Arch top neck attachments

[Patrick2]

Some builders attach the neck to the body of arch tops using the dove tail methode with an elevated neck/finger board off of the top/sound board. Some use a tongue mortise method with no neck/finger board elevation off of the sound board. Any opinions here on strength and tonal affects?

[Dad3353]

Good afternoon, Patrick...

I'm not a luthier (mere humble amateur player...), but I rather think that the difference lies in the emphasis or not on the soundboard. For an acoustic archtop, ancient violin/cello tradition leads to an overhang, freeing the table for best resonance. Once electrics come in, and centre blocks, the natural table resonance has less input into the overall sound, and so a more 'modern' approach (perhaps less costly..?) can be privileged. I'm not sure that 'strength' should be a factor; certainly the 'neck in table' is, in absolute terms, more resistant, but if one treats a violin-type structure as a quality instrument should be treated, there should be no problem (assuming a quality luthier, of course...). Older guitars of this type are often candidates for a reset after half a century or so (as indeed are violins etc...); the construction and glues used take this into account so that, although delicate, it is not a major job for a qualified and experienced person.
I'm a Hofner man, myself, and my Comittee is, right now, in the capable hands of such an expert for a neck reset. A thorough revision is not a bad thing (nothing lasts forever...), but she should be good for another few decades on her return. My electric semi's are, however, of 'in-table' construction (à la 335...). Horses for courses, perhaps; I see no need to have a resonant table with such instruments, but for a leaning towards acoustic tone, I prefer the traditional 'violin' approach.
Just my tuppence worth; other views will surely differ...

[cjm]

Originally Posted by Patrick2

Some builders attach the neck to the body of arch tops using the dove tail methode with an elevated neck/finger board off of the top/sound board. Some use a tongue mortise method with no neck/finger board elevation off of the sound board. Any opinions here on strength and tonal affects?

An elevated fingerboard permits caching a doobie underneath and that's important in some circles.

ON EDIT: Don't try this on the upright bass. Cheech and Chong couldn't have handled that one during their salad years.

[PTChristopher]

>>> dove tail methode with an elevated neck/finger board off of the top/sound board.

OR

>>> a tongue mortise method with no neck/finger board elevation off of the sound board.

Ah, the so-called false dichotomy. It is also practical to have a mortise/tenon with a floating extension to the FB.

It is a varied constellation out there for guitar design. Lots of ways to emphasize and de-emphasize resonance and acoustic sound - especially when we do not want either extreme (acoustic flat top or Les Paul).

Chris

[Patrick2]

Originally Posted by cjm

An elevated fingerboard permits caching a doobie underneath and that's important in some circles.

ON EDIT: Don't try this on the upright bass. Cheech and Chong couldn't have handled that one during their salad years.

You must've rolled 'em a lot skinnier than I did . . . back in the day!!

[Double 07]

LMBO this is the best thread ever on this forum