How thick is yer neck?

[deeaa*]

Just curious...been measuring necks on my guitars, and trying to find out the ultimate shape and thickness.

If you put a slide type caliper between the 3rd and 4th fret - with strings on - and press down, clamping the neck & strings, what thickness do you get? Measuring like this because I know people won't want to take off strings for this.

Mine vary wildly. The thinnest is 19,7mm i.e. 0.775 inches (I don't know how to better say it in those strange inches) and the thickest is 22,2 i.e. 0,87 inches. However the thickest is also a sharp V shape and really feels thin and nice to play. The second thickest is a wide U and feels terribly thick to play. Yet more the thinnest isn't perhaps the best in real life - yes it's very nice to play when recording and leads but for band playing it can get slightly tiring to chord for a prolonged time. Not much but slightly. Still, the japanese Jackson I had was clearly even thinner than that and IT was a pain to play for longer than maybe 20minutes of band playing...THAT was too thin. Too bad I didn't measure it.

So, anybody care to measure how thick...? Any comments on how do you like the playing feel as related to thickness compares most welcome. I'm leaning towards about 20mm with strings and a slight V shape might be the ultimate for me.

I still need to measure the Squier Classic Vibe neck...that is one of the best necks I've ever played though - a great shape, not really V but leaning towards it.

[FrankenFretter***]

My slide calipers are all in the shop right now.

[deeaa*]

Thanks for the quick reply anyhow, FF...this could get interesting.

You know, it's a part of my pragmatic approach to guitars...I don't believe in 'mojo' or such, I think when there are differences to guitars for sure, even those seeming 100% the same, there must be clear measurable differences.

I'm constantly surprised how 'generic' all guitar stuff is in that respect...why hasn't anyone published or found out the 'perfect' measurements and such as of yet...seems to me even the best designs have their flaws, or if not flaws, why should it be difficult to reproduce those designs that work well?

Interested to see what people report...my gut feeling is the 'best playing' or most used/loved necks may not be the thinnest ones at all.

[FrankenFretter***]

I think all of my guitars except one are fairly skinny and flat necked. There is some variance among them, to be sure, but they're not too dissimilar. The exception is a Jazzmaster like SX, which has a very beautiful amber-tinted maple neck. It's a C-shape, and it's got some girth to it. I've actually quit playing it because it starts to hurt me after a short time. And it should be noted that I don't have short fingers.

I think neck thickness is purely subjective. What works for some, doesn't work for all. Some prefer a thicker, or wider neck for bends, etc. I don't know that there is a perfect formula when it comes to necks.

[deeaa*]

Sure, people have different preferences...no doubt. But the basic idea is, I think, that a sturdy thickish neck is good for chords - fills the hand and isn't tiring - while a thin neck is good for lead style playing. Naturally much depends on what way you hold your hand/style.

Nevertheless, I think it's an area surprisingly overlooked. People just like a neck for being 'good' or 'fast' or 'hefty' or whatever, but I wonder if it really is more about the shape than the actual thickness of the neck. So not really trying to find an universal 'best thickness' but to explore the relation of thickness/shape and the player perceptions.

[sumitomo]

I'm liking my "59 roundback neck (warmoth),but I also like the Clapton shape,just wish it was a little thicker.My hands feels comfortable after playing for an hour or so and on other shapes ect.it gets cramped.Sumi

[marnold***]

I don't have a calipers handy. My Jackson is pretty thin, although not as thin as some Ibanez's that I've played. I guess I'd call it a thin-C. Fretboard radius is a much bigger deal for me than neck thickness, strictly speaking.

[kiteman]

A lot of factors is involved such as fretboard radius, nut width and back of neck profile. Even some are asymmetrical. Measurements as you suggested probably doesn't do any good. I think someone here had a contour gauge that he measured his neck profiles and posted them here.

[sunvalleylaw]

Ah, that is way too much work. My strat is a modern C. My Hagstrom is thinner and flatter radius. My Martin is just a nice acoustic neck. I'm not much about the numbers, more the feel.

[deeaa*]

This is very revealing.

I don't get it...why are people addressing the single most important part of their instrument purely on feel and no interest in what works and why?

I think that's akin to going to an auto shop and asking for new tires, and when asked what type, saying like 'mostly roundish, and about the size that fit a Jeep' or something.

I know there's a lot of factors at play here, but I'd be very interested in what is the general trend. I have a hypothesis too: the deeper a V shape, the thicker the neck can be and still rank high in playability/likeability. Also, overall, roughly 22,5mm seems to me to be the thickest anyone would find comfortable, lower limit I don't know.

I thought it'd be super easy for anyone to measure it in seconds...and with strings on and all, it'd also negate action issues and such, giving actual data on playability as concerns both neck thickness and shape.

That'd be easy to compile into Excel or something, and check for any trends given enough answers.

Maybe there should be a ready-made questionnaire, like what's the neck shape and thickness of your best all-round player, and what'd the same for any other guitar you like a lot...maybe it's no hard data or anything, but it'd confirm my thinking on what makes a nice neck. Oh well, maybe I just need to get a pad and paper and the caliper and just go play and measure a couple dozen guitars at the local shop :-)

This weekend I'm going to sand down my Flying-V neck some more, and am going for 22mm with strings and a slightly asymmetrical V shape, I believe that will work well for it.

[MichaelE]

My Turner is 1" at the third fret.

In fact, it's a 1" all the way up and down the neck. It's very comfortable for chording. Lead play is fine too. I don't want the guitar getting away from me and would rather have a baseball bat to hang on to rather than a yardstick.

[Eric***]

I don't own any calipers, so unfortunately I can't participate. I will say, however, that I'm very interested in the numbers side of this. While how it works is obviously the most important part, I agree that it's confounding that to date all we have is "C", "V", "D", and "U" as descriptors for necks. As you say, you would think that companies would have taken the time to suss this out by this point.

For me, I will say that I think both of my guitars have relatively thin necks, and they're both pretty easy to play. The LP-type is probably a bit better for chording, and the Godin for single-note leads. I did have an Xaviere 335-type previously that, after playing for an hour or so, made my hand hurt. I think that neck was a bit too thin for my tastes. By contrast, I traded away an SX tele with a pretty thick neck, and I liked that quite a bit.

So yeah, I'm with you that thinner does not necessarily equal better. I have stayed away from Ibanez wizard necks partially for that reason. Sorry I couldn't provide you with any data.

[sumitomo]

[QUOTE=deeaa]This is very revealing.

I don't get it...why are people addressing the single most important part of their instrument purely on feel and no interest in what works and why?

Deeaa,The reason these are working for me is,I'm not working as hard to get the sounds I want,it's more natural,less effort (the specs for my necks can be found at warmoth.)I have had over 10 guitars with different neck profiles for a little while now and when I have been playing I have been switching from one to the other and these profiles I stated are the best for me because I like what I'm hearing and it just plain feels good in my hands.Hope this helps a little.Sumi

[gordy_sg_no1]

as i play gibbers no 2 necks are the same, which is good makes you more versatile, the worst neck ive ever played was on an ovation applause, gladly it was not mine it was my cousins................. the neck was horifficaly awfull, i know accoustics classicaly have bad necks but this hurt my hands and theres not many guitars that can do that.

[DeanEVO_Dude]

I can say that I don't know the exact dimentions for the necks on my guitars, since I don't own any calipers or such, but here is a brief description of each:

Dean EVO: moderately thick neck, round back like a C shape... I like it alot.
Fender Strat (Squier Series): Fat neck, rounded back like a D shape... also very nice.
Stagg LP: by no means thin, but thinner than the EVO, like a shallow C shape... by no means uncomfortable to play.
Squier Standard Tele: don't know about this one, but it seems to be like the Strat, but thinner... nothing extraordinary, but I don't play this guitar much.
Peavey JF1: haven't figured this one out, very similar to that of the Dean, but with more of a D shape to it... I like it, and it is comfortable to play.

These are just my thought...

On a side note, I read an interview with Alex Lifeson and he stated that he had no preference, just played the guitars, and he has a few of them (Les Paul, ES-335, 355, PRS, Tele, etc.). I think the interview was from Premier Guitar.

[Spudman***]

I have over 50 guitars and each feel pretty different from each other, and I like that. Sure some I like the neck feel more on than others, but then again sometimes I like shrimp more than steak and sometimes it's the other way around.

I don't think I'd appreciate all that I have if they all felt the same. If that were the case I might only have 5 or 6 guitars.

The two that I like the most have different neck thickness, but the width at the nut is almost identical. That measurement would mean more to me than thickness. And yet, I don't care enough to measure it. Go figure. I guess to me having necks non consistent in thickness makes it more fun and interesting.

[Katastrophe]

This is very revealing.

I don't get it...why are people addressing the single most important part of their instrument purely on feel and no interest in what works and why?

IMO, Dee, it also has to do with nut width as well. For me, a wider neck can be a little thinner and still fill up enough of my hand to still be comfortable. BUT, a traditional Tele neck, with its slightly narrower nut width still feels good in my hand, because it's thicker. All that said, my favorite neck shape/profile would be the wide/fat that the PRS SE Singlecuts come with. At least, that's my favorite at the moment, of the guitars I've tried recently.

Unlike a car tire, which must meet a certain set of measurements to fit on a car rim, there are more variables to fitting a guitar neck to a hand.

Also, preferences change over time. My Ibby has an original Wizard neck, and it was perfect when I got it. Now, after about 18 or 19 years, it's just too thin to do any kind of chording on. My hand starts to cramp after a song or two.

[deeaa*]

Seems there are a few rather universal preferences anyway; narrower can be thicker, wider can be thinner and still comfy, and too thin a neck is straining to chord on.

But, some people prefer veritable baseball bats while others quite thin ones. Probably due to playing style more than anything, hand position etc.

It's interesting to me people like variation also on necks. I guess I don't much like variation in guitars much, seems I always try to adjust them to be as similar to each other as possible, like shifting strap button places to make them all hang at the same position, sanding the necks so they all are somewhat similarly shaped, all guitars having exactly the same electronics...I like a different feel and nuances between them, plus looks, but there's a lot I want to be the same across all of them.