Compound radius costs.

[wuzzo]

Reading this article makes me think that non-compound radius necks are actually inferior;
http://www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Necks/Radius.aspx

Are they very difficult to produce and how much more expensive should they be ? Twice the price ? Less ? More ?

[wuzzo]

Could Warmoth custom necks be incorporated into a custom built acoustic ?

[Kent Chasson]

Originally Posted by wuzzo

Reading this article makes me think that non-compound radius necks are actually inferior;
http://www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Necks/Radius.aspx

Are they very difficult to produce and how much more expensive should they be ? Twice the price ? Less ? More ?

It's been my experience that a compound radius allows slightly lower action without buzzing, particularly when bending. As for cost, there's nothing about the process that should be any more time consuming but if someone is not set up for it and doing it custom, it's reasonable that it would cost more. How much more would be pure speculation.

Some things to consider:

-The measured difference in a compound board vs a cylindrical one is very small. It's small enough that some people essentially build a compound radius into a cylindrical board when leveling the frets.

-The Warmoth article uses the term "conical". To be effective, boards can be a conical section but they don't have to be. The idea is to get the frets in a plane under the string path. That can happen with compound curves that aren't conical sections.

-Small aberrations in the neck building process (like a bad relief curve or a twist in the neck) can quickly undo any benefit gained by a compound board. A well built neck with good setup work is way more important than whether or not the radius is compound.

[justonwo]

Is a compound radius even noticeable on a relatively flat acoustic guitar fretboard? I would think that kind of detail would be more important for an electric guitar, particularly if you do a lot of high bends. I remember trying to play some Gilmour solos on a Strat with a 7.25" radius and having the notes fret out. On a acoustic, you'd have to be doing some pretty aggressive bends for that to happen. Although I'm sure my builders care about fretboard radius, it's one of those specs that I never think about for acoustic.

[wuzzo]

I feel like some shutters came down and thunder distantly rolled..but..........
....could Warmoth custom necks be incorporated into a custom built acoustic ?

I'm taking cover now.

[El Conquistador]

Originally Posted by wuzzo

....could Warmoth custom necks be incorporated into a custom built acoustic ?

Many luthiers incorporate compound radii as a standard feature. Mike Baranik for example.

Steve

[wuzzo]

I was wondering if it would be difficult to adapt , say, a Strat neck to bolt on to an acoustic body with a compatible block- forgetting bridge positioning and such. Just a theoretical question. I should probably think more before I speak.

[Jim.S]

Originally Posted by wuzzo

I was wondering if it would be difficult to adapt , say, a Strat neck to bolt on to an acoustic body with a compatible block- forgetting bridge positioning and such. Just a theoretical question. I should probably think more before I speak.

G'day Wuzzo. I build my neck join very similar to your thoughts, I have build them just as your description but now have changed it to hide the Fender style bolts on the back of the guitar, have a look through this thread Rose Cliche

Jim

[Bruce Sexauer]

Originally Posted by wuzzo

I was wondering if it would be difficult to adapt , say, a Strat neck to bolt on to an acoustic body with a compatible block- forgetting bridge positioning and such. Just a theoretical question. I should probably think more before I speak.

Won't happen on mine. First because I wouldn't, and second because I couldn't, at least not w/o a major redesign and a serious upcharge. The repercussions of such a redesign may well knock out some of the advantage I have built into my guitars. On the other hand, there is nothing I am aware of about a Warmouth neck shape or it's technical qualities that could not be reproduced by most competent luthiers, and in my case (perhaps most cases) there would be no additional charge. It certainly falls within the normal parameters of my work.

[Ken Franklin]

Originally Posted by wuzzo

I was wondering if it would be difficult to adapt , say, a Strat neck to bolt on to an acoustic body with a compatible block- forgetting bridge positioning and such. Just a theoretical question. I should probably think more before I speak.

Check out Lame Horse Guitars. That's what Chris and Jeremy do and Todd Hallawell is a fan. http://www.cjenkinsluthier.com/cjenk...ents_Home.html

[murrmac123]

Originally Posted by Kent Chasson

It's been my experience that a compound radius allows slightly lower action without buzzing, particularly when bending. As for cost, there's nothing about the process that should be any more time consuming but if someone is not set up for it and doing it custom, it's reasonable that it would cost more. How much more would be pure speculation.

Some things to consider:

-The measured difference in a compound board vs a cylindrical one is very small. It's small enough that some people essentially build a compound radius into a cylindrical board when leveling the frets.

-The Warmoth article uses the term "conical". To be effective, boards can be a conical section but they don't have to be. The idea is to get the frets in a plane under the string path. That can happen with compound curves that aren't conical sections.

-Small aberrations in the neck building process (like a bad relief curve or a twist in the neck) can quickly undo any benefit gained by a compound board. A well built neck with good setup work is way more important than whether or not the radius is compound.

As ever, succinctly put.

But I just wonder ...is it really ever possible to have a true conical radius on a fretboard ? ...I suspect that it isn't, unless you go to such extreme radii that the difference is even less significant than with conventional radii.

Louie Atienza may well make an appearance here ...this was one of the epic discussions on the MIMF some years ago, and he posted some very interesting stuff on that thread as I recall ...

[wuzzo]

Originally Posted by Bruce Sexauer

Won't happen on mine. First because I wouldn't, and second because I couldn't, at least not w/o a major redesign and a serious upcharge. The repercussions of such a redesign may well knock out some of the advantage I have built into my guitars. On the other hand, there is nothing I am aware of about a Warmouth neck shape or it's technical qualities that could not be reproduced by most competent luthiers, and in my case (perhaps most cases) there would be no additional charge. It certainly falls within the normal parameters of my work.

Yes, I see that now Bruce, thanks.

Originally Posted by Jim.S

G'day Wuzzo. I build my neck join very similar to your thoughts, I have build them just as your description but now have changed it to hide the Fender style bolts on the back of the guitar, have a look through this thread Rose Cliche
Jim

Thanks for that, Jim, and congratulations on your tenacity in seeing your ideas through. I'm moving away from such considerations now though, after some thought. I'll probably end up with a ' Spanish heel ' guitar- just about as far from a ' quick change ' neck as it can get .
You have to talk these things through though or they just niggle away in the back of the mind. Good luck with your endeavors.

[wuzzo]

A different tack-

I've been playing a 335 lately with a tighter radius than my acoustic and big jumbo frets. It's so comfortable that I have to ask- is there any reason why my acoustic build can't have , say, a 10" radius at the first fret ?

[Bruce Sexauer]

For an acoustic guitar to have a balanced sound across the strings the saddle height should be as close as possible to the same on each string. Also, a flatoicker will have an easier time of it, particularly when strumming, if the strings are not too far off of a plane. These are the two best arguments for the compound radius for those who favor a tighter radius at the nut. Personally, I find a 16" radius throughout to be entirely playable and to present no issues at all, but there you go.

[wuzzo]

I seldom flatpick, Bruce, and I have a good 17" radius jumbo when I do. I don't understand when you say;
" For an acoustic guitar to have a balanced sound across the strings the saddle height should be as close as possible to the same on each string. "

If the first fret radius was, say, 10" then I'd expect each string to be the same height from the first fret . Wouldn't that be so ? I'd expect the saddle height to vary with the string diameter to maintain that evenness.