neck profile X learning curve

Big Al · Jul 7, 2017

Reading is a skill, too. No one has said there is a one size fits all solution. My switch from thin to full ended my pain and hand fatigue. That simple. The reason is bio mechanical and is well known cause and effect. For those who have no pain or fatigue using a thin neck there is no need to change.

deytookerjaabs · Jul 7, 2017

Big Al said:
No one has said there is a one size fits all solution. .

I was showed how the larger rounder necks are more comfortable and ergonomic because of the way it fits a human hand.

Larger necks, Big Al tested, Doctor Approved!

El Gringo · Jul 7, 2017

Well as far as Gibson neck profiles go I have a 58 Louisville slugger of a neck on my Les Paul Custom and I have a R9 with a super comfortable neck and the much talked about slim profile 60's neck on my Les Paul Classic Premium Plus Top. My favorite would be the R9 .I went from the slim taper to the R9 and felt like I died and went to heaven .

Big Al · Jul 7, 2017

deytookerjaabs said:
Larger necks, Big Al tested, Doctor Approved![/COLOR]

Only for the way I play, it applies to the technique of the individual. Plenty of "Classical" style shredders, those that use a classical type technique with the thumb centered in the back of the neck find a flatter and thinner profile more comfortable and better suited to their technique. That is why most all shredder necks are thin and flat.

For those that play the way I do and that would include most classic rockers and blues types the majority find a round fatter neck more comfortable and better suited to their needs. Why is this an issue?

BTW for one two decades I played 4/5 nights a week, 4 sets a night in clubs as that's how i made my living. Long playing sessions became brutal and very painful with the thin neck guitars I was using. If I can't play I can't make a living. If I can't play a gig there are 4 other guys that can't make any money. It was a simple solution, the doc's explained why and the pain went away. For me. My experience. I never made any claims that this is the way it is for everyone, only that all the people that were saying that once they switched to a fatter neck and noticed how easier it became to play and how long sessions were less fatiguing were having the same realization that I had. Pelham 73's explanation why, which you took issue with, was exactly how my doctors explained it too me.

Why this seems to be an issue for you is beyond me, but hey, if you must, then by all means, knock yourself out, I think most people who have read these posts get what was said.:##

Pellman73 · Jul 8, 2017

P.Walker said:
What a way to overreact...

yea probably

I guess I just have gotten sick of any thing laced with sarcasm and negativity even if its not meant that way from the poster--- even when its, as they say here in North Carolina "Just pickin!"

people make jabs at you and then say "just pickin" or "just kidding". I think that's bullshit. people should just be respectful and nice to one and other all the time. busting balls with buddies is one thing (and that's where things get tricky here. its hard to know what this is sometimes. is it busting balls with buddies or are we anonymous? would we say the things we say here if we were sitting in a bar face to face? who knows)

I used to be a very sarcastic person and I find that sarcasm is usually the manifestation of anger.... I guess I got angry anyhow!

as I've gotten older I've decided that hurting peoples feelings is a shitty thing to do, again even if you don't mean to do it-- perception is reality and how it is perceived on the other end is what matters

yea I probably overreacted and deytookerjaabs your response reflected that-- I appreciate what you had to say

I will say Al's experience does seem to lend some further validation to my proposed theory. it just makes sense (TO ME-- thats it). if you have an open relaxed hand vs a hand that is, well, pinched together for lack of a better you are using more of your forearm muscles, potentially putting more stress and inflammation in the carpal tunnel, and would potentially be more painful in the long run with repetitive stress. but again-- -I'm really just throwing out theories.

speaking of tags- Al I like that you called me Pelham-- like Pelham blue. that's better than Pellman (which is just my first initial and last name. when sigining up here I did not realize my username was going to be my NAME I would have picked something much cooler. your brain auto corrected it to something cooler!

deytookerjaabs · Jul 8, 2017

Big Al, I took your post as a lean towards an absolutest theory that big necks are better for ______ technique, i.e. "Humans". Better for you, and some other guys, sure. I'm not seeing this universal preference that you seem to be implying from guys whose thumb sits over the board. I've met a good number of fellas here I know who were tracking before I was conceived that are out there every day and not one of them I can think of off the top of my head who insists on a big neck, that's including everyone who can wrap the thumb. If standard/thin necks weren't ergonomic fat necks would be the standard as there's a million full time players with said technique who will go to their grave never needing a fatty. Heck, people buy fancy vintage guitars and shave the necks sometimes, crazy. Go to a guitar store and the only 1 inchers you'll find are pricey reissues of a specific variety, that's pretty much it. Shop Warmoth in stock and there's one million "standard" profiles and maybe one boat neck if you're lucky.

And sarcasm as an expression of anger Pellman?? Geezus, I don't want to live in world without sarcasm.

slammintone · Jul 9, 2017

Pain or no pain isn't the only reason someone might like a larger neck or a smaller neck. Not by a longshot. I never had "pain" playing a skinny neck. It's just that the first time or two I played a guitar with a much larger neck I simply felt right at home and on board with the concept. Take 10 people who never really expressed a preference one way or the other for larger or smaller necks and let them play an older R8 or R4 for that matter and some of them will immediately dig the fat necks and a few will think, "no way I'd want a neck like that". For those who would be repulsed by the fat necks some will think they're laughably too big (and a couple I've played are in that catagory!) and others will realize for the first time maybe, that they simply are more comfortable playing less girthy necks.

Big Al · Jul 9, 2017

deytookerjaabs said:
Big Al, I took your post as a lean towards an absolutest theory that big necks are better for ______ technique, i.e. "Humans". Better for you, and some other guys, sure. I'm not seeing this universal preference that you seem to be implying from guys whose thumb sits over the board. I've met a good number of fellas here I know who were tracking before I was conceived that are out there every day and not one of them I can think of off the top of my head who insists on a big neck, that's including everyone who can wrap the thumb. If standard/thin necks weren't ergonomic fat necks would be the standard as there's a million full time players with said technique who will go to their grave never needing a fatty. Heck, people buy fancy vintage guitars and shave the necks sometimes, crazy. Go to a guitar store and the only 1 inchers you'll find are pricey reissues of a specific variety, that's pretty much it. Shop Warmoth in stock and there's one million "standard" profiles and maybe one boat neck if you're lucky.

And sarcasm as an expression of anger Pellman?? Geezus, I don't want to live in world without sarcasm.

It is the reason why in vintage guitars with thin or thicker profiles available the larger necked versions are more desirable. Fenders and Gibsons in particular. Not an absolute but a clear majority. Same on this forum. There is a clear preference for full round necks over the thin neck variety by a clear margin. Wonder why?

deytookerjaabs · Jul 9, 2017

Big Al said:
It is the reason why in vintage guitars with thin or thicker profiles available the larger necked versions are more desirable. Fenders and Gibsons in particular. Not an absolute but a clear majority. Same on this forum. There is a clear preference for full round necks over the thin neck variety by a clear margin. Wonder why?

Besides this forum being a very small portion of the guitar community at large that's not my take on your observation. Let's be generous and pretend 10% of Gibson & Fenders made today have 1 inchers. Well, there's a buyer group who will ONLY play fatties (kind of like a buddy of mine, y'know...). They'll complain about every other guitar "it's nice but the neck is skinny" just like the smaller group who refuse to play anything but skinny necks. Could you argue that makes them more desirable??? Meh, it's all in the math. The rest of the consumers simply don't give a darn. Again, the vintage world is a small subset of the guitar universe and one only needs to contemplate production totals for a few seconds to see that, if you want a replica of a Broadcaster chances are you want a fat neck as it's sort of a given.

Heck, even if we don't look at main production models and stuck to mass produced reissue types; which ones have fat necks in the Gibson/Fender camp? It took decades for Fender to finally put a fatty on the '52 tele reissues, of course the '58, '62, '64 Teles not so much. Strats? Again, it took a long while to get a proper fat neck on '54 reissue, even my Mary Kaye I used to have had a less than fat V. I haven't picked up a 60's style that went to 1 inch. Gibson? R8's, R7's & some others like the '58 ES335. As for the desirability go ahead and look at the after market for R8's versus R9's, the later sell for more money consistently even though they have the "less desirable" thinner neck. So, I'd say even the majority of VINTAGE reissue guitars aren't going to have a boat-ey profile.

So, the manufacturers are doing it all wrong, building Strats/Teles/LesPauls/SG etc etc with mostly medium neck profiles, then some skinny and some fat. Either they don't understand the silent majority or they're not prone to.......

Confirmation Bias: the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.

Which I don't understand Big Al because I'd think you, as a lover of big necks, would see they're not that easy to find on the wall even among non-"shred" guitars.

57Strat777 · Jul 9, 2017

My fattest neck is a 58 RI Lester and the thinnest neck guitar I own is a 89 Eric Clapton Strat. I have a few PRS guitars with Pattern Reg medium necks. My main guitar for 25 years was the thin neck 89 Clapton Strat, so when I got the 58 RI Lester a couple of years ago the neck felt HUGE. I wasn't sure if I could get used to it. Now after a couple of years with the 58 RI I love the fat neck. The one advantage I love with the thin neck is I like to do a lot of thumb over playing and the thin neck makes that easier. However, I am at the point where any of the necks seem OK to me. I wouldn't sell any of my guitars due to the neck size. If I had my choice of the perfect neck for me, the PRS Pattern Reg neck is pretty sweet.

BTW...for you guys suffering hand pain. I am an old guy nearly 60 and I play about 4 hours a day. My fretting hand used to suffer bad pain. When I woke in the morning my hand would be locked up and it would take a minute of slowly moving my fingers before it would loosen up again. I started taking fish oil everyday and that fixed it. No more hand pain at all. If I stop taking the fish oil, the pain comes back in about 4 days.

Big Al · Jul 9, 2017

deytookerjaabs said:
Besides this forum being a very small portion of the guitar community at large that's not my take on your observation. Let's be generous and pretend 10% of Gibson & Fenders made today have 1 inchers. Well, there's a buyer group who will ONLY play fatties (kind of like a buddy of mine, y'know...). They'll complain about every other guitar "it's nice but the neck is skinny" just like the smaller group who refuse to play anything but skinny necks. Could you argue that makes them more desirable??? Meh, it's all in the math. The rest of the consumers simply don't give a darn. Again, the vintage world is a small subset of the guitar universe and one only needs to contemplate production totals for a few seconds to see that, if you want a replica of a Broadcaster chances are you want a fat neck as it's sort of a given.

Heck, even if we don't look at main production models and stuck to mass produced reissue types; which ones have fat necks in the Gibson/Fender camp? It took decades for Fender to finally put a fatty on the '52 tele reissues, of course the '58, '62, '64 Teles not so much. Strats? Again, it took a long while to get a proper fat neck on '54 reissue, even my Mary Kaye I used to have had a less than fat V. I haven't picked up a 60's style that went to 1 inch. Gibson? R8's, R7's & some others like the '58 ES335. As for the desirability go ahead and look at the after market for R8's versus R9's, the later sell for more money consistently even though they have the "less desirable" thinner neck. So, I'd say even the majority of VINTAGE reissue guitars aren't going to have a boat-ey profile.

So, the manufacturers are doing it all wrong, building Strats/Teles/LesPauls/SG etc etc with mostly medium neck profiles, then some skinny and some fat. Either they don't understand the silent majority or they're not prone to.......

Confirmation Bias: the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.

Which I don't understand Big Al because I'd think you, as a lover of big necks, would see they're not that easy to find on the wall even among non-"shred" guitars.

It isn't about big necks. I said full and round. The rounder profile vs the thinner flat profile. You are engaging in the activity you seem to want to lay on me. We are talking profiles not thickness. I am not saying a 1 inch thick netk suits everybody, I have been saying the fuller, rounder necks are more ergonomic for =the majority of players vs the thin flat profile. That is all. And I'm done. We disagree.

tdarian · Jul 12, 2017

I play better and feel better playing on a "R8 style" neck than just about anything thinner. My hands are fairly small and not all that gifted but the thicker necks bring out the best. I'm OK on a PRS Wide Fat neck but thinner and I tend to get sloppy and tired.

I've got 5 guitars and my 2007 R6 has the largest neck and it is the one I play 95% of the time.

renderit · Jul 12, 2017

tdarian said:
I play better and feel better playing on a "R8 style" neck than just about anything thinner. My hands are fairly small and not all that gifted but the thicker necks bring out the best. I'm OK on a PRS Wide Fat neck but thinner and I tend to get sloppy and tired.

I've got 5 guitars and my 2007 R6 has the largest neck and it is the one I play 95% of the time.

Me too. As to the gifted part, let's say mine got lost in the mail...

But I like BIG necks, I can not lie!

neck profile X learning curve

Big Al

Well-known member

deytookerjaabs

Well-known member

El Gringo

Well-known member

Big Al

Well-known member

Pellman73

Well-known member

deytookerjaabs

Well-known member

slammintone

Well-known member

Big Al

Well-known member

deytookerjaabs

Well-known member

57Strat777

Member

Big Al

Well-known member

tdarian

Well-known member

renderit

Well-known member