Roger Archtop - No truss rod

[Korey]

Hi there. I found a 50’s Roger archtop I’m interested in buying. But there’s no truss rod. The guitar is setup and has had a neck reset done by a luthier already. But not having a truss rod is admittedly a bit scary. Anyone want to offer their two cents?

[wintermoon]

Have you checked out the neck angle and straightness in person?

[Korey]

No sadly. Very far away. My brother would be picking it up for me. Huge risk I know

[Jimmy blue note]

Is it a fat neck? Martin built their guitars without truss rods for many decades, with success. They also had fatter necks.
Necks will change, and personally, I think of a truss rod as a necessity because it allows the neck to be adjusted and fine tuned for string gauge changes, weather changes, neck relief and an overall degree of optimization that I like in a guitar. I've built guitars with graphite reenforcement. Steady as a rock over time, but not as adjustable.
If you're not going to be needing the kind of action and clearance that becomes critical with close tolerances, and the guitar is stable, then what you've got can very well be what you'll have. Modern guitars are built with the demands of modern players in mind, and each era of build reflects the state of the art both in playing and the instruments used. The limitations of a fixed neck are not limitations if you don't see them that way. Certainly all classical guitars have a design and build that is timeless and precludes neck adjustment. The more you know about your own needs, the better a decision you can make as to the fit.

Do you love the way it plays? Can you do everything you want with that guitar as it is? Does it speak to you in a way that you can't imagine changing anything about the relationship of the guitar to the strings? If it does everything as is and those are the string gauges you use, then there you have it. All set.
But if you see your setup and/or feel and playing changing, needing more fine tuned response from the neck, that guitar may present limitations for you.

Got to admit, it's pretty... but somebody once thought the same of Amber Heard too. Sometimes you need something you can live with that allows you to be your best and grow; think about whether it'd be a good fit.

What do you love about the guitar?

[wintermoon]

No sadly. Very far away. My brother would be picking it up for me. Huge risk I know

Unless he knows what to look for I'd pass unless there's a return policy that you like.

[Hammertone]

That’s a lovely old Roger Junior. Post more pix, please [ed: nevermind, I found it.] It has its original tailpiece, bridge, pickguard and pickguard mounting hardware. The Hoyer pickup was added but is period correct. The volume and tone controls were added as well - Rossmeisl did not drill holes into his carved tops.

Roger necks from this period come in a variety of sizes and shapes, and typically have some standard features, including:
-laminated necks;
-non-adjustable aluminum channel rod under the fretboard;
-@24 3/4” scale.
I have found them to be quite rigid and stable, based on the many that I have played.

They are excellent, fully carved, 17” guitars, and typically sound great. One weak spot is the Roger-branded open-back tuners one typically finds on Junior models, which can be easily replaced with excellent vintage-style open back tuners from Schaller, Gotoh, Waverly, or Grover (only the Grover 18:1 version, as the 12:1 version is garbage).

They are also often excellent value, and occasionally come up for very little $$, although that has changed over the past few years as the market has begun to recognize their value.

Where are you and where is the guitar [ed: nevermind, I found it.]? Do you have a serial number (helpful in dating the guitar)? Do you have any neck width/depth/shape preferences and any information on this guitar’s neck measurements? I’m of the “nothing ventured, nothing gained” school of thought, but don’t have enough information to make a recommendation.

[Korey]

That’s a lovely old Roger Junior. Post more pix, please. It has its original tailpiece, bridge, pickguard and pickguard mounting hardware. The Hoyer pickup was added but is period correct. The volume and tone controls were added as well - Rossmeisl did not drill holes into his carved tops.

Roger necks from this period come in a variety of sizes and shapes, and typically have some standard features, including:
-laminated necks;
-non-adjustable aluminum channel rod under the fretboard;
-@24 3/4” scale.
i have found them to be quite rigid and stable, based on the many that I have played.

They are excellent, fully carved, 17” guitars, and typically sound great. One weak spot is the Roger-branded open-back tuners one typically finds on Junior models, which can be easily replaced with excellent vintage-style open back tuners from Schaller, Gotoh, Waverly, or Grover (only the Grover 18:1 version, as the 12:1 version is garbage).

They are also often excellent value, and occasionally come up for very little $$, although that has changed over the past few years as the market has begun to recognize their value.

Where are you and where is the guitar? Do you have a serial number (helpful in dating the guitar)? Do you have any neck width/depth/shape preferences and any information on this guitar’s neck measurements? I’m of the “nothing ventured, nothing gained” school of thought, but don’t have enough information to make a recommendation.

it’s from 1958. I typically prefer a medium neck. I find most Epiphones to be more comfortable than Gibsons. I didn’t get along with the Godin Montréal premium, too flat for the neck shape for me. But one of my acoustics is a Takamine NP17c with a nut width of 1-3/4 if I remember correctly. This is just really unique and I love the idea of a carved top on a 17” I can actually afford. I’d get an Eastman but I don’t have the money and have to have them ordered in too.

[wintermoon]

it’s from 1958. I typically prefer a medium neck. I find most Epiphones to be more comfortable than Gibsons. I didn’t get along with the Godin Montréal premium, too flat for the neck shape for me. But one of my acoustics is a Takamine NP17c with a nut width of 1-3/4 if I remember correctly. This is just really unique and I love the idea of a carved top on a 17” I can actually afford. I’d get an Eastman but I don’t have the money and have to have them ordered in too.

If that's case see if you can find someone to give it a gander or even better, a look see before you make a decision. Looks like a pretty cool guitar so might be worth getting some more info if priced right.

[Korey]

I should point out that he has 77 5 star reviews on reverb. He also did a video call to walk me through the guitar etc. That’s still hard to see neck angles etc tho

[cmajor9]

You can learn a lot from this extensive, illustrated article on Roger guitars from schlaggitarren.de:

PDF Comprehensive Article on Roger-guitarren by Herbert Rittinger

As Hammertone states, most Rogers from that time have a non-adjustable truss rod in the neck. I've been playing my 1955 Super for nearly ten years now, and the neck is perfectly straight.

Roger was one of the few German makers to put serial numbers on most of their guitars. Is there a label inside the body with a serial number (the article above has a table for dating based on the serial number).

[Korey]

You can learn a lot from this extensive, illustrated article on Roger guitars from schlaggitarren.de:

PDF Comprehensive Article on Roger-guitarren by Herbert Rittinger

As Hammertone states, most Rogers from that time have a non-adjustable truss rod in the neck. I've been playing my 1955 Super for nearly ten years now, and the neck is perfectly straight.

Roger was one of the few German makers to put serial numbers on most of their guitars. Is there a label inside the body with a serial number (the article above has a table for dating based on the serial number).

I've not talked with the seller yet this morning, but based on the PDF this would be a 58 due to the headstock info. Thanks for chiming in. There’s no way to see it before buying but it’s good to know you’ve had good luck with yours. Can you describe the tone you get from yours? Any Kenny Burrell tones to be found in it? ?

[cmajor9]

I've not talked with the seller yet this morning, but based on the PDF this would be a 58 due to the headstock info. Thanks for chiming in. There’s no way to see it before buying but it’s good to know you’ve had good luck with yours. Can you describe the tone you get from yours? Any Kenny Burrell tones to be found in it? ?

A Roger like the one you're considering is a carved, full-depth archtop, and will have the sound. The electric tone is of course mostly up to the pickup. Mine has the original Ideal (single coil) pickup, which I quite like and find comparable to a DeArmond floater. The Hoyer pickup in your photo looks to be constructed similarly, and may be the same pickup rebranded. I suggest you give it a try if you end up buying the guitar. There are plenty of good choices of floating pickups these days which could get you in the ballpark tonewise.

[hotpepper01]

I have owned a Roger Junior in natural for a short period of time. Mine was supposed to be late 50s, build in the Mittenwald factory. The neck was no problem at all, and was on the heavy side, a kind of what you might call a baseball bat. One of the heaviest I have ever encountered on a guitar. Heavier than your typical 50s Les Paul neck. Mine was not reset or taken care of by a luthier. It had sprouting fret ends and some very serious fret wear in the first 5 frets or so. Apperantly, the first owner played a lot of cowboy chords...
Many people claim it is a very loud guitar with the famous german carve and it was loud. But, IMHO still not loud enough for a loud bigband for playing acoustically. So, I had to make a choice between return to seller, restoring it and play it amplified, or reselling as is. I chose for the latter.

[Hammertone]

The Roger Junior that was for sale above is from 1964 and, yes, it does the Kenny Burrell thing. In spades. Of course, the old saying "tone is in the knobs" is entirely true, at least in this case.