Best Custom Shop?

[Señor Voorhees]

Are the guitars you've played hipshot hardtail and neck through. There's really not much room for neck angle with a bridge as shallow as a hipshot. The pictures on the axe palace don't give a good viewing angle, but it doesn't look like there is one... And if there is, it's not by much.

In order to have neck angle with a hipshot you'd have to crank the saddles pretty high.

Now that I'm looking at my E-II bass though, there appears to be a very slight angle despite being a short bridge. (though it's bolt on so not entirely a good comparison.) I'm gonna guess that the guitar has a smaller angle, and that angle (especially one so shallow) makes very little difference in the feel to one with a straight angled neck. There's also the possibility that it was never the neck angle he didn't like, and it was something more significant like neck profile or joint or something.

 

[exo]

The flusher a bridge is with the surface of the body, the less angle is needed.

It's not unusual AT ALL for there to be no neck angle on guitars that don't have TOM style bridges. Recessed floyds, standard OG trems and hard tails......non of this things require a neck angle becaus the strings come off the bridge low enough in relation to the end of the fretboard that a neck angle will take the strings TOO low by the time you get to 17-24 feet area.

A little Google-fu of the phrase "Floyd rose neck angle" will give a wealth of information on the subject.

 

[purpledc]

Are the guitars you've played hipshot hardtail and neck through. There's really not much room for neck angle with a bridge as shallow as a hipshot. The pictures on the axe palace don't give a good viewing angle, but it doesn't look like there is one... And if there is, it's not by much.

In order to have neck angle with a hipshot you'd have to crank the saddles pretty high.

Now that I'm looking at my E-II bass though, there appears to be a very slight angle despite being a short bridge. (though it's bolt on so not entirely a good comparison.) I'm gonna guess that the guitar has a smaller angle, and that angle (especially one so shallow) makes very little difference in the feel to one with a straight angled neck. There's also the possibility that it was never the neck angle he didn't like, and it was something more significant like neck profile or joint or something.

not by much is still more than nothing which was my point. And most neckthroughs don't have a tremendous amount of neck angle but most of them do. And it would also depend on which hipshot was installed on the guitar. They make it in two heights.

The flusher a bridge is with the surface of the body, the less angle is needed.

It's not unusual AT ALL for there to be no neck angle on guitars that don't have TOM style bridges. Recessed floyds, standard OG trems and hard tails......non of this things require a neck angle becaus the strings come off the bridge low enough in relation to the end of the fretboard that a neck angle will take the strings TOO low by the time you get to 17-24 feet area.

A little Google-fu of the phrase "Floyd rose neck angle" will give a wealth of information on the subject.

It has nothing to do with how flush the bridge is. It depends on how tall the bridge is. Flush is how close the base of the bridge is to the body. With a hard tail the bridges are nearly always flush to the body. The height will depend on which hipshot was used on the guitar. And it is unusual if the company is known to always build their guitars with some degree of neck angle into the construction.

 

[Señor Voorhees]

The second half of the post of mine you quoted was me sort of flip flopping, as I picked up my bass that had a shallow bridge but still an angle. I was basically saying you were right, though I still don't know what difference it makes if it has 0 angle and 1 degree angle.

As for your response to exo, you're just arguing semantics. We all know full well that he meant string height at the bridge. Hell, most of what you're arguing is semantics. No angle vs. negligible angle the point remains... The way the guitar plays won't feel different.

 

[purpledc]

The second half of the post of mine you quoted was me sort of flip flopping, as I picked up my bass that had a shallow bridge but still an angle. I was basically saying you were right, though I still don't know what difference it makes if it has 0 angle and 1 degree angle.

As for your response to exo, you're just arguing semantics. We all know full well that he meant string height at the bridge. Hell, most of what you're arguing is semantics. No angle vs. negligible angle the point remains... The way the guitar plays won't feel different.

Sorry. I read it. But i also wasnt trying to be a dick either. I was just touching on certain points of what you said in regards to hipshot bridges. But to answer your question there really isnt a huge difference. Hell there isnt really a difference between my les paul and my esps. Which is why I said my point wasnt about the amount of neck angle but rather if it existed at all in any amount. I am not the best communicator as I often leave emotion out of my consideration when responding and many take this as me being abrasive when its not my intent. I am the type of person that looks at whether something is factual or not. So even if it was a half a degree, if it was intentional on the makers part then that is what I look at whether i can see it or feel it. No harm intended.

 

[exo]

not by much is still more than nothing which was my point. And most neckthroughs don't have a tremendous amount of neck angle but most of them do. And it would also depend on which hipshot was installed on the guitar. They make it in two heights.




It has nothing to do with how flush the bridge is. It depends on how tall the bridge is. Flush is how close the base of the bridge is to the body. With a hard tail the bridges are nearly always flush to the body. The height will depend on which hipshot was used on the guitar. And it is unusual if the company is known to always build their guitars with some degree of neck angle into the construction.

Semantics. Flushness helps determine string height, since it's a facet of the overall height of the bridge in relation to the fretboard. You know what I'm getting at. Jeeze.......

 

[purpledc]

Semantics. Flushness helps determine string height, since it's a facet of the overall height of the bridge in relation to the fretboard. You know what I'm getting at. Jeeze.......

I know what you are getting at yes now that you have explained it. But no its not semantics. You are either right or you are wrong. If I said you adjust your action by turning the truss rod it would be an inaccurate statement even though a neck adjustment would change the orientation of the strings to the fretboard. I don't think people should be excused for using improper terminology if it is in fact incorrect no matter if I know what they are getting at or not. Because being in the beginners section people with less knowledge than you or I will look at it, get the wrong idea and go off on their merry way repeating what you said and someone else is surely going to correct them. I'm sorry you disagree. But that is how I feel. But you are still incorrect. Flushness does not determine string height on a hardtail bridge. The actual height of the bridge and/or its saddle range determines height. Have you ever in your life seen anyone mount a hardtail anything but flush to the body? I think I have seen someone recess one once or twice but I haven't seen anyone float one. Thus in most cases its always mounted flush and that has nothing to do with the height of the strings. When you need to adjust the action on a hipshot would you go grab some washers or shims and raise the bridge or would you turn a screw on a saddle? You say semantics, I say I'm simply stating facts.

 

[exo]

I know what you are getting at yes now that you have explained it. But no its not semantics. You are either right or you are wrong. If I said you adjust your action by turning the truss rod it would be an inaccurate statement even though a neck adjustment would change the orientation of the strings to the fretboard. I don't think people should be excused for using improper terminology if it is in fact incorrect no matter if I know what they are getting at or not. Because being in the beginners section people with less knowledge than you or I will look at it, get the wrong idea and go off on their merry way repeating what you said and someone else is surely going to correct them. I'm sorry you disagree. But that is how I feel. But you are still incorrect. Flushness does not determine string height on a hardtail bridge. The actual height of the bridge and/or its saddle range determines height. Have you ever in your life seen anyone mount a hardtail anything but flush to the body? I think I have seen someone recess one once or twice but I haven't seen anyone float one. Thus in most cases its always mounted flush and that has nothing to do with the height of the strings. When you need to adjust the action on a hipshot would you go grab some washers or shims and raise the bridge or would you turn a screw on a saddle? You say semantics, I say I'm simply stating facts.

Yeah, not looking to argue crap with you, but you're being more than a little pedantic. Flushness of the bridge helps determine height of the strings. you run a TOM all the way down the studs so it sits flush, you bring the strings flusher to the body. You run the studs down on a trem system, it brings the strings flusher to the body. You run the saddles flush on a hard tail........yards yadda yadda. you're simply using terminology in a slightly different manner than I, which is EXACTLY what a semantic arguement is. Enough is enough. Good grief.........

 

[Chokey Chicken]

Oh oh! I like pointless debate! To further argue semantics how about this! Technically, the more flush the saddles are to the body, the less height there is to the strings! If the strimg saddles are completely "flush" with the body (ie: no gap), then the strings would touch the body. Tune-o-matic saddles are very much less flush with the body than a hipshot or any other flat mount bridge.

This thread has gotten so ridiculous it's hilarious. None of this means anything to anyone.

 

[purpledc]

Oh oh! I like pointless debate! To further argue semantics how about this! Technically, the more flush the saddles are to the body, the less height there is to the strings! If the strimg saddles are completely "flush" with the body (ie: no gap), then the strings would touch the body. Tune-o-matic saddles are very much less flush with the body than a hipshot or any other flat mount bridge.

This thread has gotten so ridiculous it's hilarious. None of this means anything to anyone.

But what if you take a die grinder and grind the saddles flush with the rest of the bridge? Is that a double flush?

Yeah, not looking to argue crap with you, but you're being more than a little pedantic. Flushness of the bridge helps determine height of the strings. you run a TOM all the way down the studs so it sits flush, you bring the strings flusher to the body. You run the studs down on a trem system, it brings the strings flusher to the body. You run the saddles flush on a hard tail........yards yadda yadda. you're simply using terminology in a slightly different manner than I, which is EXACTLY what a semantic arguement is. Enough is enough. Good grief.........

The first sentence is correct. Again if you don't want to argue then why continue? I'm not denying that I am using terminology in a different way. But that is also the correct way. But like you I am done. If you want to create another post being upset with me pointing that out fine but I wont be responding. I can live with you having the last word whatever that may be.

 

[feraledge]

This thread has gotten so ridiculous it's hilarious. None of this means anything to anyone.

Correction: this thread has always been ridiculous.