Martin Should consider a bolt on neck!

[JerryM]

I continue to read here and other forums and talk to techs that have or are having problems with Martin neck set angle. Many are underset causing problems with saddle height, action, buzz etc. I have had over the past 30 years or so a dozen or more and have had several neck resets done at enormous expense because I otherwise liked the guitar so wanted to keep it.
While visiting GC's I have run across brand new dreads with terrible neck angle problems one recently was actually unplayable above the 5th fret and it was a brand new HD28, they had it marked down 500 dollars, big deal! When I inquired they said "someone will buy it" why not send it back???Some person who is unaware ends up getting taken.
Having had several Bourgeois and Collings and once a couple of Taylors, the bolt on system is great. A angle change can be done in under an hour and even at home if your familiar with the system.I don't feel there is any loss of tone or volume either.
Old style sets are craftsman perfection in custom makers hands but in a factory setting and mass production it seems to me it would solve what I consider to be a problem with Martins. But I also know they will say it isn't, JMO here so be kind.

[LemonCats]

Bolt on necks should become the new industry standard!!! (Aswell as adjustable truss rods, which is pretty much standard nowadays but not as much in the nylon string world)
And for acoustic pickups- A pickup that also has a mic blend should become the new standard!

[guitar george]

Bolt on necks sound like a good idea. Why doesn't everyone use them? Maybe there are some drawbacks.

[drplayer]

Experiences vary...I’ve probably had close to a dozen Martin’s over the years, and have only had 1 neck re-set done (my 000-28EC when it was 17-years old), and it wasn’t dire that I do it at that time; but, it was headed there, and I just thought I’d get it out of the way. I’m neutral with regard to neck attachments, but there’s a place for both, and many prefer one over the other. I suspect this will always will be the case. For every Dana Bourgeois, Bill Collings, and Bill Taylor, there is a Richard Hoover, Ren Furgusen, or C.F. Martin. I suspect if Martin changed to a bolt-on neck, it would be the end of Martin. Most would consider it blasphemous...

[brencat]

Originally Posted by JerryM

I continue to read here and other forums and talk to techs that have or are having problems with Martin neck set angle. Many are underset causing problems with saddle height, action, etc.

I have observed this too in the past 5 - 7 years specifically as annual production #s have ramped up, there are a higher than usual number of Martins with underset necks.

Perhaps the solution then is better training of their workers doing it, not the join itself? I personally like the traditional dovetail.

[zmf]

Originally Posted by drplayer

I suspect if Martin changed to a bolt-on neck, it would be the end of Martin. Most would consider it blasphemous...

There is great truth here. It brings to mind that other large acoustic forum, and what their reaction would be.

There's nothing rational about this, or at least I haven't hear the ultimate explanation.

And I'll confess that if Hoover and Santa Cruz say a dovetail makes a difference, I'll tend to let it ride as one of those mysterious black boxes. Meanwhile, that little voice in the back of my head is saying "whatever happened to your scientific rigor?"

[l8tstartr]

I think Martin would gladly switch to bolt on necks if it didn't mean big losses in sales. Bolt on necks would probably save them a ton of money in assembly costs and repair costs. The problem is customer acceptance. I would love to see them take a chance on one or two models to see how the public reacts.

[pscheel]

Originally Posted by l8tstartr

I think Martin would gladly switch to bolt on necks if it didn't mean big losses in sales. Bolt on necks would probably save them a ton of money in assembly costs and repair costs. The problem is customer acceptance. I would love to see them take a chance on one or two models to see how the public reacts.

Agreed. My luthier has said that the last 2 years, there has been an insane amount of NEW Martins coming in his shop that needed neck resets. He has stopped doing Martin warranty work. The time it requires to do a neck reset doesn't justify the reimbursement he gets from Martin.

[Earl49]

Originally Posted by l8tstartr

.....I would love to see them take a chance on one or two models to see how the public reacts.

They already do that with the Mexican Martins - mortise & tenon or simple dovetail neck joins. But the Martin faithful would be apoplectic without their traditional dovetail joint in the Standard Series. Kinda like a Lexus with a hand-crank starter.

Originally Posted by pscheel

Agreed. My luthier has said that the last 2 years, there has been an insane amount of NEW Martins coming in his shop that needed neck resets. He has stopped doing Martin warranty work. The time it requires to do a neck reset doesn't justify the reimbursement he gets from Martin.

I believe it. I was two-for-four on Martin neck resets in the 1990's, long before production numbers were this high, with the third eventually going to need it sooner rather than later. I made the switch to bolt-on as soon as Taylor came out with their NT neck system, and have never looked back. IMO, any solid joint will conduct the string vibration equally well. But I am a blasphemer that way and probably not welcome in Nazareth.

[mawmow]

Purists argue for standard glued neck while Taylor patented neck is awesome !
* Taylor used to glue the fretboard on the top before 1996 but just bolted the neck since 1996.

I bought last Fall a nice Taylor 412ce 2008 needing his neck to be reangled : someone had shaved done the saddle to keep a decent action. I unbolted the neck, placed a shim, rebolted and replaced the saddle with a higher bony one to higher strings insertion angle : it nows sounds better. It cost nothing but a new saddle.

Try that with a glued neck !

[H165]

They already do that with the Mexican Martins - mortise & tenon or simple dovetail neck joins.

This.

I've read several comments that the bolt is only there to act as a glue clamp, and contributes nothing to the security of the joint. I hope nobody with the slightest understanding of physics, geometry, vectors, or stress points actually believes this.

The "bolt" Martins are still more of a pain to reset than no-glue joints.

Ryans have bolt-on necks, and they sound pretty good. When a Ryan neck got a long drenching in one of the big storms, I believe the neck replacement took about 45 minutes - if that. The old neck is still laying around the shop.

[guitar george]

Originally Posted by mawmow

Taylor used to glue the fretboard on the top before 1996 but just bolted the neck since 1996.

I have a 1996 Taylor 512-M that does not appear to have a bolt-on neck. Must be one of the last before they switched. I presume I would see a bolt or two on the inside of the neck block. Instead, there's a white "Taylor Guitars" sticker. Maybe there are some bolts under the sticker? How would I know if it is a bolt-on or not?

[Tony Burns]

Do you realize how long it took martin to even put a truss rod in their guitars !
now your asking about bolt on necks ? -- Remember Martin invented the Acoustic guitar as we know it today -
IMO for them to use a bolt on neck would be against the way the guitar was invented -yeeah it sounds kinda arcaic or old world
-it will take them along time to even consider it -- not saying it will never happen - but it wont be soon .

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by mawmow

* Taylor used to glue the fretboard on the top before 1996 but just bolted the neck since 1996.

I believe Taylor glued the fretboards until 1999. They bolted the necks, but glued down the fretboard extension. They did not use shims to adjust the neck, but rather simply reduced the heel to achieve the correct angle. While not preferred, that could be done without ungluing the fingerboard by sliding 1-sided sandpaper between the heel and body top.

In 1999, Taylor went to the NT neck - shims to adjust the neck, and fretboard extension, which was now bolted down, rather than glued.

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by guitar george

I have a 1996 Taylor 512-M that does not appear to have a bolt-on neck. Must be one of the last before they switched. I presume I would see a bolt or two on the inside of the neck block. Instead, there's a white "Taylor Guitars" sticker. Maybe there are some bolts under the sticker? How would I know if it is a bolt-on or not?

You could take my word for it There are 2 bolt heads under that sticker. If you're dying to see for yourself, you can heat the sticker and pull it away so it can be reused (say some . . .).

Also, per my msg above, your fretboard extension is NOT bolted on - it's glued.