Asher Guitars WD Music Products Amplified Parts Mod Kits DIY Nordstarnd Pickups Warmoth.com Reiland Pickups
Asher Guitars WD Music Products Amplified Parts Mod Kits DIY Nordstarnd Pickups Warmoth.com Reilander Pickups
Asher Guitars WD Music Products Amplified Parts Mod Kits DIY Nordstarnd Pickups Warmoth.com Reilander Pickups
Join TDPRI Today

7.25" to 9.5" radius a significant change?

Discussion in 'Tele-Technical' started by alfbell, Jun 20, 2012.

  1. alfbell

    alfbell Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    110
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Location:
    idyllwild california
    My tele has a 7.25" radius and I don't like it because it makes bending difficult and the strings fret out when I do big bends high up the neck. (The standard solution of raising the strings up doesn't work for me because I prefer very low action and for the strings to all be at the same height (level).

    I tried a new tele in a music store the other day and the neck and playability was fine. I assumed it was a 9.25" radius (supposedly that's what all the new teles have). I checked with the the guitar tech in the store and he said he didn't know what the neck radius was and the literature that came with the guitars didn't say either (huh? whatever).

    Anybody that is knowledgeable about this, please give me your opinion...

    I thought I was going to have to go to a 12" radius like some strat or les paul neck to achieve what I want but it appears that just going from a 7.25 to a 9.5 makes all the difference that I would need to achieve the setup that I want. Does this seem to be the case?
     
  2. tele_pathic

    tele_pathic Tele-Afflicted

    Posts:
    1,408
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Location:
    St. George, UT
    Yes, going from a 7.25" radius to 9.5" makes all the difference in the world as far as string bending goes.
     
  3. Telesavalis

    Telesavalis Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,717
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Location:
    Deep in the Heart O Texas
    it's all personal preference. I prefer the 7.25 to the 9.5 but I've been told that the 9.5 was developed, more or less, to reduce the string bending issues you speak of, and so many other fender players complained of, that were related to the 7.25 neck. For me it's easier to play a 7.25 neck for several hours, like at a club gig, because I can wrap my hand around it easier and play F positioned barre chords up the neck instead of the traditional forefinger braced barre chords, which makes for less wrist fatigue in my case. Plus I find that a slightly raised action, raised just enough to not fret out on bends up high past the 12th fret, on my 7.25 tele or strat produces a slightly stronger tone and I can play the guitar a bit harder on high intensity rhythm parts. but, again, it's all personal preference.
     
  4. Forum Sponsor Sponsored posting

  5. Soapbarstrat

    Soapbarstrat Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    336
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Location:
    USA
    Wow. Even most techs working out of their house have radius gauges.
     
  6. HC

    HC Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    589
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    I go back and forth between 7,25¨and 9,5¨radius all the time, no problem.The difference is actually very small, compare some radius gauges when you have a chance.
    I have no problems with bends on the 7,25¨radius 52RI I have and I have pretty low action. Are you sure the setup is correct and that the frets aren´t uneven?
     
  7. waparker4

    waparker4 Doctor of Teleocity

    Posts:
    17,320
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    [​IMG]

    from one of Ron Kirn's posts on another thread
     
  8. alfbell

    alfbell Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    110
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Location:
    idyllwild california
    My setup is ok and my frets are even too. I use very light gauge strings (.008 E) and I want to be able to bend high (like Buddy Guy) and can't do it with the 7.25" R.

    Apparently the SRV signature model strat has a 12" radius and so does the Eric Johnson model. That is the standard radius of the Gibson LP too I'm told. I guess that is what I need and 9.5" might not be enough. I always feel more comfortable playing on a LP neck and the bending is so much easier and doesn't have this problem that I have on my tele (altho I know the scale is shorter on the LP, making the bending easier).

    I want the twang and lightness of a tele so I'll need to get a new neck for it. Eventually I'll get a LP too.
     
  9. alfbell

    alfbell Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    110
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Location:
    idyllwild california
    Addendum:
    A friend suggested that I don't mess with my MIJ 1950 Tele Reissue and change the neck. He says leave it be and set it up for use for bottleneck and he'll assemble a custom Tele for me with the neck I want, etc. using parts from Warmouth, MusicKraft, USAAG or whatever. Might not be a bad idea.
     
  10. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Former Member

    Posts:
    1,078
    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    I've got a 9.5" and plenty compound radius necks to compare it with. I don't have any proba playing SRV on the 9.5. It's possible it's just a really good neck but it does show that a 9.5 is fine for blues.
     
  11. alfbell

    alfbell Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    110
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Location:
    idyllwild california
    I guess I'm just going to have to go somewhere (Guitar Center?) where I can have access to trying out Fenders with 9.5" through to 12" radii necks so that I can see what I really like. Also I want to try out the different shape and thickness necks as well. Need to find out what radius and what shape/thickness is the one for me.
     
  12. Super_Locrian

    Super_Locrian TDPRI Member

    Posts:
    15
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2012
    Location:
    Pasadena CA
    I use 11-12" Radius on all my guitars..Les Paul, strats, teles..etc. 9.5 is fine. 7.25 is too round
    My suggestion...start moving up in string gauge. 8's are beyond light!! Even 9's are too thin. You are cheating yourself in the tone dept. Even if you nail all Buddy Guy's stuff, it will still sound nothing like it with those strings.
     
  13. tedro

    tedro Tele-Afflicted

    Posts:
    1,414
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Location:
    7th Galaxy
    -1. :(
     
  14. tedro

    tedro Tele-Afflicted

    Posts:
    1,414
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Location:
    7th Galaxy
    -1.
     
  15. H. Mac

    H. Mac Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    2,369
    Joined:
    May 26, 2012
    Location:
    In the USA!
    If you have a preference as to fingerboard radius, then you have to find and identify the radius (and fret size) that best suits you - - and then carefully avoid the opinions of people like me.

    I don't believe the old, "bending is hard on a 7.25 radius" argument and never will. Between 1954 and 1983, just about all Strats and Teles had a 7.25 inch neck radius, and Clapton, Harrison, Page, Garcia, Guy, Beck, Gatton and millions of others played them without anyone complaining that the radius made string bending too hard.

    It's a matter of technique.

    However, now the "bending is hard on a 7.25 radius" myth is part of our guitar culture.
     
  16. alfbell

    alfbell Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    110
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Location:
    idyllwild california
    You know the "heavier the gauge string, the better the tone" makes sense BUT what about James Burton? His high E is less than a .008. He used to use banjo strings on his telecaster before light gauge guitar strings were available. How do we account for the incredible tone he got live and in studio? (Listen to his tone on everything he's done. Listen to his tone on Emmy Lou Harris's CDs).
     
  17. Wally

    Wally Telefied

    Posts:
    22,660
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Location:
    Lubbock, TX
    alfbell, I can't help you much from this distance, but I can share some thoughts.
    The radius does have a big influence on what action is possible for what amount of bend one prefers. the other big variable is the line of the neck. there are good necks and there are bad necks. There are great necks, and there are necks that are not worth putting strings on. ONe has to be able to read the line of the neck to understand this. I have owned, seen and set-up---I do work on stringed instruemtns for a living----7,25" radius necks that played like a dream. I have seen 12" radius necks that were useless because of a bad line to the neck.
    Buddy Guy bends.....I have a Strat partscaster that will do those bends. IT has a 7.25" radius. IT also has some high action on the high E string---jsut like B. Guy's guitars...but I can take the string across the neck with ease. Note: short radius necks and/or higher action present the string to the fingertip in such a way that there is better 'purchase'--read: grip--- of the string by the finger...and the bending is facilitated by this. Lower action on a flatter radius will allow the same bend as higher action on a shorter radius neck, but the 'attack angle' of the fingertip to the string is different. Some prefer one thing, some prefer another.
    I have a Gibson L>P. Special Plus with a 12" radius...and one of the best Gibson necks I have ever seen. the action at the 12th fet is the same as other 12" radius Gibson necks that I set up....but instead of just achieving a 1 step bend at that action the way most of those Gibson neck yield, this one goes a bit beyond 2 steps....again, Buddy Guy territory, right? Why? Because it has a great---read: ideal---line of neck. You don't often see perfect necks. I remember one vintage TEle that had the same type of situation....it sat up lower than other 7.25" radius Teles...but it bent way up and with ease. I was setting it up with 10's for the player....and I could bend that guitar with ease. Note: I play 9's on 25 1/2" scales normally.

    One other note: IF one sets up with all of the strings at the same height, there is a difference in the feel of the strings and there is a difference in the amount of fret rattle that occurs..meaning that the lower strings will yieldmore fret buzz than do the higher strings...because the tension of the lower strings will be less than the higher strings...noticeably so. Imho, a proper set-up leaves an instrument feeling the same at every fret position....and if you can hit one string without getting fret buzz, you can hit any other string with the same pick attack without getting fret buzz. IF you set up the strings at the same height off of the 12th fret, you actually have to reach over the high strings to get to the lower strings.... YEs, I am a picayune person; but when I am through with a set-up, the guitar puts the player at ease, the insturment palys in tune over the span of the 'board, and there is better control over what the player wants to do with the guitar.
     
  18. AutoReverse

    AutoReverse Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    160
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2012
    Location:
    BC Canada
    The difference is much less of a factor than the fret size. A lot of the smaller radius necks have vintage type frets, hence the greater difficulty bending notes.
     
  19. 63dot

    63dot Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,152
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Location:
    USA, but more importantly, planet earth
    +1 for the 7.25" inch radius and comfort for long periods of time.

    But for speed, low action, and avoiding the buzzing, the very flat feeling 9.5" inch radius is great. It's not 12" or 16" inches but to the fingers both 9.5" and 12"+ feel almost completely flat like a classical guitar.

    Basically, consider anything from 9.5" inches to infinity as a so-called flat fretboard where you can get the action very low if you like. While you can see a 9.5" inch radius, it basically feels flat to the hand, and when you are at an extreme radius of 16" inches as on some Jacksons then it both looks flat and feels flat but really not much more than a 9.5" inch. Fender did their research and got a great flat feeling radius at 9.5" inches without having to make a completely flat radius which can run into issues. And a radius in the 7.25" inch radius range, or less, is seen as a rounded fretboard and you can definitely see and feel how the fretboard has a curve to make chording more comfortable.

    I don't know where the neck feels curved to most players but I get that long term comfort level on my small hands just right on a 7.25" inch radius and I would even welcome a smaller radius from Fender.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2012
  20. 67TeleNut

    67TeleNut Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    130
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Location:
    South Carolina
    Hot Rod 52 AVRI Teles have 9.5 radius necks.
     
  21. boris bubbanov

    boris bubbanov Telefied

    Posts:
    40,361
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA + in the
    Those are exactly the right words.

    You see, another 7.25 boarded guitar, might bend great.

    Like Wally says, some 12 inch boards are pretty hopeless.

    I prefer to see it like this:

    All thing being equal, a 12" board is easier to set up to bend. Especially with larger frets.

    All things being equal, a 7.25 board is a little harder to set up to bend. Especially with vintage frets and a coating of poly over a maple board.

    But things simply aren't equal, not enough of the time.

    I love the ease with which I can get up and down the fretboard with a 7.25 neck and vintage fretwire. I give some of that up, on a 10-16 compound radius board with 6100 jumbo wire.

    Take the time to identify what they offer you to play. Be honest and objective. There are no "cool points" awarded for bigger or smaller, rounder or more flat. The only thing that matters is is it comfortable and can be played long intervals, does it stay in tune, does it sound great, and can I afford it.
     
IMPORTANT: Treat everyone here with respect, no matter how difficult!
No sex, drug, political, religion or hate discussion permitted here.


Share This Page