Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: Eyes Wide Shut on February 06, 2012, 02:24:58 PM
-
I'm pretty unfamiliar with Warmoth, but have discovered it through this forum, so i thought I may as well ask on here. I obviously know that importing to UK will add up to about 25% added at customs, but I have nother question about the prices.
With the hardware, would you recommend getting it from Warmoth, or buying in the UK? I'm just curious as a Wilkinson Gold Trem is $104 from Warmoth, but £120-140 in the UK. I'm just worried I'm missing something here beause Warmoth seems extremely cheap.
Cheers,
P.S. Excuse all the threads, I just have loads of answers and found this forum to have decent people with decent answers, as to the other forums where arguments end up happening over something that is completely different to the original thread haha.
-
I buy a lot from Warmoth, but never hardware - don't know why really, I guess they don't stock a lot of my personal favourite hardware items, but also Warmoth's shipping charges are high so I'd only get hardware if I was ordering something else at the same time.
If they have what you want, I don't see any reason not to order, there's no "catch".
I think gwEm has bought some hardware from Warmoth in the past.
-
As Philly says, I've had a couple of bits of Warmoth brand hardware off them.
It was fairly decent, but I think Fender USA stuff is alot better.
edit: Just read the whole thing and saw you wanted a Wilkinson trem. Not tried one myself, but that have a good rep. Got one of their tele bridges and it was nice. As Philly says, Warmoth shipping charges are a bit on the high side. Maybe find a reputable ebay seller?
-
I'd order a guitar as well, so would be getting a bulk package. I've also been looking at USACG if anyone has heard/tried them?
Thanks for the quick responses btw. Really appreciated
-
I'd order a guitar as well, so would be getting a bulk package. I've also been looking at USACG if anyone has heard/tried them?
There's an occasional poster on here, Copperhead, who speaks highly of USACG.
Personally I like Warmoth because I can buy things from the showcase and see actual pictures and - very importantly for me - body weights. And (touch wood) I've had no bad experiences with them, everything has turned up just as described and very well made.
USACG's website is less user-friendly, but apparently the guy (Tommy?) is good to deal with by phone. Me personally, I'm not really a phone person! :lol:
-
Would you recommend a slimmer neck since I have smaller hands? As in the 1 5/8", or would you recommend the 1 11/16" style?
Also what do you make of the neck contours? There's only 2 which catch my eye (Standard Thin/Wizard) and wondered how the compare.
Also with having small hands, would you recommend a neck conversion to 24 3/4"?
-
Hard to say, what guitars do you have at the moment, for reference?
I don't have big hands either, but personally I prefer big(ish) necks. My favourite is the '59 Roundback and I usually get the 1-11/16" nut width. Don't mind 1-5/8" either, but I wouldn't go to 1-3/4".
You're looking at the two smallest neck shapes, I find both the Wizard and Standard Thin too skinny, but as a rough guide the Standard Thin is pretty similar to a new Fender American Standard, the Wizard is - I assume - similar to an Ibanez Wizard! Standard Thin is Warmoth's biggest seller, they have a lot more of those in the showcase than any other size.
For scale length, I don't think you need to worry about the size of your hands when comparing 24-3/4" versus 25-1/2". The former is Gibson, the latter is Fender - and they make most of their necks to the Fender scale length so again you'll get more choice at 25-1/2".
-
I'd probably go for a Custom Design if I can't find anything.
Another good question I have, which has really left me wondering is -
You have the C-shape neck, and the U-Shape necks. How would one compare to the other if both had the exact same depth at the 1st & 12th fret? Do people pick a certain shape for a certain reason?
Also is U-shaped the same as D-shaped?
Thanks for answering my question :)
-
i quite like the Fender 'modern C' profile.
philly's right in that the standad thin is similar, but i do think the standard thin might be a bit thinner than 'modern C'. i've not done any measurements - just going on feel
-
philly's right in that the standad thin is similar, but i do think the standard thin might be a bit thinner than 'modern C'. i've not done any measurements - just going on feel
Yeah, I think you're probably right there.
You have the C-shape neck, and the U-Shape necks. How would one compare to the other if both had the exact same depth at the 1st & 12th fret? Do people pick a certain shape for a certain reason?
Also is U-shaped the same as D-shaped?
OK, this is a bit tricky! Different people probably have different ideas of what those descriptions mean....
To me, a C shape is a perfectly rounded shape, like a cross-section of a circle (maybe slightly squashed into an ellipse! :lol: ) - there's not much of a "shoulder" where the neck meets the fretboard.
U shape is also rounded, but a bit deeper and "straighter" at the sides, so it's more like a 90-degree angle where it meets the fretboard, more of a shoulder.
D shape - to my way of thinking - is kind of like a shallow U or a squashed C, straight at the sides and tending to be flatter at the back, so it doesn't really feel so rounded, more "squarish".
I found this which is a pretty good illustration of neck shapes (as I see them):
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_yF3Oeq9jNrc/Sgb3PqabVOI/AAAAAAAABLo/00zlEsis6u8/s400/Neck+Shape.jpg)
-
Thanks for that. I guess I'll just have to try a Fender Neck and compare it to a Wizard at the same time.
Thanks for your help anyways.
-
remember that you'll have to pay import duty if you import from the US
-
remember that you'll have to pay import duty if you import from the US
Yh I mentioned this in the first post. It's something around 25%, am I right?
-
remember that you'll have to pay import duty if you import from the US
Yh I mentioned this in the first post. It's something around 25%, am I right?
Yeah, 20% VAT plus a bit of import duty and an admin fee - 25% is about right.
-
The Warmoth Wizard profile is the same as the Wizard 1, which AFAIK isn't available on any current Ibanez model. It's a shallow C whereas modern Ibanez necks are a shallow U.
-
The Warmoth Wizard profile is the same as the Wizard 1, which AFAIK isn't available on any current Ibanez model. It's a shallow C whereas modern Ibanez necks are a shallow U.
So would you recommend just getting the Standard Thin then?
-
I have the standard thin with a 1 11/16 nut and I love it. The fretboard is a bit wider than a Strat fretboard, so there's less string slip off. As for the neck contour, it is like a flatter, thinner version of a Strat neck contour. The most noticable differnece is how much less rounded it is; it looks more like the "D shape" neck from Philly Q's picture. So honestly I don't consider it similar to Strat C type necks, as they feel quite different from one another. In short, Standard Thin = thinner (from string side to back side), flatter, and wider (from one edge of fretboard to the other); Fender C Shape = rounder and narrower (from one edge of fretboard to the other).
(Just so you know, there are three modern Fender Strats in my house, in addition to my guitar with the Warmoth neck. I have also played quite a few Ibanez guitars. I guess all I'm getting at is that I have a pretty solid reference point and so hopefully I'm conveying the nature of the standard thin neck accurately)
One last thing I realized I forgot to mention: I have fairly large hands (more long than wide), but I've found that I'm most comfortable playing necks that are Femder C shape or thinner, rather than larger necks. So I don't think slimmer hands always need slimmer necks, or vice versa. Most people have large enough hands to play most electric guitar necks without excessive effort or struggling; the determing factor of which neck is most comfortable tends to be your playing technique and how you hold the neck.
-
The Warmoth Wizard profile is the same as the Wizard 1, which AFAIK isn't available on any current Ibanez model. It's a shallow C whereas modern Ibanez necks are a shallow U.
So would you recommend just getting the Standard Thin then?
Depends on what you want. I just got a Wizard neck from Warmoth and it's very nice indeed.
-
I have the standard thin with a 1 11/16 nut and I love it. The fretboard is a bit wider than a Strat fretboard, so there's less string slip off. As for the neck contour, it is like a flatter, thinner version of a Strat neck contour. The most noticable differnece is how much less rounded it is; it looks more like the "D shape" neck from Philly Q's picture. So honestly I don't consider it similar to Strat C type necks, as they feel quite different from one another. In short, Standard Thin = thinner (from string side to back side), flatter, and wider (from one edge of fretboard to the other); Fender C Shape = rounder and narrower (from one edge of fretboard to the other).
(Just so you know, there are three modern Fender Strats in my house, in addition to my guitar with the Warmoth neck. I have also played quite a few Ibanez guitars. I guess all I'm getting at is that I have a pretty solid reference point and so hopefully I'm conveying the nature of the standard thin neck accurately)
Interesting stuff - I was going mostly by "internet lore" in saying that the Standard Thin was similar to the Fender Modern C. I've only actually owned one Standard Thin, many years ago. Since then I've bought the chunkier shapes. :)
From your description, it sounds more like the Fender American Standard necks from the late '80s and '90s (as I remember them). When Fender changed from the American Standards to the American Series in 2000, the necks got slightly chunkier, more rounded and they started paying more attention to "rolling" the fingerboard edges. I think that's when they first started using the term "Modern C" but I could be wrong.
-
Well I'm used to playing my Epiphone Les Paul Custom. That's actually got quite a comfortable thin neck. It sort of starts as a C-Shape, gradually turning into a slim, D shape. I guess I'll just have to do a very extensive forum search haha
-
Yeah that's kind of like the standard thin. It is at it's most round near the headstock, and it flattens out as it approaches the body. It's still on the flatter side down the whole neck, but it does flatten out slightly like the Epiphone you're describing. Another nice feature is that it maintains it's curvature all the way to the heel, unlike the Strat necks, which kind of square off in an extended heel like shape. When I get home tonight I'll take a couple pictures to show you the difference.
-
i find the standard thin profile just 'ok', its a just a little bit too thin for me.
on the other hand, you can get some good deals for them in the warmoth showcase, and as philly points out you can then see what your buying, and get it alot quicker too.
often the warmoth necks have their compound radius fingerboards, which is something nice, i like the feeling of it.
-
Yeah that's kind of like the standard thin. It is at it's most round near the headstock, and it flattens out as it approaches the body. It's still on the flatter side down the whole neck, but it does flatten out slightly like the Epiphone you're describing. Another nice feature is that it maintains it's curvature all the way to the heel, unlike the Strat necks, which kind of square off in an extended heel like shape. When I get home tonight I'll take a couple pictures to show you the difference.
That would be great, thanks very much :)
-
I have the standard thin with a 1 11/16 nut and I love it. The fretboard is a bit wider than a Strat fretboard, so there's less string slip off. As for the neck contour, it is like a flatter, thinner version of a Strat neck contour. The most noticable differnece is how much less rounded it is; it looks more like the "D shape" neck from Philly Q's picture. So honestly I don't consider it similar to Strat C type necks, as they feel quite different from one another. In short, Standard Thin = thinner (from string side to back side), flatter, and wider (from one edge of fretboard to the other); Fender C Shape = rounder and narrower (from one edge of fretboard to the other).
(Just so you know, there are three modern Fender Strats in my house, in addition to my guitar with the Warmoth neck. I have also played quite a few Ibanez guitars. I guess all I'm getting at is that I have a pretty solid reference point and so hopefully I'm conveying the nature of the standard thin neck accurately)
Interesting stuff - I was going mostly by "internet lore" in saying that the Standard Thin was similar to the Fender Modern C. I've only actually owned one Standard Thin, many years ago. Since then I've bought the chunkier shapes. :)
From your description, it sounds more like the Fender American Standard necks from the late '80s and '90s (as I remember them). When Fender changed from the American Standards to the American Series in 2000, the necks got slightly chunkier, more rounded and they started paying more attention to "rolling" the fingerboard edges. I think that's when they first started using the term "Modern C" but I could be wrong.
What neck profiles do you like?
-
From Warmoth, the only one I really like is the '59 Roundback. I had an SRV which was OK, but still a bit too slim.
I'm always tempted to try a Boatneck or Fatback, but I'm afraid they might be a bit too big - and I don't really like a neck which is the same depth at the 1st fret as the 12th.
-
These two pictures show the difference in fretboard width (both necks have 1 11/16 nut widths):
The first is the Warmoth Standard Thin, the second is the Fender American Series Highway 1.
Finally, one important note: the flash on my camera makes both necks look pretty bad, but the glossy Warmoth is especially badly represented. The Warmoth looks great in real life.
-
Now here are two pictures that I wasn't going to post but I think they are interesting. Notice how much thicker the rosewood fretboard is on the Warmoth than on the Fender. Ok so I measured it and its only an one milimeter difference, but still... :D
Note: the order of pictures (Warmoth, then Fender) are the same on every post.
-
These show the heel extension of the Fender neck compared to the Warmoth like I mentioned earlier.
-
Here are the two necks as the reach the heel, and as they reach the headstock. (God the stupid flash really makes the Warmoth look bad :shock:)
-
From Warmoth, the only one I really like is the '59 Roundback. I had an SRV which was OK, but still a bit too slim.
I'm always tempted to try a Boatneck or Fatback, but I'm afraid they might be a bit too big - and I don't really like a neck which is the same depth at the 1st fret as the 12th.
Wow you really like a fat neck then. You should try to find out what the dimensions are on your favorite neck and see where they fall on the Warmoth scale.
-
Thanks very much for that. Greatly appreciated.
And the Warmoth really does give you a bit of an extra chunk on ya fretboard :)
-
Just one little additional point on the thickness of the fretboards - I see that's a Warmoth Pro neck, the boards on the Vintage Modern and Total Vintage necks aren't quite as thick. Probably something to do with different construction methods because of the different types of truss rod. :)
-
So after all the close comparisons, I think the contours of the necks are more similar than I originally thought. They are at their most different as they approach the heel, which you can see pretty well from the pictures. But up towered the headstock, they are pretty similar.
That's interesting to hear about the fretbaords, Philly. I might get a Vintage modern for a different guitar, so that's good to know.
-
They are at their most different as they approach the heel, which you can see pretty well from the pictures. But up towered the headstock, they are pretty similar.
Just as another point of interest (maybe! :lol: ), Warmoth have changed the heel shape quite recently. It used to be a "rounder" shape which I didn't really like:
(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p216/phillyq/VMT1917B.jpg)
(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p216/phillyq/VMS3565b.jpg)
(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p216/phillyq/SN6190B.jpg)
(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p216/phillyq/VMS3526b.jpg)
The newer ones have a smaller heel which fits the body more tightly:
(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p216/phillyq/VMS4887B.jpg)
(http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p216/phillyq/VMT3361B.jpg)
-
Isn't the round one a Strat shape and the square one a Tele though?
-
I mean the shape of the heel as it blends in to the main part of the neck, just above where it says "Warmoth".
As you rightly point out, at the end of the neck Strats have a rounded heel and Teles have a square heel.
-
Ignore this post, realised I was just looking way too deep haha.
Do you mean the newer necks have a sharper angle and the ends, rather than rounded?
-
Look at the heels.
Where you connect it to the body.
Not the neck profiles.
-
Just look at the whole flat area of the heel.
On the two newer necks (the bottom two) that area is smaller, squarer - it hugs the heel area of the body more closely. Go back to Roland's pictures of his guitars and you can see it.
Does this make any difference to the guitar's playability? Not really. It's just an observation. :P
-
Do you know how recently they changed that Philly? My neck is proabably almost a year old at this point.
Edit: I just checked mine; it's definitely the newer heel type. I actually think it does effect plausibility to a degree when you're playing in the uppermost register
-
I have a quick question about Warmoth Philly. I've posted on another thread as I thought it may be more relevant to that one than this one. Here's the link if you have time - https://bareknucklepickups.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=26043.0
-
Do you know how recently they changed that Philly? My neck is proabably almost a year old at this point.
I think the last three necks I've bought have had the "new" heel, so that's probably all within the last year, yes.
-
I bought my wilkinson trem from Warmoth with the body and neck. I did think about sourcing the trem in the UK instead, but if you buy the trem from Warmoth they will install the studs for you, which I thought was worth doing as it was the first time I'd put a guitar together and I wasn't sure about my abilities.
Also, I didn't get charged any import duty, which was a nice surprise. I don't know whether they just forgot, or what, but I was very happy. This was about five years ago though, so maybe they are more on the ball now.
-
I bought my wilkinson trem from Warmoth with the body and neck. I did think about sourcing the trem in the UK instead, but if you buy the trem from Warmoth they will install the studs for you, which I thought was worth doing as it was the first time I'd put a guitar together and I wasn't sure about my abilities.
Also, I didn't get charged any import duty, which was a nice surprise. I don't know whether they just forgot, or what, but I was very happy. This was about five years ago though, so maybe they are more on the ball now.
That's bloody lucky haha. With the price of a Warmoth guitar, you could have probably got a set of BKPs for the import duty saved lol
-
I bought my wilkinson trem from Warmoth with the body and neck. I did think about sourcing the trem in the UK instead, but if you buy the trem from Warmoth they will install the studs for you, which I thought was worth doing as it was the first time I'd put a guitar together and I wasn't sure about my abilities.
Also, I didn't get charged any import duty, which was a nice surprise. I don't know whether they just forgot, or what, but I was very happy. This was about five years ago though, so maybe they are more on the ball now.
That's bloody lucky haha. With the price of a Warmoth guitar, you could have probably got a set of BKPs for the import duty saved lol
I did 8) I hadn't bought the pickups yet so when it came and I realised I was saving some cash I invested in a set of Nailbombs.