Fingerboars Radius Advice

[Dingus]

I am looking at the possibility of buying a bass with a vintage-style Fender neck profile , and it has a 7.25 inch fingerboard radius . This is a lot more curved than the 9 - 11 inch radius boards I have been used to playing in recent years and I would like to know what difference the more curved board will make to the feel of the bass in terms of action and playability . Any opinions , comparisons and experiences gratefully recieved .

[iconic]

And what are C and D necks!?

[Gilby]

Speaking as primarily a guitarist (sorry), the big aversion to 7.5 radius is the "choking" of bent notes. Bend a string and the note dies as it touches the fret board due to the extra curvature of the neck. Something that be counteracted be raising the action (height of strings).
I've tried a couple of 7.5 radii guitars and didn't really see what the fuss was all about. The big advantage is that it does fell more comfortable playing chords. The bigger the number, the flatter the neck.
Profiles. This is the shape of the back of the neck itself, not the fretboard (which would be the radius). So that's you C shape or D shape. It's not as simple as just that as there is a "modern" and "traditional" C shape, the traditional be deeper or "chunkier".
It's back to the old expression, try before you buy. It's a personal thing.

[dlloyd]

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1353103843' post='1871784']
And what are C and D necks!?
[/quote]

There's some diagrams on the following pages that should explain the various terms used for neck contours:

http://www.fender.com/en-GB/news/index.php/?display_article=422
http://www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Necks/BackContours.aspx
http://www.strat-talk.com/forum/stratocaster-discussion-forum/116744-v-neck-vs-c-neck.html

[iiipopes]

"C" and "D" necks, when talking about actual Fender basses, also can apply not only to the contour of the back of the neck, but to the width of the nut as well: 1 1/2 is the "A" neck, 1 5/8 is the "B" neck, etc., as set forth on the bottom of the Fender link above.

Oversimplified: rounder radius is easier for chords, flatter radius is easier for string bending. That's why Warmoth and some other companies have gone to a "compound" radius board, for ease of chording in the first frets and ease of lead guitar playing up the neck.

So for bass, it's whatever is comfortable. For me, after trying many different necks, I settled on 10" for my custom fanned fret bass.

[Dingus]

I have had a fair few old Fenders in the past that must have had a 7 1/4 inch radius , but it's getting to be so long ago I can't remember what that felt like in comparison to a more modern flatter radius. I 've got to decide whether to buy a bass with that vintage radius in the next day or two and would like to know if there is anybody who can make a direct comparison between , say , a 10 inch radius board and a 7.25 vintage Fender radius . What would be the immidiately percievable difference ?

[ikay]

I have a 72 J with 7.25" radius and a Lakland JO4 with 10" radius.

By way of comparison, I can feel that the '72 has a slightly more curved board but in general terms I find them both as comfortable to play. The bigger radius and flatter board is a bit more comfortable when playing further up the board and above the 12th fret.

I can also get a lower and faster action on the JO than the '72. As I like a fairly low action with very little neck relief my general preference is for a larger radius (10"-16"). Having said that the '72 suits a more medium action and the 7.25" radius somehow feels 'right' on a bass of this vintage.

All other things being equal though, If I was buying a 'modern' bass I'd go for the bigger radius.

Edited November 17, 2012 by ikay

[Dingus]

[quote name='ikay' timestamp='1353163786' post='1872294']
I have a 72 J with 7.25" radius and a Lakland JO4 with 10" radius.

By way of comparison, I can feel that the '72 has a slightly more curved board but in general terms I find them both as comfortable to play. The bigger radius and flatter board is a bit more comfortable when playing further up the board and above the 12th fret.

I can also get a lower and faster action on the JO than the '72. As I like a fairly low action with very little neck relief my general preference is for a larger radius (10"-16"). Having said that the '72 suits a more medium action and the 7.25" radius somehow feels 'right' on a bass of this vintage.

All other things being equal though, If I was buying a 'modern' bass I'd go for the bigger radius.
[/quote]

Thanks for the comparison , that's exactly the kind of information I'm after . The bass I'm looking at is a modern take on a vintage style bass , so maybe the more curved radius would feel correct on it . I too like a low action with a small amount of relief , and I was wondering if the difference in action between the Lakland and your 72 Fender could be to do with the difference in the fret work on each bass as well as the radius ? All the Laklands I have played have had seriously good fret jobs , both Skyline and U.S.A , and that combined with those very narrow vintage frets they use lends itself towards a very low setup .

Edited November 17, 2012 by Dingus

[drTStingray]

I have a Stingray Classic which has a similar fretboard radius to what you describe. I find it excellent - I only notice the difference when going back to playing a standard SR4 (although it only takes a minute or two to become accustomed again).

I have always found more of an issue, however, with the width of the fretboard of a 'vintage' (say 60s) P bass - they are slightly wider than the modern ones and my short fingers don't like them.

[Dingus]

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1353167481' post='1872336']
I have a Stingray Classic which has a similar fretboard radius to what you describe. I find it excellent - I only notice the difference when going back to playing a standard SR4 (although it only takes a minute or two to become accustomed again).

I have always found more of an issue, however, with the width of the fretboard of a 'vintage' (say 60s) P bass - they are slightly wider than the modern ones and my short fingers don't like them.
[/quote]

Thanks Dr T, that's good to know . I know some players say that they find a more curved radius more comfortable , I'm just not clear on why . I'm very particular about how my basses play , so I'm trying to find out what I might be getting myself into.

[ikay]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1353165173' post='1872306']
I was wondering if the difference in action between the Lakland and your 72 Fender could be to do with the difference in the fret work on each bass as well as the radius?
[/quote]

Yes, I'm sure the fretwork does also have something to do with it. The JO4 has an exceptional neck (it's an early one from 2002 so pre Plek - in my view a positive!). The '72 still has its original frets and has been played a lot in its life. A classic workhorse bass with all the associated mojo. The frets have been dressed a few times and are getting a bit low. It's a great player but does require a slightly more forgiving action the the JO.

I had a Noel Redding Jazz until a couple of years ago which also had a 7.25" neck. This had narrow vintage frets which were in very good shape but the neck still needed a little more relief and a slightly higher action than the JO.

Basic geometry comes into play here. The narrow nut on a Jazz means the strings are splayed out towards the bridge (a little more than on a Precision). The top and bottom strings in particular are therefore running at quite an angle to the centreline of the neck. Doing this on a neck with a small fixed radius means that the outer strings will choke/buzz (around the middle part of the neck) if the action is too low. The larger the fingerboard radius and the more parallel the strings (ie. wider the nut), the lower the action will go before choking/buzzing. A compound radius also helps with a low action.

Edited November 17, 2012 by ikay

[Dingus]

[quote name='ikay' timestamp='1353171323' post='1872396']
Yes, I'm sure the fretwork does also have something to do with it. The JO4 has an exceptional neck (it's an early one from 2002 so pre Plek - in my view a positive!). The '72 still has its original frets and has been played a lot in its life. A classic workhorse bass with all the associated mojo. The frets have been dressed a few times and are getting a bit low. It's a great player but does require a slightly more forgiving action the the JO.

I had a Noel Redding Jazz until a couple of years ago which also had a 7.25" neck. This had narrow vintage frets which were in very good shape but the neck still needed a little more relief and a slightly higher action than the JO.

Basic geometry comes into play here. The narrow nut on a Jazz means the strings are splayed out towards the bridge (a little more than on a Precision). The top and bottom strings in particular are therefore running at quite an angle to the centreline of the neck. Doing this on a neck with a small fixed radius means that the outer strings will choke/buzz (around the middle part of the neck) if the action is too low. The larger the fingerboard radius and the more parallel the strings (ie. wider the nut), the lower the action will go before choking/buzzing. A compound radius also helps with a low action.
[/quote]

Ah , now I think I see . I suppose in light of those facts , ( if I understand correctly , the outer strings in effect recieve less relief from the truss rod , and so the entire neck needs more relief for the outer strings to get enough curvature in the neck beneath them , and the strings need raising to similalty compensate for the difference in relief of enjoyed by the outer strings ) . I would hope that the more expertly the neck is made and the better the fret job , the less you would have to compensate . Thanks for explaining that , it becoming a bit clearer too me now ( I think!) .

[ikay]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1353173319' post='1872429']
... the outer strings in effect recieve less relief from the truss rod ...
[/quote]

Now you mention it I guess they do (although I hadn't thought of it like that!). It's all to do with the outer strings not running parallel to the centreline of the neck. When the strings are splayed out in this way, the radius of curvature of the neck in effect creates a 'bump' that the string has to pass over.

Take something with a really tight radius such as a broom handle for example. Pin a string at one end (the 'nut') and then again at an imaginary bridge further down. Providing the string runs parallel to the centreline of the handle the action can go as low as you like. Move the 'bridge' end of the string slightly to one side though and the string will quickly bottom out as it passes over the 'hump' created by the curavture of the handle.

Of course, if the board is completely flat the action can go as low as you like and you don't have to worry about any of this. Just one reason to buy an ACG!

[LawrenceH]

I have a 75RI jazz with 7.25", chunky (front-to-back) neck and an aerodyne jazz with a 9.5", slimmer-profile neck. Both are totally playable and adjusting between the two has never been an issue. There's something indefinably nice about the feel of the vintage profile neck, but the more modern neck might have the slight edge for preciseness. OTOH I could be imagining it.
I would care a lot more about the balance of the instrument, so in a custom-build would want to make sure the neck wasn't too heavy if going for a chunkier vintage profile. If it was made of a nice lightweight piece of maple, I wouldn't care and would probably choose the vintage just for the old-school aesthetic.

[iiipopes]

[quote name='ikay' timestamp='1353171323' post='1872396']Basic geometry comes into play here. The narrow nut on a Jazz means the strings are splayed out towards the bridge (a little more than on a Precision). The top and bottom strings in particular are therefore running at quite an angle to the centreline of the neck. Doing this on a neck with a small fixed radius means that the outer strings will choke/buzz (around the middle part of the neck) if the action is too low.[/quote]
Yes, if the strings are played in "bends" guitar style to slide up to pitch. At any given point, however, if you sight down the neck, it's still straight or has just the same relief. Otherwise there couldn't be such instruments as fanned frets or helix necks (Lace Helix, Little Guitar Works Torsal).

[iconic]

Ahhh, its all making sense....I think! My vmj jazz has the highest action of all my fleet, I think I know why now!

[Owen]

I have favoured a modern flat radius for a long time now, but my first basses had the old Fender radius. I played an Alleva last year last year and it felt like home from the olden days in a good way but that was a 5 string and had a 10" radius. Confused? I am.

[Dingus]

Me too.

[Kongo]

...I seem to have forgotten about radius when it comes to necks. Odd.
I must check what radius my fingerboards have. My BTB 6-string is almost flat, but I'm not too keen on it. Flat necks and radius fingerboards feel unnatural to my fingers and thumb. Not entirely sure why.