PacerX Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 My H-150 is just too darned narrow across the nut. What are the standard Heritage neck widths, and what should I be looking for? Are their particular models of the H-150 and 157 with wider widths? Ideally, I'd like 1.75" across the nut, but that ain't happening, so I definitely need something wider... how wide do they go?
Kuz Posted October 27, 2009 Posted October 27, 2009 I ordered my Custom 555 with a 1 3/4" nut width. I like it, but have ordered several since at the standard 1 11/16 and can't tell the difference really. So the will build to suit your needs (within reason).
PacerX Posted October 28, 2009 Author Posted October 28, 2009 I ordered my Custom 555 with a 1 3/4" nut width. I like it, but have ordered several since at the standard 1 11/16 and can't tell the difference really. So the will build to suit your needs (within reason). I got a reply from Ren, seems like they could go to my ideal: 2" across the nut.
big bob Posted October 28, 2009 Posted October 28, 2009 I got a reply from Ren, seems like they could go to my ideal: 2" across the nut. Oh well then, Happy New Guitar Day!!!
SouthpawGuy Posted October 29, 2009 Posted October 29, 2009 I got a reply from Ren, seems like they could go to my ideal: 2" across the nut. Going for a 12 string are we ?
Kuz Posted October 29, 2009 Posted October 29, 2009 I hope he is ordering a 12 string or he will need a body this size to match the nut! <a href="http://s240.photobucket.com/albums/ff205/jjkuz/?action=view¤t=46549849_f8358b2800.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff205/jjkuz/th_46549849_f8358b2800.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" ></a>
Kuz Posted October 29, 2009 Posted October 29, 2009 I hope he is ordering a 12 string or he will need a body this size to match the nut!
PacerX Posted October 30, 2009 Author Posted October 30, 2009 I hope he is ordering a 12 string or he will need a body this size to match the nut! <a href="http://s240.photobucket.com/albums/ff205/jjkuz/?action=view¤t=46549849_f8358b2800.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff205/jjkuz/th_46549849_f8358b2800.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" ></a> Nope, actually a 6-string. What actually clued me in finally to what I needed was buying one of these: http://www.musiciansbuy.com/Godin-ACS-Nylo...y-32150KIT.html Mine's one with the synth access on it, but like that one it has the 2" width at the nut. I started playing classical 30 years ago, so getting the Godin was like a revelation... I wanted that big, wide neck... and could nver find exactly what I was looking for... didn't even really know what it was... just knew something was wrong with every guitar I owned and had owned neck-wise. The light went on when I started playing the Godin. Now I need a Heritage 150/157 with this neck on it, and life is good!
pegleg32 Posted October 30, 2009 Posted October 30, 2009 The light went on when I started playing the Godin. Now I need a Heritage 150/157 with this neck on it, and life is good! This is interesting, have you thought about why the wider neck works better for you? Is it heavier fingers, or just needing more room between the fingers, or some other dynamic. I'm really curious about what makes it work better for you. (and asking myself if that would apply for me.)
PacerX Posted October 30, 2009 Author Posted October 30, 2009 This is interesting, have you thought about why the wider neck works better for you? Is it heavier fingers, or just needing more room between the fingers, or some other dynamic. I'm really curious about what makes it work better for you. (and asking myself if that would apply for me.) A few reasons I think: I have relatively thin fingers, but play with a pretty heavy left hand - meaning that there is all kinds of legato work going on (picking is generally optional for me on single note lines). That requires that my right hand do most or all of the muting. If the strings are too close together, I'll sometimes bump an adjacent string when hammering on with my pinky or ring finger. If the strings are further apart, I can handle almost all the muting with my right hand and end up playing much more cleanly. Second reason is simply comfort. Because of the size of my hand, cramming everything together for a bar chord on a thin neck gets uncomfortable. Third, the wider width lets a really flat fretboard radius pay off. The limit for how low you can drop the action on a guitar (as long as the fretwork is good and the board itself is consistent) is the radius. Basically, I want the fret board at 16" in radius or HIGHER. Oddly enough, classical guitars tend to have a really flat fretboard radius... and classical guitarists don't do much bending. Lastly, a relatively thin neck section (which is radically different than a classic Les Paul, which have "baseball bat" necks) makes for better speed playing. Ibanez and Jackson necks are shaped like they are to facilitate the type of playing I identify with... fast and faster. Problem is, if the neck gets thin in section and ISN'T very wide you get a thinner sound out of the guitar (my opinion there only...). With a wider neck, you make up some mass and can fill the sound back out some. So, wide width, a flat fingerboard radius and a relatively thin neck section work best for me. Some guys like a standard 50's LP neck. Some guys like the 60's neck. Some guys like Ibanez necks and some guys like Jackson necks... I just happen to really like a type of neck nobody really builds, except Godin... on a nylon string of all things... There was a Fernandes once that was close. A signature model for the rhythm player of Velvet Revolver, but it was solid mahogany and didn't have a maple cap on it, so ultimately that wouldn't work either. Oh... And the heavier the better as far as body wood goes. I'm 100% with Alex Skolnick on that one. 150's and 157's, to sound their best, should weigh a freaking ton and a half. His signature model would be very close to what I want, but the neck wouldn't be wide enough and it would be too baseball-bat-like in section.
SouthpawGuy Posted October 30, 2009 Posted October 30, 2009 A few reasons I think: I have relatively thin fingers, but play with a pretty heavy left hand - meaning that there is all kinds of legato work going on (picking is generally optional for me on single note lines). That requires that my right hand do most or all of the muting. If the strings are too close together, I'll sometimes bump an adjacent string when hammering on with my pinky or ring finger. If the strings are further apart, I can handle almost all the muting with my right hand and end up playing much more cleanly. Second reason is simply comfort. Because of the size of my hand, cramming everything together for a bar chord on a thin neck gets uncomfortable. Third, the wider width lets a really flat fretboard radius pay off. The limit for how low you can drop the action on a guitar (as long as the fretwork is good and the board itself is consistent) is the radius. Basically, I want the fret board at 16" in radius or HIGHER. Oddly enough, classical guitars tend to have a really flat fretboard radius... and classical guitarists don't do much bending. Lastly, a relatively thin neck section (which is radically different than a classic Les Paul, which have "baseball bat" necks) makes for better speed playing. Ibanez and Jackson necks are shaped like they are to facilitate the type of playing I identify with... fast and faster. Problem is, if the neck gets thin in section and ISN'T very wide you get a thinner sound out of the guitar (my opinion there only...). With a wider neck, you make up some mass and can fill the sound back out some. So, wide width, a flat fingerboard radius and a relatively thin neck section work best for me. Some guys like a standard 50's LP neck. Some guys like the 60's neck. Some guys like Ibanez necks and some guys like Jackson necks... I just happen to really like a type of neck nobody really builds, except Godin... on a nylon string of all things... There was a Fernandes once that was close. A signature model for the rhythm player of Velvet Revolver, but it was solid mahogany and didn't have a maple cap on it, so ultimately that wouldn't work either. Oh... And the heavier the better as far as body wood goes. I'm 100% with Alex Skolnick on that one. 150's and 157's, to sound their best, should weigh a freaking ton and a half. His signature model would be very close to what I want, but the neck wouldn't be wide enough and it would be too baseball-bat-like in section. Have you tried one of the Heritage shredder guitars, a VIP2 or Stat ? The neck on my VIP2 is very different to those on the 535/ 170/ 575 etc. I have an Ibanez RG3120 and the VIP is along those lines, not sure of the actual width but it feels wider and is definitely thinner in relation to the width than usual.
PacerX Posted October 30, 2009 Author Posted October 30, 2009 Have you tried one of the Heritage shredder guitars, a VIP2 or Stat ? The neck on my VIP2 is very different to those on the 535/ 170/ 575 etc. I have an Ibanez RG3120 and the VIP is along those lines, not sure of the actual width but it feels wider and is definitely thinner in relation to the width than usual. I played a Stat AGES ago at Elderly Instruments once. I didn't have the money to buy it at the time and was looking for a Telecaster anyway. It did make a generally favorable impression, but I can't remember the neck all that well on it.
SouthpawGuy Posted October 30, 2009 Posted October 30, 2009 I played a Stat AGES ago at Elderly Instruments once. I didn't have the money to buy it at the time and was looking for a Telecaster anyway. It did make a generally favorable impression, but I can't remember the neck all that well on it. There have been a few Stats on Ebay lately, haven't seen a VIP2 for sale (twin humbuckers) in a while.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.