Eastman AR805 - neck hump

[upsidedown]

Originally Posted by Pura Vida

Don't hesitate to contact Eastman about the bridge. They've been known to replace AR bridges, even if they are used and not covered by the original warranty. Their customer service is really good with this.

Following up with a plug for Eastman's customer service. Sent them an email explaining the situation and a week later received the replacement bridge, no charge. And as PV mentioned, they didn't care that it was a used guitar.

[Pura Vida]

That's great news! Eastman's CS is excellent. I have a friend in Costa Rica, who owns several Eastman guitars, but having difficulty finding the right saddles down there. He emailed them, and they mailed three saddles (one for each guitar, plus he has a fourth guitar on the way) to me, so I could bring them down to him.

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by upsidedown

And as PV mentioned, they didn't care that it was a used guitar.

A bridge like the use goes for around 30 bucks retail, compared to what they ask for a new archtop that's odd change. Plus they supposedly have paused archtop production so those saddles are just taking up space at the moment

My Loar also has a slight hump in the fretboard where it goes over the neck extension, fortunately only at the bass side so rarely an issue. I plan to have the bridge replaced with a bone-insert model, I'll have my luthier take a look at redressing the frets a bit on that occasion.

[coder]

The dreaded fingerboard hump over the body is usually an indication of a dried out instrument. It would be worth it to rehumidify it, and to see if the hump goes away.

I had this problem with a Martin dread (pretty bad) and rehumidify with a damp-it for a couple of days did always cure it. I got into the habit of keeping the guitar in the case, and eventually sold it. Both Martin and Taylor describe this problem in their respective user manuals, that is where the idea of rehumidifying comes from. They present the hump as an inevitability.

When I bought my first Larrivee, I was amazed that it did not have this problem. I was like, hmm.. apparently it is possible to build a guitar without this problem...

[Robin, Wales]

Originally Posted by coder

The dreaded fingerboard hump over the body is usually an indication of a dried out instrument. It would be worth it to rehumidify it, and to see if the hump goes away.

I had this problem with a Martin dread (pretty bad) and rehumidify with a damp-it for a couple of days did always cure it. I got into the habit of keeping the guitar in the case, and eventually sold it. Both Martin and Taylor describe this problem in their respective user manuals, that is where the idea of rehumidifying comes from. They present the hump as an inevitability.

When I bought my first Larrivee, I was amazed that it did not have this problem. I was like, hmm.. apparently it is possible to build a guitar without this problem...

What you have said is very true but unlikely on most archtop guitars as the fretboard extension "floats" above the guitar top and so is not going to be affected by the type of top movement you describe for dried out flat top guitars.

[coder]

Robin,

Oh.. that is not an actual picture of a hump, you are just illustrating a point of how the fingerboard extension is separate from the neck... right?
In any case, I summarize the options, it there is a hump, or ski slope etc. in that section:

As I see it, there are 4 options:

1) Try to rehumidify, that piece of wood may straighten out. Unfortunately if it dries out again, it will warp again. But even as a diagnostic step it is worth doing, and keep the guitar in a humicase when you are not playing it.

Options (2) and (3) shoudl be done by someone who has some skill in fretboard leveling, including unfret, resurface and refret. A luthier wannabee
may ruin your guitar for good.

2) If the warping is not severe, a good guitar tech can level the frets in that area to take out the hump. Depending on the extent of the "hump" an agressive fret leveling job there may be enough. This may make the problem area more or less unplayable, as the frets there will not be tall enough. If the verdict is that the warp is slight enough that a fret level will do the trick, it is worth looking around your area for a shop that has a Plek machine. I recall that a plek job costs about $300, and results in precisely dialed in playing surface

3) If the warping is so severe, that it cannot be corrected by (2), a luthier can remove the frets in the problem area, sand the fingerboard flat, and re-fret.
Wild guess:this would cost ~$300-500. One possible problem, if that piece of wood is flat sawn, it may continue to warp, undoing the fingerboard leveling.

4) It may be worth while to try a warranty claim via Eastman. Chances are they would just replace the guitar, unless they try to weasel out in some way.
This is worth trying before (2) or (3) . I consider this a manufacturing defect. If the fingerboard support wood was perfectly quartersawn,
no hump would develop.

The story to tell eastman is that the elevated fingerboard support is apparently flat-sawn, and not surprisingly, it is warping. Send picture with a straight edge on top. That will clearly show the extent and nature of the warping. I will give it 50:50 odds that they will take care of it. They may suggest it is the owner's fault because of letting the guitar to dry out.

Either (2) or (3) will kill your warranty, so thy (4) first.

[Robin, Wales]

Originally Posted by coder

Robin,

Oh.. that is not an actual picture of a hump, you are just illustrating a point of how the fingerboard extension is separate from the neck... right?

Yes, it was just an illustration of how archtop guitars have a very different build to flat top guitars. That guitar in the picture has a perfectly straight neck. The fingerboard extension is not separate from the neck, it is all one piece. The neck heal is attached to the neck block, but the fingerboard/neck extension floats over the guitar top. On a flattop guitar the neck stops and the neck block and just the fingerboard continues across the guitars top plate - and is glued to it. On a flattop any drying of over humidification of the guitar may cause the fingerboard extension to rise and fall with the top. However, on an archtop guitar, like the Eastman AR805 in this case, humidification of the guitar's top will not cause the fretboard extension to rise or fall.

Therefore, in this particular case, humidification was not the issue. The OP has had the issue solved with a fret dress.

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by Robin, Wales

The fingerboard extension is not separate from the neck, it is all one piece.

FWIW, that's not the case with all archtops.

[Robin, Wales]

Originally Posted by RJVB

FWIW, that's not the case with all archtops.

I though that I was being a bit too generalist when I was typing! I try to remember to use phrases like "mostly" or "usually ". Not all flattops are build the same either - some have a neck extension running under the fretboard extension.

[RJVB]

I had planned (but forgot) to find an image online:



That's a Loar LH-350 but from what I understand all their L5 clones have this construction. Which apparently is quite common. From what I understand the 2nd insert block that holds the PU may not be glued to the top (other than by the nitro finish...)

[Robin, Wales]

Originally Posted by RJVB

I had planned (but forgot) to find an image online:




That's a Loar LH-350 but from what I understand all their L5 clones have this construction. Which apparently is quite common. From what I understand the 2nd insert block that holds the PU may not be glued to the top (other than by the nitro finish...)

I'm no expert, so hopefully someone will chip in, but that fretboard extension construction doesn't look like the old 16" L5 that it is copying? On the photos of old L5s I have seen the fretboard extension is supported only over the neck block, not the free moving part of the top, and so the support stops short of the 16th fret.

[RJVB]

I was just thinking that I should find similar pictures of the non-cut LH-6/700 with the chunky necks. The old L5 never existed as a cutaway, nor did it come with a PU.

I wonder just how much difference this would make for the sound though. Also note that the owner of the guitar in that photo claims he can see light shining through/underneath that small block holding the PU. So maybe that block indeed doesn't touch the top before the finish is applied ... whatever that might change for the sound. It *is* typically the kind of thing you'd expect given the Loar's QC reputation (I've also seen remarks about there not being any finish under the neck extension/overhang).

[RomanS]

I've got a Loar LH-300, and it definitely has the floating neck extension!

Isn't the LH-350 the cutaway model? All the Loars with cutaway have super-deep ones, so maybe that necessitates a different neck block/fretboard extension construction?

[RomanS]

Oh, and BTW, it is quite common on many vintage archtops that there's no finish underneath the fretboard extension - the finish is usually applied AFTER the neck was glued to the body, and that's not exactly an easy spot to spray cleanly/consistently...

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by RomanS

I've got a Loar LH-300, and it definitely has the floating neck extension!

Do you think you could manage a mug shot?

Isn't the LH-350 the cutaway model? All the Loars with cutaway have super-deep ones, so maybe that necessitates a different neck block/fretboard extension construction?

Yes, the LH-350 and 650 are the cutaway models with the modern neck.
Your assumption could be right, or maybe there is little benefit for having a floating neck extension because the cutaway prevents the top from vibrating in that area?