|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||
| Tele-Technical Telecaster nuts and bolts talk ONLY |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Friend of Leo's
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Age: 37
Posts: 2,703
|
lightweight body - thin neck or thick neck?
I'm putting together a strat that is pretty lightweight (a 3 lb. 1 oz. poplar body) and wondered if it would do better with a thick neck. I read (on TDPRI, I think) that a lightweight body sounds better paired up with a beefier neck. Better resonance between the mass of a thicker neck and the light body, perhaps?
I'm at the point where I'll be ordering a neck soon, and I'm down to either an SRO-FAT/SMO-FAT strat neck (i.e. ballbat profile) or the SRO/SMO (which is a medium C profile, 12" radius and jumbo frets). The guitar in question will be for rock (dual humbucker, rear routed--i.e. no pickguard), so the 12" radius and jumbo frets would be welcomed, but I can definitely hang w/ the Allparts FAT neck as I have one on my esquire. So, with such a light body, will the overall tone/sustain of the guitar be noticeably better with the fat neck over the more traditional one? |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Telefied
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA + in the past
Posts: 30,186
|
If you are selecting a body so light that a 525 gram TMO or SMO-FAT will give you neck dive, respectfully, you are putting your priorities in the wrong place. The right neck comes first; Any body that is too light for use with the best necks is of no value to me - except to sell it to someone who doesn't agree, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Friend of Leo's
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Age: 37
Posts: 2,703
|
I guess the question is--- is a 3 lb. 1 oz. body too light for the SRO-FAT neck? I'll be putting a 57/62 Reissue strat trem on this one (the one with the full size steel block), so that should add a few extra ounces to the body end. Plus I'll just go w/ Gotoh klusons to keep the weight down at the headstock end.
I've seen a few 3 lb. strat and teles on Revelator, etc. that use the big fat necks. I wouldn't think that they'd put a neck on a body that would cause it to neck dive, since they care so much about the overall feel, tone & balance of the instrument. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
![]() Poster Extraordinaire
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Park Ridge, NJ
Age: 67
Posts: 7,728
|
No brainer - we play off the neck/frets - pick out the neck first, the body last.
FWIW, I routinely assemble 2.4#-3.2# Thinline bodies with large TMO-FAT necks and Gotoh staggered vintage tuners - never had any "neck diving" syndrome. If I did, a few ounces of fishing sinker lead epoxied in the body or control cavity does a fine balancing act. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) | |
|
Friend of Leo's
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Age: 37
Posts: 2,703
|
Quote:
Do you find that strat bodies are more or less balanced than a tele body? A tele is such a beautiful slab of wood, and the strat is just much more refined, curvy, etc. I'm still mainly a tele guy, but I'm starting to see the advantages of the strat body shape & contour. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) | |
![]() Poster Extraordinaire
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Park Ridge, NJ
Age: 67
Posts: 7,728
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
Telefied
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA + in the past
Posts: 30,186
|
Quote:
There's always choosing a Bigsby on a Tele, right? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) |
|
Friend of Leo's
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Age: 37
Posts: 2,703
|
I tell ya, with Rob and Boris on the boards, I always get great advice and never have to worry about guitar projects anymore. Thanks to both of you for the consistently great tips and answers!
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
|
|
IMPORTANT:Treat everyone here with respect, no matter how difficult! No sex, drug, political, religion or hate discussion permitted here.