Why isn’t there a measurement standard for necks?

WezV

A very skinny neck is 20mm thick.  A very fat one is 24mm thick.  Most fall between 22-23mm

A very narrow neck it 40mm wide at the nut.  A very wide one is 45mm.  Most fall between 42-43mm

The differences between most guitars are tiny... Yet they can make a very big difference to the feel.   

Those are the easy measurements to standardise, so are the ones that do often make it into a spec sheet

Only way to standardise profile shape across the industry would be to remove all hand done processes altogether across all guitar factories.   Personally, I don't think anyone benefits from that.  

ICBM

One of the real problems is that so many people use mutually exclusive terms... like "nice fat".

darius

Frets are standardised and hand dressed.

Pickups are handmade but impedance is spec'd.

Everything can be described by measurement.

I'm just curious why the back of the neck has this unquestionable aura around it that one must never accurately define it or we will all lose the ability to choose the right guitar.

rico

darius said:

I'm curious to know how you think it may be possible.

OK, well. Someone has decided necks are C's and D's and U's and V's so they already have vague unhelpful standard descriptions. Every guitar manufacturer has decided their own version of neck shape description. Why not define an international standard C, D, U, V blah blah, with actual dimensions. Why does the fingerboard get the (apparently) impossible to define shape dimension but not the neck?

the fingerboard is easy to measure because it's a segment of a circle with a defined radius. 

darius

rico said:

darius said:

I'm curious to know how you think it may be possible.

OK, well. Someone has decided necks are C's and D's and U's and V's so they already have vague unhelpful standard descriptions. Every guitar manufacturer has decided their own version of neck shape description. Why not define an international standard C, D, U, V blah blah, with actual dimensions. Why does the fingerboard get the (apparently) impossible to define shape dimension but not the neck?

the fingerboard is easy to measure because it's a segment of a circle with a defined radius. 

and the neck is series of blended defined radii.

drofluf

darius said:

I'm curious to know how you think it may be possible.

OK, well. Someone has decided necks are C's and D's and U's and V's so they already have vague unhelpful standard descriptions. Every guitar manufacturer has decided their own version of neck shape description. Why not define an international standard C, D, U, V blah blah, with actual dimensions. Why does the fingerboard get the (apparently) impossible to define shape dimension but not the neck?

Because there are too many variables in a complex neck shape to present in a simple form that an average player would understand. Below are some “possible” neck shapes. How would you condense those into a set of numbers. If we took a simple arc of a circle we have the radius and the angle of the segment.  But neck shapes are not that simple!

Philly_Q

darius said:

I'm curious to know how you think it may be possible.

OK, well. Someone has decided necks are C's and D's and U's and V's so they already have vague unhelpful standard descriptions. Every guitar manufacturer has decided their own version of neck shape description. Why not define an international standard C, D, U, V blah blah, with actual dimensions. Why does the fingerboard get the (apparently) impossible to define shape dimension but not the neck?

Who's going to define this international standard?  Who's going to get manufacturers to comply with it?  How many different standard shapes would be defined?  Will your standard C, D, U, V etc always have to be the exact same width and thickness, or could they be scaled up or down?

I've had Us that feel like Cs and Vs where the V is barely perceptible.  Your D may be my shallow U.  A few extra seconds on a sanding machine can make a neck feel completely different.  It's too subjective.

WezV said:

A very skinny neck is 20mm thick.  A very fat one is 24mm thick.  Most fall between 22-23mm

And I'd say 24mm is still a tad on the slim side.....!

darius

Philly_Q said:

I've had Us that feel like Cs and Vs where the V is barely perceptible.  Your D may be my shallow U.  A few extra seconds on a sanding machine can make a neck feel completely different.  It's too subjective.

WezV said:

A very skinny neck is 20mm thick.  A very fat one is 24mm thick.  Most fall between 22-23mm

And I'd say 24mm is still a tad on the slim side.....!

mic drop

darius

drofluf said:

darius said:

I'm curious to know how you think it may be possible.

OK, well. Someone has decided necks are C's and D's and U's and V's so they already have vague unhelpful standard descriptions. Every guitar manufacturer has decided their own version of neck shape description. Why not define an international standard C, D, U, V blah blah, with actual dimensions. Why does the fingerboard get the (apparently) impossible to define shape dimension but not the neck?

Because there are too many variables in a complex neck shape to present in a simple form that an average player would understand. Below are some “possible” neck shapes. How would you condense those into a set of numbers. If we took a simple arc of a circle we have the radius and the angle of the segment.  But neck shapes are not that simple!

I could dimension every single one of your design drawings, make them and measure them to show conformance within a micron.

Funkfingers

darius said:

why?

Tex Mexico said:

Because

/Thread.

digitalkettle

Tex Mexico said:

I work in technical manufacturing. Some things are more work to develop a universal standard for than it's worth.

Reminded me of this:
https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png

darius

Funkfingers said:

darius said:

why?

Tex Mexico said:

Because

/Thread.

Yeah. I think you’re right. 

Chewy. Turn the ship around. 

WezV

darius said:

drofluf said:

darius said:

I'm curious to know how you think it may be possible.

OK, well. Someone has decided necks are C's and D's and U's and V's so they already have vague unhelpful standard descriptions. Every guitar manufacturer has decided their own version of neck shape description. Why not define an international standard C, D, U, V blah blah, with actual dimensions. Why does the fingerboard get the (apparently) impossible to define shape dimension but not the neck?

Because there are too many variables in a complex neck shape to present in a simple form that an average player would understand. Below are some “possible” neck shapes. How would you condense those into a set of numbers. If we took a simple arc of a circle we have the radius and the angle of the segment.  But neck shapes are not that simple!

I could dimension every single one of your design drawings, make them and measure them to show conformance within a micron.

And do you think you could also accurately cut and shape wood to the same level of accuracy. 

Those drawings may only represent one section of the neck.  Could be a V at first fret, C by 7th and D by 12th... All offset towards the bass side


Reminds me of an old Gibson customs shop vid where they were recreating a famous 335, including its neck profile.  They took scans, did casts, carved the neck with CNC precision.. Then handed the guitar to a guy working the big sander to make sure it actually felt right

skunkwerx

There are two standards. 

1. Esp’s Thin U. 

2. Sub-standards. 

Greatape

The variation in neck shape between two of the same model does have an advantage: it increases the possibility that you'll find the neck that fits you perfectly. 

It's all part of the fun. 

darius

Thread derailing -
I’m not requesting standardised necks. 

Just a standard way of describing every neck. 

This would be useful IN ADDITION to trying every guitar you want to try. And it’s the same as already happens with most of the rest of a guitar. 

Information helps erm inform. 

FelineGuitars

When I build a series of guitars I aim for a similar shaping and size overall 

For example on the 20th and 25th anniversary guitars I specified 

Width:43mm at the nut and 57mm at the last fret

Depth: 21.5mm at the 1st fret and 23.5 at the 12th fret 

There is still a huge amount of variation available within those parameters, especially with something that is hand shaped 

darius

@FelineGuitars How do you know when you’ve achieved the final neck shape that you are aiming for? Is it a feel thing or are you comparing measurements?

PhilKing

As someone who has bought an 20th Anniversary Lion from @FelineGuitars , I can tell you that he has the buyer check for the final feel and that is how it is determined.  It is all about feel.

FelineGuitars

As a general rule I like my necks to be hand shaped - or at least the right shape to accommodate your hand when playing chords