Neck Angle

[MrBump]

Quick question for the builders amongst us.

I've been reading the Hisc--k book, and thinking about necks and stuff.  He talks about traditional bolt on Fender style necks having a straight profile, and Les Paul ones needing to be angled back because the fretboard is designed to be less proud of the body.  

Angling the neck backwards seems like a really big deal!

Am I right in thinking that this can be dealt with by recessing the bridge?  I've seen manufacturers doing this.

Also, if you build a neck-through guitar, does the addition of a fretboard give you enough clearance from the body to avoid a recessed bridge?

Does that make sense to anyone?

Also - surely there MUST be a better solution than a truss rod!!!  In this day and age of advanced alloys, surely something has been invented that's light and ridged enough to keep a neck perfectly straight?

Your in ignorance,

Mark.

[Jonny]

You mean this?



It's a Warmoth option and it says there isn't a need for an angled neck pocket.

[MrBump]

Yeah, that's the type of thing.  I've seen recessed trems too...

Just not sure why Gibson would go through the aggro of offsetting the neck, when the bridge can be recessed?

[WezV]

truss rod question first go with a two way one that can be installed in a straight channel.  much easier to install compared to a traditional curved rod and also allows for much greater adjustability..  I usually compliment that with two carbon fibre reinforcement bars either side which gives a lot more stability and also helps prevent dead spots in the neck

secondly, with the neck angle ... whatever method you choose get some measurements off the bridge (always have it first) and do full size side elevation drawings.. That way you cant go wrong

It sounds like you dont want to do a neck angle and you dont want to do a recessed bridge..  its not likely to happen.  

generally the thickness of a fretboard will not give you enough clearance with a non recessed bridge - not unless you have the neck angle.

On the through neck SG i am doing at the moment had to do both, the fretboard is slightly raised (no where near as much as the dreaded gibsons with raised fretboards) and the neck is angled as well.  It had to be done this way because the dog ear cover of the neck pickup was taller than the height of the fretboard and frets.  It was all pretty easy to do because i had drawn it out first  from the side and that really does help it all make sense

[WezV]

Yeah, that's the type of thing.  I've seen recessed trems too...

Just not sure why Gibson would go through the aggro of offsetting the neck, when the bridge can be recessed?

because neck angles change the way a neck is presented to the player.  i dont notice but my sprayer is short and complains about having to reach further on a strat, partly due to the scale length and partly due to the neck angle..

and the fact gibsons neck join follows the carve of the top in that area - they look really strange withough neck angles

[MrBump]

i dont notice but my sprayer is short and complains about having to reach further on a strat

That makes sense.

Got no problem with recessed bridges, and yes - I love neck through guitars!  In fact my Charvel has a recessed trem, and I've always struggled with the Tune-O-Matic style of bridge on an LP, because it feels like I'm having to reach over too much.

[Philly Q]

On the through neck SG i am doing at the moment had to do both, the fretboard is slightly raised (no where near as much as the dreaded gibsons with raised fretboards) and the neck is angled as well.

Just to stick up for those dreaded Gibsons, I have a couple of LP Juniors with that neck design - the strings are parallel to the body so the bridge, whilst not recessed, is very close to the body - and they play great.

It doesn't work so well on my V, though, for some reason.  Playing the upper frets on that guitar feels weird.

[WezV]

i aint got owt against them really - just aware of the bad reputation and how some people view that style of gibson