Trusted builder to make “highly” custom fender replacement neck

[Bearitone]

Worst case scenario he screws this up, we all note his name, and there’s one more bad seed we can all avoid watering

 

[budda]

Nope. He is not a known and trusted builder.
I was looking for a trusted bigger name builder. Couldn’t find one :/

I’m trying my luck with an independent guy which isn’t what i wanted to do but, appears to be my only option

Just wanted to confirm. I wish you the best of luck!

 

[Bearitone]

Just wanted to confirm. I wish you the best of luck!

Thanks!

 

[Drew]

The rocklite and richilite isn’t a “must” but preferred. Really more than anything i want the zerofrey and flat fretboard

If the guy you found doesn't come through, modifying a Warmoth neck might be your best bet.

Richlite might be tough (though I'm curious, why do you want this as a spec? I have a richlite fretboard on my Martin, and I'd much rather have real wood), though I suppose you could hae a luthier remove a rosewood or similar fretboard and replace it with richlite. But, if you ordered a long-scale Strat neck with a 16" radius and asked them to send it to you with no frets and no nut route, then a competent luthier could likely take that neck, flatten the radius, and then fret it with stainless frets and add a zero fret.

Out of curiosity, what's the purpose of this particular set of specs? These are oddly special-purpose. Touchstyle, maybe? I can't see a flat radius being at all comfortable for conventional chording.

 

[Bearitone]

If the guy you found doesn't come through, modifying a Warmoth neck might be your best bet.

Richlite might be tough (though I'm curious, why do you want this as a spec? I have a richlite fretboard on my Martin, and I'd much rather have real wood), though I suppose you could hae a luthier remove a rosewood or similar fretboard and replace it with richlite. But, if you ordered a long-scale Strat neck with a 16" radius and asked them to send it to you with no frets and no nut route, then a competent luthier could likely take that neck, flatten the radius, and then fret it with stainless frets and add a zero fret.

Out of curiosity, what's the purpose of this particular set of specs? These are oddly special-purpose. Touchstyle, maybe? I can't see a flat radius being at all comfortable for conventional chording.

The idea behind each spec:
-28.625? I just like that scale length.
-Richilite and stainless? Zero maintenance. No need to oil it or rehydrate it, no need to finish it with any lacquer, and can easily be cleaned with Namptha and water.
-flat fretboard? Well this goes deeper into geometry than I’d like to type out on my phone so i’ll Keep it simple. Basically you need either a cone shape (compound radius fretboard), or a plane (flat fretboard), to achieve the lowest action possible across all frets. A straight radius doesn’t work as well because your neck tapers fr the bridge to the nut. I’ve already tried a compound radius and that was okay but I’m dying to try a flat fretboard (but there aren’t many options out there).

-Why a zero fret? Easy. Now the end user (me) can easily replace the nut (which is just a string retainer now) without fear of filing too deep. All that’s needed is the nut material, some slotting files, and a string rule. No more not slotting too deep. No more paying a tech $120 for a nut replacement

 

[Bearitone]

Dp

 

[Drew]

Basically you need either a cone shape (compound radius fretboard), or a plane (flat fretboard), to achieve the lowest action possible across all frets. A straight radius doesn’t work as well because your neck tapers fr the bridge to the nut. I’ve already tried a compound radius and that was okay but I’m dying to try a flat fretboard (but there aren’t many options out there).

I'm not sure I'd agree with this - a straight radius is fine, provided the nut and the bridge radius are the same. It's when they're not, when for example you have a 20" bridge radius (like a Floyd) and a 10" nut radius, that something like a 10-16" compound radius will give you even action across the neck. Otherwise, you need to radius the bridge, either by adjusting saddle height on adjustable bridges, or shimming saddles on something like a Floyd.

If you've never played a flay radius, well... There's a reason it's an uncommon spec. It's NOT comfortable for chording.

I'd also say if you want ease of maintenance, finished maple fretboards are pretty maintenance free.

As far as nut replacements... My oldest guitar is a '97 Stratocaster I bought new in 1998. I've had the nut replaced twice, once in favor of a graphite nut for smoother trem performance when it was only a couple years old, and once again as part of a refret within the past year. And actually I take that back, I just pulled up a few pictures on my phone to make sure, and sure enough it still has a graphite nut on it. No other guitars I've owned needed a nut replacement. That's one nut replacement in 20 years, and I don't think it cost me more than $30-50 to have it done. It's probably cheaper to just replace the nut every couple decades than have a zero fret installed.

Idunno. Your guitar, your specs... But this is a lot of work to put into getting a very specialized spec set, and I think a lot of those specs are either things you'll find you won't actually like, or are intended to solve problems that have much easier solutions.

 

[KnightBrolaire]

If you've never played a flat radius, well... There's a reason it's an uncommon spec. It's NOT comfortable for chording.

totally disagree. Classical guitars are almost always flat radius and they're widely used for chord work.

 

[Drew]

totally disagree. Classical guitars are almost always flat radius and they're widely used for chord work.

...in a wildly different playing position than what's common in rock. Find a way to get a strap on a classical and then try playing a few power chords and get back to me.

 

[KnightBrolaire]

...in a wildly different playing position than what's common in rock. Find a way to get a strap on a classical and then try playing a few power chords and get back to me.

This is how you strap up a classical guitar:

go look at most guys playing technical music and they've got the guitars strapped up into what's basically a classical position. Combine that with the relatively flat radius that's common on metal guitars and the parallel is easy to see:

 

[Drew]

Yeah, but most of the guys playing that sort of technical music with the guitars strapped that high up on their chests aren't exactly playing all that much in the way of chords lower down on the neck, either. I'm not pulling this out of my ass or anything, it's pretty widely understood that rounder radiuses lend themselves to more comfortable chording, but the tradeoff is that they tend to choke when you bend notes a little more readily.

All of which is a moot point, since the OP's belief that you need either a compound radius fretboard or a flat fretboard to get the lowest possible action is incorrect, so going for a flat radius involves tradeoffs that you don't actually need to make.

 

[7 Strings of Hate]

I'v had a few flat fret board guitars, and I wouldn't know if you didn't tell me. I found no difference in difficulty or feel of chording or any noticeably better action.

 

[Bearitone]

I'm not sure I'd agree with this - a straight radius is fine, provided the nut and the bridge radius are the same. It's when they're not, when for example you have a 20" bridge radius (like a Floyd) and a 10" nut radius, that something like a 10-16" compound radius will give you even action across the neck. Otherwise, you need to radius the bridge, either by adjusting saddle height on adjustable bridges, or shimming saddles on something like a Floyd.

If you've never played a flay radius, well... There's a reason it's an uncommon spec. It's NOT comfortable for chording.

I'd also say if you want ease of maintenance, finished maple fretboards are pretty maintenance free.

Really? See geometrically i think when taking a section of a cylinder (like a fretboard is) you can never get even height across all frets because the spacing is different at the nut than it is at the bridge. I’ll try to make a model to explain my logic.

As for comfort i hear flat radius is uncomfortable from some people and from others i hear “it’s the best, omg, never going back” so, it’s something i want to try for myself

And yeah i guess maple would have been a good low maintenance option too. When i re-examine my line of thinking I’m not sure why but, I like the idea of a fretboard with no lacquer or finish. I guess the only people who should really care are the manufacturers who get to save money by skipping the step of spraying lacquer.

 

[Bearitone]

Aha, i don’t have to make a model. Turns out someone has already done a video on this subject.

 

[penguin_316]

I hope everyone realizes how little a difference a radius makes. If you can’t play chords on a flat radius it’s not like they are magically easier on a fender style radius. The radius promotes thumb over the neck playing, which isn’t really needed for tech metal...and commonly avoided.

I know players like Mark Holcomb do it, and yet still his guitars are a 16” radius I believe which is closer to flat than it is to a 7” radius like a fender.

People need to draw out the circles with the respective radio to get a picture of what type of curvature they are dealing with and gain perspective.

Get a giant piece of paper and a large compass and have at it. A 20” radius creates a 40” diameter circle....it’s pretty flat.

I always make my guitars with a flat fretboard and wouldn’t have it any other way. The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. Lower action, bigger/easier bends that won’t fret out, promotes “correct” thumb behind the neck playing, etc.

It also less likely to “trip” your fingers over adjacent strings of the string height is more uniform across the fretboard. Basically flat fretboard seem to play faster, that’s my take on it. Less finger movement=more efficient=faster playing with less effort.

 

[penguin_316]

If you play sitting down with the guitar on your right leg, a flat radius might not be for you. I always play in classical position, with my guitar high enough to play up and down the neck with my wrist barely bent. Basically the same position your guitar would be if standing and playing.

 

[Drew]

Really? See geometrically i think when taking a section of a cylinder (like a fretboard is) you can never get even height across all frets because the spacing is different at the nut than it is at the bridge. I’ll try to make a model to explain my logic.

Ok, I see where you're going with that now. In theory, yes, if there's any curve at all to the surface then the action will be ever-so-slightly higher at the bridge (or the theoretical fretboard plane under the bridge) than at the nut because the strings will be a hair further out along the arc of the fretboard. But, I mean... If you have a 43mm nut and standard Floyd spacing at the bridge is 52mm, and let's say each E string is 2.5mm away from the edge of the fretboard at the nut and the bridge, then the two outer strings would span a gap of 38mm at the nut and 47mm at the bridge, the four inner strings would split that into 5 equal spaces, and you'd have string spacing of 7.6mm at the nut increase to 9.4mm at the bridge, meaning the string would have transversed 1.8mm on a cone with a radius of 16", or a diameter of 32" (about 813mm). My geometry is a little rusty so I'm not going to tell you exactly how much deflection we're talking here, but at the bridge, well, I'd have a hard time seeing a horizontal deflection of 1.8mm on a 16" radius resulting in a vertical deflection of more than one or two tenths of a millimeter. And that's at the bridge. Let's be generous and say it's two tenths of a millimeter in vertical deflection if you move horizontally out across that radius 1.8mm - at the 12th fret, the midpoint, you're only going to see half of the vertical change, or the fretboard would only fall a tenth of a millimeter lower than it would if nut and string spacing were identical. In practice, I don't know if someone could take a guitar with 2mm action at the 12th fret, raise it to 2.1mm, and anyone would notice the difference. And, I'd love to see the actual math here, because I'm just estimating and I'd bet I'm wildly exaggerating the vertical plane change here and in prtactice the difference is going to be something more akin to 0.025mm or some such number.

So, all that said - yes, there's a theoretical impact here. But is there a practical impact? Is this sort of difference actually worth chasing, vs something like a plek'd fretjob to ensure the frets are perfectly even, for optimal action?

I hope everyone realizes how little a difference a radius makes. If you can’t play chords on a flat radius it’s not like they are magically easier on a fender style radius. The radius promotes thumb over the neck playing, which isn’t really needed for tech metal...and commonly avoided.

I know players like Mark Holcomb do it, and yet still his guitars are a 16” radius I believe which is closer to flat than it is to a 7” radius like a fender.

In practice... Bending on a vintage Fender 7" or 7.5" or whatever neck, especially with the typical small frets they ship with, is challenging for me and requires fairly high action, higher than I prefer, to stop the notes from choking out, and is a radius so round that I struggle with it for lead playing. Past 9.5-10" or so though, it's really not a concern for me, and I own guitars with 10" and 16" fixed, and 10-16" and 9-14" multiradius necks that all are pretty interchangable to me. I suspect I'd be comfortable up to 18" or so, but as you get much flatter than that it starts to feel uncomfortable for me, as well. the sweet spot is pretty big though and in that range fret size and quality has a much bigger impact on action than radius does.

Also - "correct" thumb position is very position dependent. A "classical" thumb behind neck position gives a very relaxed, natural wrist angle for a very high, traditional classical position, or as was recently pointed out to me a VERY low position provided the guitar is also held at a very steep angle, a la Slash. In between though, the "blues" thumb over neck position provides a much more relaxed wrist angle, and is going to both give you a lot more leverage for bending, as well as reduce wear and tear on your tendons relative to a classical position with the same guitar posture. For me, then, I tend to default to the blues position but only shift into the classical one when needed - Satriani is a good guy to watch for this, as he (totally unconsciously, I'm sure) transitions effortlessly from a "blues" position for most of his playing with the thumb visible over the top of the fretboard, but then drops into a classical position for strtchy fluid legato runs, and not for nothing he's a guy who's never had any real history of RSI issues (outside of the session where he cut the original Power Cosmic tapped arpeggios for some guitar mag, where would have had to be tracked in the classical position). Getting way off topic here, lol, but it's kind of pertinent in that there's a LOT of factors that influence whether something like a flat radius or a given hand position are going to work for an individual guitarist. And I'm not saying this like it's going to be some huge revelation for you - you're pretty clearly aware of the impact position can have on radius choice, and it's only a small extension to thumb position from there, as well.

 

[penguin_316]

All things aside, to make a neck like this is easy. The specs are a tad uncommon and more in materials, but by no means is it difficult.

I’m pretty sure you can buy a template of the neck pocket of a fender. I’d request the actual instrument to be sent to me though to verify everything (if I was building the neck).

 

[Bearitone]

Ok, I see where you're going with that now. In theory, yes, if there's any curve at all to the surface then the action will be ever-so-slightly higher at the bridge (or the theoretical fretboard plane under the bridge) than at the nut because the strings will be a hair further out along the arc of the fretboard. But, I mean... If you have a 43mm nut and standard Floyd spacing at the bridge is 52mm, and let's say each E string is 2.5mm away from the edge of the fretboard at the nut and the bridge, then the two outer strings would span a gap of 38mm at the nut and 47mm at the bridge, the four inner strings would split that into 5 equal spaces, and you'd have string spacing of 7.6mm at the nut increase to 9.4mm at the bridge, meaning the string would have transversed 1.8mm on a cone with a radius of 16", or a diameter of 32" (about 813mm). My geometry is a little rusty so I'm not going to tell you exactly how much deflection we're talking here, but at the bridge, well, I'd have a hard time seeing a horizontal deflection of 1.8mm on a 16" radius resulting in a vertical deflection of more than one or two tenths of a millimeter. And that's at the bridge. Let's be generous and say it's two tenths of a millimeter in vertical deflection if you move horizontally out across that radius 1.8mm - at the 12th fret, the midpoint, you're only going to see half of the vertical change, or the fretboard would only fall a tenth of a millimeter lower than it would if nut and string spacing were identical. In practice, I don't know if someone could take a guitar with 2mm action at the 12th fret, raise it to 2.1mm, and anyone would notice the difference. And, I'd love to see the actual math here, because I'm just estimating and I'd bet I'm wildly exaggerating the vertical plane change here and in prtactice the difference is going to be something more akin to 0.025mm or some such number.

So, all that said - yes, there's a theoretical impact here. But is there a practical impact? Is this sort of difference actually worth chasing, vs something like a plek'd fretjob to ensure the frets are perfectly even, for optimal action?

You definitely have a point. In any assembly/machine/instrument there are lots of variable, the question is which ones have a real impact.

Here’s a question I’ve been wondering. Is the complex geometry of a radius or compound radius even worth the hassle? Is it THAT much better from an ergonomic perspective?

I have to know.

Because god knows there’s no way it’s easier from a manufacturing perspective.

 

[Bearitone]

This is how you strap up a classical guitar:

go look at most guys playing technical music and they've got the guitars strapped up into what's basically a classical position. Combine that with the relatively flat radius that's common on metal guitars and the parallel is easy to see:

That Jason Richardson picture reflects exactly how i have my strap set up^^^

When i shopped for straps online i actually had to make sure to find one that could be adjusted to be short enough.