-
I've done it to several guitars over the years, including a strat, led paul, and 335. For me, guitars are tools, not investments, and I've modded every electric I've ever owned. If it isn't right for you and you like the guitar, reshape the neck.
Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk
-
07-29-2017 12:53 AM
-
My 1961 ES175D was the victim of an appalling excessive neck shave when I bought her some 25 years ago - the price I paid reflected this. I finally decided to have a new neck made, and was able to find an excellent luthier williing and able to do the job (a 2 year search and a 9 month wait). The original fretboard and inlays were used as well as the tuners. The guitar us no longer "origjnal" but it plays like a dream. Was it expensive? Yes, because of the refinishing work - mucho man hours. Was it worth it? For me, a definite yes.
Be very sure of what you want, be prepared to dig deep and don't regret your choice.
-
Removing mass from the neck changes the guitar. It's not an opinion, it's physics. Sometimes it works out fine. Sometimes it changes the character of the guitar enough to ruin it. I have seen several great guitars become lesser instruments after modifying the neck. As a result, I advise against irreversible mods. Now, changing things like pickups, jacks, switches, wiring, and tuners are simple and effective. Nuts and bridges affect tone enough to warrant going to a luthier if you don't have experience cutting, shaping and slotting. Even then, these are things that can be easily fixed if done wrong. Proceed with extreme caution when modifying a neck profile, you won't get a second chance on that mod.
-
In all you say, I thoroughly agree. Let me try to explain my rationale for the necks I've worked on, why I felt qualified to share the fact that I've done it safely (and never to say to the OP that this is something he SHOULD do).
Originally Posted by rolijen
Removing mass absolutely changes the neck. The question is whether it's detectable or whether it makes a difference in the resonance frequencies of that piece of wood or the interaction of the strings. The neck acts not only as an anchoring point for the strings, but also as a resonant conduit for the vibrations of the strings. That's a given. Now in order to change that resonance, you're going to need to significantly reduce the mass- a lot- or change the stiffness of the wood.
Stiffness is an exponential function. Mass is linear. You know that of course but what it means is the stiffness threshold is always lurking beyond the effect of mass until you reach the crossing point of those curves. There's where the danger is.
Now I've built many guitars. I know where that threshold is, and for a fat mahogany 175 neck it's not going to change the resonance significantly, or the stiffness practically. Think of this, I've played many Gibsons from the post Norlin era and the specs are all over the place. I've felt some fat necks, some thinner very comfortable necks. I don't think the beefy necks contributed to a better guitar. As a matter of fact, the thinner, better contoured necks were the work of seasoned and experienced luthiers, I believe, from the overall workmanship. The truth is, for less seasoned luthiers, the overwhelming tendency is TO overbuild the necks. Better safe than sorry.
Yes it's physics, but it's a well informed physics I studied for many years and built to for many. My time with colleagues, luthiers and associates in acoustical societies and research work at MIT has given me an internal picture of what's going on. There are some necks I won't work on, marginal cut of wood and already thin necks on electric solid bodies, there are guitars I rejected when I worked for Ibanez for wood that was already close to compromise. I don't believe the OP's beefy 175 neck is anywhere near that critical point. I know Gibson necks, they are almost categorically more massive and better quality wood (or used to be) than many quality Asian builds. Hand size, customer demand, traditions, who knows why, but that's the way it tends to be.
I believe an oversized 175 neck could take it, but I myself would never take a scraper to a neck without a thorough inspection of the wood and grain, and that, the OP should do regardless of what you or I say if he chose that route.
Yeah, I look at a guitar as wood. I see a chunky neck as right for the right person with large hands and a playing style that compliments that. I can also see a chunky neck as a thinner (not radically toothpick SG style) neck that a luthier didn't choose to make. That potential is still there, for a sound perfect match, and if the luthier didn't go that route, that's between the wood, the guitar and the player. I'm just doing something the builder didn't do. Ha ha, sometimes I'd look at a guitar I liked at Ibanez and think "Nice kit" and I'd buy it and mod it. "Nicer guitar" is what it turned out as. I was careful. I never considered it a mistake.
I respect your reluctance rolijen. I hope you're always happy with the guitars in your hands.
Absolutely great advice. Measure twice, cut once. That goes for decisions to change an instrument. Originally Posted by rolijen
David
-
David speaks with authority on this topic. He's one of a very few I would trust to evaluate the potential of this 'full commitment' type of mod!
-
I would suggest selling and finding a Heritage H575. Almost certainly the neck is going to work for you.
-
A nice anecdote about shaving a guitars's neck and Jimmy Page, in about 15:27.
In the beginning there is 'a bit of language', as one might say, but then they get on the bisnes.
Funny discussion here and there: "If (Gibson) can't make the case (of the Les Paul Historics) like originals, how could they make the guitars right!"
-
I don't want to beat a dead horse, here, people's opinions seem to be hardening. But I would just hate to see this done. It may be emotional, but even if you like the new neck profile, I can't imagine you will have improved the guitar... Maybe it will be the same afterward, maybe not, but I know two things: 1. You won't know for sure until you do it and 2. after it's done, there's no going back.
I mean, it's not like it's the only one left in the world. There are untold thousands of these around in every variation possible. I'd just look around for one you do like...
OK, I'll say no more. But the idea of shaving that neck actually gives me an unpleasant physiological reaction... Perhaps I'm nuts.
Best to the OP. I hope you find guitar happiness whatever way you finally choose.
-
Originally Posted by furtom
Well unless Howard Roberts gets the guitar, his famous Black guitar he used Bondo to reshape the neck. But that was a different time and there wasn't a luthier every ten blocks.
-
Did the OP mention what year their 175 is?
-
Thanks for all the input.
I have decided there is no rush, it holds me back just a bit I think but given I can't bear to part with it for a set up the concept of no guitar for probably many weeks is just too much.
I agree there are many guitars in this world, not so many in Australia though. We do not have Heritage and even to find a 175 is pretty rare.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
That, of course, is a very fair point. In the end, you'll do what makes you happy, which is all we ever can do in the world of guitar. Why else do we do it? Originally Posted by gggomez
BTW, what year is the guitar?
-
2012
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
When first saw this title, I immediately thought about what my wife is always nagging me to do. Shave your neck!
-
My ex told me to do the same thing. She even bought me a chain saw and offered to help. But I told her this is the way I came from the factory and besides, I'm vintage now. Originally Posted by Woody Sound
David
-
Hi there jazz players,
In 2000, I bought a 1998 ES175. I like this guitar very much but would like to know the preferred neck set-up. At the moment the mahogany neck is a bit concave and I have no real problem with this. But, since my classical guitar and my Taylor flattop both have perfectly straight necks, I am wondering how it would work out for the 175 to have a straight neck as well. The guitar is strung with Thomastik-Infeld JS112 flats (12 - 50 ).
Can you give me thoughts please?
-
Serge
This should be fixable via the truss rod. Check out YouTube videos on tightening the truss rod a bit.
-
Thanks Greentone,
Maybe I didn't express myself in the right way, but I was not referring to help me making a trussrod adjustment. I have done such a job quite a few times on my guitars. I simply would like to know how ES175 owners prefer their neck setups and if straight or slightly concave necks are used the most. Anyhow, thanks for your reply.
-
Your low E string should be about .25mm above the 8th fret when you Capo at the first fret and hold the string down at the fret where the body joins the neck (15th fret on ES-175). A little more if you play hard. Check out the steps at
Home - EZ Guitar Tech
-
A great deal depends upon your strings and upon your touch. I play .13-.52 strings and I have a fairly heavy hand. If I don't have a bit of relief in the neck things get buzzy and twangy for me.
Jim Hall, OTOH, could play beautifully with much lighter strings and sound sublime on his ES-175.
-
I bought a '44 L7 after carefully surveying it with my luthier at the time who was exceptional in repair and restoration of vintage archtops. The guitar required a neck reset and had been played so much that there was bare wood on most of the neck, which also needed refreting. It was a very thick d shape that was not my cup of tea.
So, I made careful measurements of the necks on my 3 most played archtops at the time, a Campellone, Trenier Excel, and Heritage Eagle, and gave the averaged numbers to this luthier.
He did an excellent job shaving and contouring the neck, leveling and refreting, and doing the needed finish work.
It's the best sounding and playing guitar on the planet. It's my guitar,
I play the heck out of it And love the neck. Best decision I ever made with an archtop and increased the value 10 fold, to me! That's what's important. That you are at peace with your decision.
If the guitar didn't require all of the other extensive neck work, especially removal and reset, i probably would never have decided to change the shape.
My '55 175 is very chunky in the neck, but i would never change it. Its perfect!
-
Just say no (when it comes to a Gibson neck shave), and get a different guitar.
-
ahh my old thread.
... nearly two years later and the neck is like home.
Reply With Quote
“The Amp Shop” (Schuske) 5F1 Tweed Champ
Today, 01:21 PM in For Sale