the ends (between the E & A and B & A strings) will naturally be slightly lower, so it may appear that the neck angle is shallow, when in fact it is not. Considering where you are checking this guitar, I'd say the neck angle is great--although the break angle of the strings over the saddle looks a tad shallow. Just a laymen's opinion...

Originally Posted by NEGuy

So, Darylcrisp (or anyone) -- what would you think of the condition of the neck on that guitar if it were a potential purchase?

The straightedge is clearly not resting on the top of the bridge, but almost, right?

In most cases, the straightedge will not clear the top of the bridge if the guitar is tuned to pitch. It will when the strings are off and the repairman is reseting the neck. I believe those are often confused.

Let's look at the the math. If the straight edge is long enough to hit the 1st fret, it will will be sitting pretty much on 1 and 14. It shouldn't be touching anything past the 14th fret and there should be a very small gap, maybe 0.002" at the 12th. Let's ignore that for now and say we're hitting the 12th fret and the straight edge just touches top of the bridge. For an action of 3/32" at the 12th fret, the saddle height above the bridge would be 6/32" or 0.1875". IMO that is an overly tall saddle and runs the risk of tipping forward and possibly cracking the bridge. I like saddles between 0.125" and 0.150" after a neck reset. To accomplish that, the straightedge will hit just below the top of the bridge - when tuned to pitch.

Originally Posted by ewalling

Another method of checking neck angle, which is suggested by frets.com, is simply to measure the distance of the bass E string from the top of the guitar just in front of the bridge. It should be 1/2" or more.

That is the rule of thumb, but you have to be cautious about the "or more" part.

That would depend on the thickness of the bridge. A standard Martin bridge is about 0.340", and I believe their thickest is about 0.375". Taking the lower number and adding a saddle at the taller end of normal, we have 0.340" + 0.150" for a total of 0.490". Using the the thicker bridge, you end up with 0.525".

None of my guitars are over 1/2" and none presently need a neck reset.

Many vintage Gibsons use even thinner bridges, so a neck on one of those would have to be way overset to get to 1/2".

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by mercy

Check every guitar you buy with a straight edge and return any that are wrong. It is your responsibility to the guitar playing community to make the mfg do things right. If you just ignore it they wont change. Remember Martin is a business first and most important. They are not interested in making good guitars.

This may be the most misinformed final sentence that has ever been posted.

Just unbelievably incorrect.

[Kip Carter]

Originally Posted by mercy

Check every guitar you buy with a straight edge and return any that are wrong. It is your responsibility to the guitar playing community to make the mfg do things right. If you just ignore it they wont change. Remember Martin is a business first and most important. They are not interested in making good guitars.

Mercy,
Your premise is way out of line. Especially when it comes to musical instruments of any reasonable level of quality.

YES - If you 'expect' then by all means 'inspect'!
YES - If there are problems it is imperative on the buyer to make it known to the seller and consequentially the builder. Not to whip them into submission, but to allow them the opportunity to exercise their warranty. It isn't a sales gimmick to lure you into buying, it is a function of their quality control and remediation process.

Where I have a problem with your statement is the "Remember Martin is a business first and most important. They are not interested in making good guitars.".

The relationship between the businesses that provide musical instruments and the community they serve is based on trust and quality. It is not a commodity driven transaction (Although some of our collections would suggest otherwise ); it is a purchase that often endures a large portion of their consumers lifespan. Therefore the 'companies' best interest is to assure that the products that make it to that community are of the highest quality and appropriate to the market. Their profit motive is only served when their reputation is upheld by their products.

While you SHOULD inspect and SHOULD seek remediation of issues with the company, in addition to correcting the issue this also serves the companies desire to have satisfied customers who will recommend their product to others and if they do return to the market to purchase another instrument consider them verses their competition.

By not bringing the issue to their attention, negates their ability to provide the product and service that they are in business to supply to their market.

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by Todd Yates

That would depend on the thickness of the bridge. A standard Martin bridge is about 0.340", and I believe their thickest is about 0.375". Taking the lower number and adding a saddle at the taller end of normal, we have 0.340" + 0.150" for a total of 0.490". Using the the thicker bridge, you end up with 0.525".

Actually, the thing I like about the 1/2" test is that it has nothing to do with the bridge - it is purely about relative heights at different sections of the guitar. According to frets.com, if you have a guitar with a decent string height at the 12th fret and around 1/2" from the low E to the top, just in front of the bridge, then you have an acceptable neck angle in relation to the body. In this way, you might have a tall bridge with a little saddle, or a thin bridge with a high saddle - what counts is the string height and not the comparative thicknesses of bridge and/or saddle. That's how I make sense of the information from frets. com anyway.

Originally Posted by ewalling

Actually, the thing I like about the 1/2" test is that it has nothing to do with the bridge - it is purely about relative heights at different sections of the guitar. According to frets.com, if you have a guitar with a decent string height at the 12th fret and around 1/2" from the low E to the top, just in front of the bridge, then you have an acceptable neck angle in relation to the body. In this way, you might have a tall bridge with a little saddle, or a thin bridge with a high saddle - what counts is the string height and not the comparative thicknesses of bridge and/or saddle. That's how I make sense of the information from frets. com anyway.

I think if you talked to Frank about it he would tell you it has everything to do with the bridge. The "1/2 rule" is based on an average bridge thickness of 0.350" and an average saddle height of 0.150". If the bridge on a particular guitar is significantly thinner or thicker, you have to take that into account. A very thin bridge with a very tall saddle is not structurally stable, and I'm quite confident Frank would not set a neck in such a way that you would end up with that.

[valleyguy]

Originally Posted by phavriluk

And the NT neck is why I bought a Taylor for my first storebought guitar. Unequalled and unique precision and maintainability.

Which is why I won't buy Taylors. I just don't like their sound, but of course YMMV. What good is a perfectly made guitar if you don't like what it sounds like.

That said, my 6 month old D18 was recently set up as the action was too high. seems healthy to me, I've done that with every guitar I've ever owned.