$vboptions[bbtitle]



NOS Nocaster gets a shave

slincoln
February 1st, 2006, 04:51 PM
Well, I did it. After finally coming to terms with the fact that big ol' baseball Nocaster neck isn't to my liking, I shaved it down. I shaped it to be similar to my NOS '60 Strat, which I love.

Guys, I know it's heresy, but for me, and I'll bet for many (who can get past the machismo appeal of the fat neck), it's a vast improvement in feel and tone. It seemed to clarify the sound and boost the twang factor with NO loss of sustain (which you might presume). To me, this neck shave yielded as big a tonal improvement as a good pickup change. To my ears, nothing was tonally compromised by the transformation.

By the way, I have Fred Stuarts in this baby and my belief in his pups has just taken another step up. That big ol' chunk of wood was hampering the tone, in my book. I just thought I'd throw this out here for guys, for whatever it's worth.

ThermionicScott
February 1st, 2006, 04:54 PM
Hey, wood isn't 100% predictable. What matters is that you enjoy your guitar now. :)

GTO
February 1st, 2006, 05:01 PM
(who can get past the machismo appeal of the fat neck),

Mmmm, thats telling us. Do what you want, its your guitar. But are you sure the superb new twang factor and killer tone wasn't just the new set of strings? Rock on.

Jack Wells
February 1st, 2006, 06:41 PM
What method of shaving it down did you use?

fractal
February 1st, 2006, 07:26 PM
Guys, I know it's heresy, but for me, and I'll bet for many (who can get past the machismo appeal of the fat neck), it's a vast improvement in feel and tone.

Hi,

I'm glad you got a guitar adjusted to your liking. However, big necks aren't all machismo. I get hand pain while gigging with a guitar that has a small wood cross-sectional area. (It can't be a small nut width AND be small from front to back, however I have 1 3/4" nut width guitars that don't bother me if they are a little thinner front to back.) So, for me, a slightly bigger neck is a necessity. Plus, I think they feel really good.

But, then again, I like a gloss finish on the back of the neck, so I guess I'm weird...

-Garrett

mellecaster
February 1st, 2006, 09:47 PM
I Disagree with just about everything you stated....but I'm glad it went well for you......and that you're Happy 8)

slincoln
February 1st, 2006, 10:43 PM
I actually didn't change strings for this venture, so the difference I heard was simply related to the trimmed off wood. My reason for doing this post was to comment on the factor of neck mass to tone. As I found, it seems to be pretty substantial. Oh yeah, I also removed most of the laquer from it a long time ago. That, too, was a real upgrade to the tone. All that glop Fender drowns their necks in is a real tonesucker.

sabby
February 1st, 2006, 11:04 PM
I had a fatback on a Strat that I tried to sand down to a boatneck. :lol: I should have known I'd end up with something else. Anyway, the neck was thinner than I planned, though still very nice (reverse taper, hard V to C). I think the tone suffered a tad (a little less across the frequency spectrum). FWIW.

GUITARmole
February 2nd, 2006, 01:09 AM
Besides the fact that I just like the way they feel, I think that a fat neck really contributes to tone and sustain.

I'm glad your neck shave turned out OK for you though.

GTO
February 2nd, 2006, 03:48 AM
"That, too, was a real upgrade to the tone. All that glop Fender drowns their necks in is a real tonesucker"

It just gets better. Be very careful what you say from now on. Eric Johnson will be wanting your ears. I understand he has been looking for a spare set. So don't accept any cheap holiday's out of the country.....

That aside, come on, the Custom Shop do not 'drown' necks in 'glop'. I think you are now protesting to much for dramatic effect, or whatever, but any truth in your original statement is starting to ebb away.

Nick Fanis
February 2nd, 2006, 04:11 AM
You can HEAR the difference between a finished & an unfinished NECK,on an electric guitar through an amp ? :shock:

Are you sure your name isn't SUPERMAN?? :lol:

The Doctor
February 2nd, 2006, 07:44 AM
He means when you use the neck for percussion, duh. :wink:

slincoln
February 2nd, 2006, 06:21 PM
Dadgum, I'm feeling the love out there. :D

Jack Wells
February 2nd, 2006, 07:04 PM
What method of shaving it down did you use?

sabby
February 2nd, 2006, 07:33 PM
Dadgum, I'm feeling the love out there. :D
Sorry about the slincoln. :oops: I only meant to suggest that wood is mysterious. I don't doubt your results.

jwells393: You didn't ask me, but I'll say anyway. I used coarse sandpaper on a hard block (carefully) followed by fine sanding sponges. I'm surprised how even it came out. The transition to headstock and heel isn'e as sharp as production necks, bit that says more about the sander technician than the technique, I'd figure.

stevieboy
February 2nd, 2006, 09:17 PM
Hey, machismo is in the fingers!!!

slincoln
February 3rd, 2006, 12:57 AM
jwells393, I just used a good knife, cutting with the grain, in even strokes (blade angled back), and used various grades of sandpaper to get it to the desired shape. It was a fairly slow process that allowed me to avoid any sudden disasters.

My apologies to any who might have felt a nerve struck with my initial "machismo" comment. If you've played an NOS Nocaster, for any length of time, it's a big honker of a neck. Over the course of a night, it became tedious for me. Mind you, I have some rather large necks on other guitars that work well for me. I more feel like it was a combination of the bulk plus the triangular shape that finally did me in with it.

stevieboy
February 3rd, 2006, 03:28 AM
You might as well get em the way you want em. Personally I have a wide range of neck sizes and while i would answer "thick" in a neck size preference poll I enjoy playing them all.

While I am 100% on the fence when it comes to the neck size-to-tone debate, your impression I guess would fit in with those that believe that a thicker neck equals a fatter tone, with more twang being the opposing result of a thinner neck. I've read those debates and the two opinions are always either a thicker neck gives a fatter tone, or it has no effect. So your comments are interesting in that they present another perspective.

slincoln
February 3rd, 2006, 08:20 AM
I guess would fit in with those that believe that a thicker neck equals a fatter tone, with more twang being the opposing result of a thinner neck.


stevieboy, I think you are right. I gather that Broadcasters have thick necks, much like the Nocaster. It makes me feel that the Broadcaster tone may owe a bit to the neck girth.

Deacon Blues
February 7th, 2006, 09:30 PM
Personally, I wouldn't mess with a Nocaster neck. I think they are perfect. Very comfy compared to a modern "C" shape neck.
You changed pups, too? Someone get a rope! A new stiff, scratchy rope! :evil:

slincoln
February 7th, 2006, 11:51 PM
Deacon Blues, an aftermarket neck? Well, that would probably be good, but I have no plans to ever sell the thing, so why not just mutilate the one I've got?

Good thing this forum doesn't prosecute guys for crimes against musical instruments, or I'd be in some real trouble. :twisted: