Truss Rod Question?

[TommyD]

I'm new to this forum, so I'll say "Hi!"
I play an ES 165, which is an ES 175 from Gibson's custom shop, with only one pickup, a knock-out rosewood fretboard, terrific flamed maple, and ersatz gold fittings. It's named after Herb Ellis, who supposedly autographed it. All in all, a nice axe. Strings? Thomastik 13 to 53's. Amp? Old Princeton reverb (tubes). Amp settings? Bass/10, treble/0, reverb, etc/0. ( I like it dark.)

Question for someone who knows the answer; how much tension can be placed on the truss rod without torqueing the neck? I feel that with heavy strings, I need another turn or two on the truss rod nut. The action is a little too high up near near the guitar body. Lowering the bridge makes the strings buzz on the frets near the nut.
Thanks for any expert advice.

TommyD

[Little Jay]

A turn or two??!?! I hope you mean two quarter-turns, because two whole turns to tighten the trussrod is an awfull lot!!

With 013 strings you should be able to make your neck deadstraight with the trussrod, without fearing damage for the neck or the trussrod. On my ES175 copy I have an almost straight neck without fretbuzz.

Beware of this: If you have stringbuzz in the upper register, the neck could be too hollow, needing tightening of the trussrod.

Stringbuzz in position 1 to 5 (near the nut) usually means that your neck is too flat (to straight) and the trussrod needs to be relaxed a little bit (un-tightened), a quarter turn should be sufficient. This might sound contra-dictionary to the high stringheight, but although adjustment of the trussrod is of influence of stringheight, it's still not the method to adjust the height of the strings, that's the bridge's task!

It sounds like in your case the neck is too hollow. So loosen the trussrod a quarter-turn (loosening is counter-clockwise) and then you can probably lower your bridge also without buzz.

This is all assuming your neck is not warped and your fretwork is ok. If you do adjustments of the trussrod in small steps, a quarter-turn at the time, you can hardly damage anything. If you still have fretbuzz near the nut, it could also be that your nut is cut too deep. But then you shouldn't have buzz when you play in first position, only on the open strings.

Check also here:
Adjusting A Truss Rod on You Guitar, Bass, Mandolin - What is it? How do I check relief? How do I adjust the rod properly?
FRETS.COM

Good luck!

[TommyD]

Originally Posted by Little Jay

A turn or two??!?! I hope you mean two quarter-turns, because two whole turns to tighten the trussrod is an awfull lot!!

With 013 strings you should be able to make your neck deadstraight with the trussrod, without fearing damage for the neck or the trussrod. On my ES175 copy I have an almost straight neck without fretbuzz.

Beware of this: If you have stringbuzz in the upper register, the neck could be too hollow, needing tightening of the trussrod.

Stringbuzz in position 1 to 5 (near the nut) usually means that your neck is too flat (to straight) and the trussrod needs to be relaxed a little bit (un-tightened), a quarter turn should be sufficient. This might sound contra-dictionary to the high stringheight, but although adjustment of the trussrod is of influence of stringheight, it's still not the method to adjust the height of the strings, that's the bridge's task!

It sounds like in your case the neck is too hollow. So loosen the trussrod a quarter-turn (loosening is counter-clockwise) and then you can probably lower your bridge also without buzz.

This is all assuming your neck is not warped and your fretwork is ok. If you do adjustments of the trussrod in small steps, a quarter-turn at the time, you can hardly damage anything. If you still have fretbuzz near the nut, it could also be that your nut is cut too deep. But then you shouldn't have buzz when you play in first position, only on the open strings.

Check also here:
Adjusting A Truss Rod on You Guitar, Bass, Mandolin - What is it? How do I check relief? How do I adjust the rod properly?
FRETS.COM

Good luck!

Thanks, Little Jay. The problem that I face with the truss rod nut is that it is so close to the "surface" of the headstock that the factory ground off a good portion of one side of the hex head so the truss rod cap plate could actually lie flat on the headstock with the nut turned so the flattened part is up. So if I want to replace the truss rod cover plate, I have a choice of one full turn of the nut in either direction....that's it. Of course I could always leave the cover plate off. Then I could quarter-turn it or half-turn it at will.
Couple of notes; fret work is like new and neck is not warped to my eye. I do still have to micro-file the string grooves in the nut to accomodate the heavier strings and I haven't done that yet. The strings actually stand proud quite a bit. That, actually, is the first job.
I think that I'll take your advice and make quarter-turn adjustments in the truss rod nut. I'll just leave the cover plate off until I figure out how to handle the problem. (I could make a thickened cover plate and hollow out the back to accomodate the nut.) Sometimes I'm astonished at the haphazard way Gibson puts guitars together, even the so-called "better" guitar lines.
T/

[FWBO]

Little Jay's advice is sound but I don't like your description of the truss rod protruding too far out of the neck - if you are in a position to do so I would be asking for another guitar so that it can be properly set up and played.

[SamBooka]

Originally Posted by TommyD

. The problem that I face with the truss rod nut is that it is so close to the "surface" of the headstock that the factory ground off a good portion of one side of the hex head so the truss rod cap plate could actually lie flat on the headstock with the nut turned so the flattened part is up. .
T/

.. i mean

[cosmic gumbo]

This is a Gibson Cutom Shop guitar??? I'm impressed.

[hot ford coupe]

The description of the truss rod nut just doesn't sound right to me at all. I've owned a bunch of vintage archtops and I've never enountered anything like that. I agree with FWBO.

[TommyD]

You're right, all the way, but this particular guitar happens to be one of the most resonant I've ever played and I won't give it up for such a small mfg defect. Besides, as I've learned over the years, with Gibson it's one thing or another. They lost all their good technicians when they left Kalamazoo.
Maybe we should all be playing Heritage guitars! I know that every one I've ever picked up played just great.
But the bottom line is, I'm keeping the ES 165 Herb Ellis model. I like playing it and it gets the sound I like and I don't feel like spending my time on a search. There's always a better guitar out there someplace, and the GAS is easy to fall into and hard to break.
T/.

[FWBO]

Hi Tommy,

have you got any pictures you can post of the quality craftmanship on your truss rod?

I'm slightly bemused - from an engineering perspective - as to how you ended up with a truss rod that is too long or with a neck that is too short.

In this day and age it is perfectly possible to buy a very cheap guitar and if you can do set ups make it into a good playing instrument. It seems madness to put up with a guitar that cannot be set up to your liking.

Going back to your original post - sounds like you would benefit from lowering the bridge until you have the right action for notes above 12th fret and then SLACKEN the truss rod to remove the buzzing from the lower frets. No pun intended but it does sound a strange set up. You can go from strat straight to banana bow in half a turn of a truss rod.

Good luck!

[hot ford coupe]

It seems like one way you can make the instrument better is to get ahold of a new truss rod nut. If the guitar sounds that good and the nut sticks out a little, I'd say that would be a fair trade.

[TommyD]

Originally Posted by FWBO

Hi Tommy,

have you got any pictures you can post of the quality craftmanship on your truss rod?

I'm slightly bemused - from an engineering perspective - as to how you ended up with a truss rod that is too long or with a neck that is too short.

In this day and age it is perfectly possible to buy a very cheap guitar and if you can do set ups make it into a good playing instrument. It seems madness to put up with a guitar that cannot be set up to your liking.

Going back to your original post - sounds like you would benefit from lowering the bridge until you have the right action for notes above 12th fret and then SLACKEN the truss rod to remove the buzzing from the lower frets. No pun intended but it does sound a strange set up. You can go from strat straight to banana bow in half a turn of a truss rod.

Good luck!

"a truss rod that is too long or with a neck that is too short:?? Where did you get that idea? All I said was that when I removed the truss-rod cover plate I noticed that the nut on the end had been flattened off on one side. I inferred that it was done so the cover plate could lie flat. I never said that the truss rod is too long, or that the neck is too short!
This is what I finally did. I removed my nice, resonant, teak bridge and re-installed the original Gibson metal bridge, I loosened the strings a lot, loosened the truss-rod nut, and went to bed. Two days later, I sighted down the fretboard, saw that it was straight, and turned the truss-rod nut just enough to seat it. Then I lowered the tune-o-matic bridge, and tuned up the guitar.
Result? Action nice and low.
P.S. I discovered that the truss rod cover plate will lie flat regardless of the position of the filed flat-spot on the side of the nut. Why Gibson did it I'll never know (or care).
Let's bury this thread.
Best to all, and Happy New Year. Now go to your music room like good little boys, play "Have yourself a merry little Christmas" once more, in chord style, and start thinking about Spring.

TommyD

[SamBooka]

With all due respect Tommy.
This thread is not dead until RandyC says so :P